Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
anyone who is seeking other things isnt a scientist
Scientists don't necessarily have to seek "truth" which is an odd way of phrasing looking at natural phenomena or processes to come to a better understanding of a system....that is phrasing a scientist would never use, except perhaps if trying to communicate with a layperson, simply because its far too subjective to be a useful term.
For instance, what is the "truth" of whether light is a particle or a wave? Well, its both. For a long time people didn't know that, and were convinced the truth was that it was a particle, because that's what they could detect. Later, it was realized the truth was a bit more complicated than it initially appeared.
What is the "truth" of gravitational attraction? Well, it follows the inverse square law, best as we can tell. But the truth about what it is and how it is propagated remains a mystery. As much as scientists can examine this phenomenon and relate it to mass, nobody can say they have the truth about what gravity even *is*. Its just a "force". We don't understand how its properties arise or why, in short we do not possess the "truth" about gravity.
What was the truth of whether the Higgs Boson existed back in 1964? Well, it was predicted by theory. And even though it couldn't be tested, based on inductive reasoning, one could be fairly confident that it did. A mere 50 years later, we have the "truth" about this particle.
What is the ultimate truth of whether god exists? Nobody even knows how to test for this. Does that mean there is a question for which Science cannot provide an answer? Yes, sometimes.
So "truth" is a bit of a tricky loaded term. It might be better to say "information" or "knowledge" or even "Fact" or "law"...depending on the degree of confidence one has in their information, and the degree to which it has been tested through observation and experiment and any conclusions subjected to the peer review process.
Republicans voters are essentially voting for the agenda of the economic elite in this country, and they do this by dangling a carrot in front of them in the form of social issues like immigration, abortion, guns, religion, etc. as a way of getting them excited to go out an vote.
Think about it, the economic elite make up only 1% of the population, they don't have the voting numbers, so they use (mostly) Republican voters to support their causes for them, even though it's mostly against their own interests.
How is curtailing immigration against my own interests? I don't use illegal labor, so its not in my interests to import it.
In fact, immigration is against the interests of us all in our personal sphere because it represents competition for finite resources, and any additional competition faced as a consumer or employee is generally a bad thing. Likewise, competition amongst employers and producers is a good thing for consumers and employees, but bad for the employers and producers (in most cases).
Do you ever wonder why your version of conservativism is so close to the corporate agenda?
No, I wonder why the Dems version of liberal is so close to communism. That's the elephant in the room.
Did you get that from FOX news too?
FOX news is a news channel for the gullible and uneducated. You watch any number of miniskirted babes dumbly saying yes to what the men are saying. And the women on the show all have law degrees. They must be smart. So everyone on FOX news have law degrees? There's your fake news.
Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan both have good conservative credentials. Lou Dobbs had a prime time show. Pat Buchanan ran for President. Lou Dobbs is no longer a prime time anchor and Pat Buchanan was denounced as an extremist when he ran for President.
People who watch FOX news don't trust science. Scientists don't have an agenda. They only have evidence and proofs.
People who watch FOX news hate liberals but Medicaid a liberal program is a major way to get medical attention in primarily the red states.
People who watch FOX news fault the Federal Reserve for the Great Depression and the Great Recession but can't tell me why.
Why do you believe that the minimum wage shouldn't be raised even though it would only raise prices by 1.45%?
Why do you think that the recent tax cut is so great when it is only throwing you the crumbs for only eight years at that?
You don't support unions.
You vote for people who appoint judges who rule against working people.
Do you ever ask yourselves why your beliefs as a conservative are such a close match to what CEOs want?
Do you ever ask why?
This is laughable. "People who watch FOX news don't trust science?" Huh?
Medicaid isn't the problem as much as the whole agenda of "progressivism." Why point to one tiny program (which is obviously here to stay) when the bigger problem is "the fundamental transformation of America," Obama's words, which is the goal of "progressivism" (Marxist-socialism)?
Oh, I see ...you're parroting Pelosi: "the Republicans are throwing you 'crumbs.'" Never mind.
Any thoughts of your own?
I believe in what our Founders and the Framers of our Constitution believe in. That's what built this great country, not socialism.
Judges don't "rule." Kings rule. Judges render opinions, and they are supposed to be based on what the law says. Judges aren't supposed to be "equalizers." That isn't their role. Thomas Jefferson said, "The great object of my fear is the Federal Judiciary." The Framers made the Judiciary the weakest branch for a reason. They feared rule by judges.
Republicans voters are essentially voting for the agenda of the economic elite in this country, and they do this by dangling a carrot in front of them in the form of social issues like immigration, abortion, guns, religion, etc. as a way of getting them excited to go out an vote.
Think about it, the economic elite make up only 1% of the population, they don't have the voting numbers, so they use (mostly) Republican voters to support their causes for them, even though it's mostly against their own interests.
Yes, these have been called 'wedge issues'. They drive a wedge between one segment of working class voters and another. The attempt to harness the power of one-issue voters, for whom economics may be too complicated a subject but they can be roused on some simple message. Republican strategists and consultants have made a specialty of tapping this as a source of support and often have two or more wedge issues slicing and dicing the electorate (each group voting against it's own interests on a variety of topics because the are angry about one thing).
Often these wedge issues can be kept alive for multiple election cycles, and some are phantoms which can be called upon indefinitely because they only exist in professional wordcraft. Once the problem is 'solved' they are no longer useful, and the pro-business vote could drop several percentage points, so it is vital to replace it or avoid solving the problem and hopefully directing blame for not solving it on the opposition.
This is what the Republican party does best: it is an advocacy group for big business. Like the Sophists of ancient Greece, modern Madison Avenue advertising swifts and attorneys, Republican politicians, consultants and strategists are paid well to develop a case and drive the voters into the pens. As professionals they are not required to believe the case they are making to get the job done.
The large dark money donations (a great river of money) go to pay for propaganda. Many are attracted to drink a deep draught of this river.
[*** As a side note: Roger Ailes (a media savvy Republican media consultant who worked for Nixon and Reagan) tapped into this lucrative flow of money directly after Ronald Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine (apparently on Ailes advice). First he associated with CNBC (the official name at the time: Consumer News and Business Channel), and in 1996 Ailes was hired by Rupert Murdoch to lead the development of his new Fox News. ***]
Do you ever ask yourselves why your beliefs as a conservative are such a close match to what CEOs want?
Do you ever ask why?
Of course they don't wonder about it.
Right wingers are followers, not thinkers.
They just get in line, get in step and do as they're told.
Advisory:
The following is based on science and may not be suitable for conservos.
Right-wing authoritarians are people who have a high degree of willingness to submit to authorities they perceive as established and legitimate, who adhere to societal conventions and norms, and who are hostile and punitive in their attitudes towards people who don't adhere to them. They value uniformity and are in favour of using group authority, including coercion, to achieve it.
Right-wing authoritarians want society and social interactions structured in ways that increase uniformity and minimize diversity. In order to achieve that, they tend to be in favour of social control, coercion, and the use of group authority to place constraints on the behaviours of people such as political dissidents and ethnic minorities. These constraints might include restrictions on immigration, limits on free speech and association and laws regulating moral behaviour. It is the willingness to support or take action that leads to increased social uniformity that makes right-wing authoritarianism more than just a personal distaste for difference. Right-wing authoritarianism is characterized by obedience to authority, moral absolutism, racial and ethnic prejudice, and intolerance and punitiveness towards dissidents and deviants.
Lou Dobbs and Pat Buchanan both have good conservative credentials. Lou Dobbs had a prime time show. Pat Buchanan ran for President. Lou Dobbs is no longer a prime time anchor and Pat Buchanan was denounced as an extremist when he ran for President.
People who watch FOX news don't trust science. Scientists don't have an agenda. They only have evidence and proofs.
People who watch FOX news hate liberals but Medicaid a liberal program is a major way to get medical attention in primarily the red states.
People who watch FOX news fault the Federal Reserve for the Great Depression and the Great Recession but can't tell me why.
Why do you believe that the minimum wage shouldn't be raised even though it would only raise prices by 1.45%?
Why do you think that the recent tax cut is so great when it is only throwing you the crumbs for only eight years at that?
You don't support unions.
You vote for people who appoint judges who rule against working people.
Do you ever ask yourselves why your beliefs as a conservative are such a close match to what CEOs want?
Do you ever ask why?
"Do you ever wonder why your version of conservativism is so close to the corporate agenda?"
No but, I DO KNOW there as many dems in corporate America as repubs.
So, I will ask You, Do you ever wonder why your version of liberalism is so close to the corporate agenda?
The rest of your biased rant is just MORE baseless lies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The hard truth
