Debunking "liberals don't think"

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-12-2008
Debunking "liberals don't think"
107
Fri, 10-17-2008 - 1:37pm

I have often read the phrase "those liberals don't think, they only feel." Accompanying this phrase is often the analogy of Obama supporters as sheep who are so blinded by the light of Obama's celebrity that they fail to consider the issues carefully or logically.

First, I wanted to say that most liberals I know DO feel. They are very empathetic, compassionate people who do want to ease suffering in the world. I think that most conservatives are the same way. But liberals are not stupid. In fact, if you look at the data, higher levels of education are correlated with more liberal attitudes, although once you get into people with graduate degrees, the correlation flattens. The faculty at more prestigious universities also tend to be more liberal than the faculty at less prestigious universities. This is not to say that there are not highly intelligent people who are also conservative. My point is simply that saying liberals "don't think, they only feel" is simply a false explanation for disagreement.

Can't we all agree that two intelligent people considering the exact same information might come to different conclusions? Can't we all agree that two intelligent people carefully and logically considering the issues might still choose to vote for different presidential candidates? If we want to get over the polarization in our society, we need to stop thinking of people who disagree as being idiots.



Photobucket


siggy aug 09

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-24-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:25am

~I am no fan of McCain, and if it weren't for Palin, I would probably write in Spongebob Squarepants for president for my grandson. ~


I see.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:51am

<-so back to my original questions. why are obama supporters elitists? how is it possible that "there are too many unanswered questions surrounding him (obama)," yet the thought of palin in the white house comforts you?>

Why aren't they elitists? A good percentage of them are. He surrounds himself with them. David Axelrod is an elitist. Franklin Raines is an elitist. Jim Johnson is an Elitist. Most of the heavy donors to Obama's campaign are elitists from Hollywood, large corporations, and, believe it or not BIG OIL!!! Only elitists do the two step with BIG OIL. Obama complains about them out of one side of his mouth, while dining on their shrimp and caviar with the other side of his mouth. I call that a betrayal from someone who says they're going to bring change to Washington. Obama won't change anything. He upholds the usual liberal agenda, even in what he outlines as his plan for America. That's not real change. Real change is reducing the size of government, cutting out government waste, holding the line on spending, and getting back into the habit of using paygo. Obama doesn't support an agenda that is best for America. He supports an elitist agenda. It's all on his website.

Obama lied several times about his relationship with Bill Ayers. At first he said Ayers was just a guy who lived in his neighborhood whose kids went to school with his. Ayers' kids are in their 20's. Obama's kids are 10 and 7. How many times did Ayers' kids flunk kindergarten? Then it was discovered that Obama and Ayers worked together on the Annenberg Challenge. Obama called him a distinguished professor he once worked with. Then when Ayers' terrorist past came out, Obama threw him under the bus. He lied about Ayers from the beginning. While Obama didn't help Ayers blow anything up, he tried to cover up the fact that he had a relationship with Ayers. Obama is guilty of poor judgment for sure. He should have come out and told the truth about ayers from the start. He is also guilty of the same poor judgment in how he handled the reverend Wright's racist, anti-American remarks. Father Flager, same difference. How much more poor judgment is Obama going to show? We can't afford someone who has poor judgment to be put in charge of the country, the nuclear football, and the US military. It's too risky.

Palin is like an ordinary person. That's how she presents herself. She's not afraid to speak her mind, and she's not afraid to stand behind what she says. You know what you're getting with her. The biased media has blasted her up one side and down the other, and she's still standing. That's what I find comforting and impressive about Sarah Palin. She is genuine. Obama, when he made those elitist comments about clinging to guns and Bibles, only illustrated to me how much of a fake he really is.

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:57am

If I haven't said so already, welcome to the board.>

Thank you. That's very kind of you, and very much appreciated. :) I know we won't always agree, but I don't think we'll always disagree. Common ground is a wonderful thing to find sometimes. :) I hope we can find it. :)

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-24-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 2:59am

~-it has nothing to do with that~


Just to clarify, yes, it did (which is why I posted it).

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 3:07am

This is not the same as being Bush, which is what most Liberals, including Obama, tried to portray McCain as.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-24-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 4:04am

~This is not the same as being Bush, which is what most Liberals, including Obama, tried to portray McCain as.~


a) I didn't say it was the same.


b) You had said "tied to Bush", not "being Bush".

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-12-2008
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 7:53am

What you are describing is a campaign strategy. All campaigns have them and they are designed to get votes. These strategies are nearly always unfair and manipulative. The Obama campaign wants to link McCain to Bush because they know that people don't like Bush. The McCain campaign wants to make Obama appear foreign and dangerous to the American people because when undecided voters feel afraid, they historically shift to the right. Then both candidates act all offended and resentful at the other candidate's attempts to manipulate and try to make the other side appear more "negative." Its all a game. Politicians have taken their cues from modern advertising: they use psychology to manipulate people. This election is no exception and the politicians aren't really bad for doing it, they just want to win and see it as being for the greater good.

There's a well-established phenomenon in psychology called the confirmation bias, which is that we tend to only pay attention to evidence that fits with our current views and ignore everything else. At election time, and on boards like this one, this tendency gets very strong. We only want to see what's positive and good about "our side" and demonize the other side. What you have just said seems to be a good example. You have pointed out the tricks that the Obama campaign is using, while failing to notice the similarly sneaky things going on in the McCain campaign.

Are *some* liberals elitist? Sure. But you may wish to reread your statement. You've characterized people who disagree with you as being angry, arrogant, and unjust, and I can only assume that you think you are not those things and therefore better than people who are.




Photobucket


siggy aug 09
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 8:59am

<<

 


 


I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 9:05am

<>


I certainly don't think that's the case in this election.

 


 


I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 10-18-2008 - 9:13am

<>


It also shows the ability to set a goal and attain it.

 


 


I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure

Pages