Study: Cons are more racist than Libs

[taxedout]

Only the liberals maintain, as a cornerstone of their social philosophy, that certain races are inherently and organically inferior, and thus cannot succeed without the assistance of white liberals.

What's more, they insist on helping with other people's money.

 

[LeftyHenry]

It is truly ludicrous to suggest that Conservatives, champions of individual rights and equal opportuinty, are racist at all in any sense greater than the natural inclination of all people of whatever race.

LOLL

equal rights, conservative philophsy is to kick th less fortunate to the curb and bathe in there money. conservatives want tax cuts for the rich and a stop to the aid of the poor. I don't think there has ever been a hint of consevatives believing in equal oppurtunity-disgusting.

 

[Carl]

conservatives want tax cuts for the rich and a stop to the aid of the poor. I don't think there has ever been a hint of consevatives believing in equal oppurtunity

Several observations, I'd like to take the last point first. The confusion liberals have is based upon a fundamental misconception as regards "equal".

For example, "equal opportunity" simply means nobody is denied having a shot at the brass ring. The results of availing one's self of opportunity are not guaranteed, however. I have the same opportunity to try-out for a professional basketball team as anyone, however I doubt I'll succeed. The outcome of opportunity depends on the abilities, motivation, skill, and natural talent of the individual.

Liberals appear to consider "equality" only with regard to outcomes. If the outcomes aren't even, or aren't at some arbitrary minimum level, the liberal concludes that the game is rigged. Conservatives believe in equal opportunity, liberals believe in equal outcomes.

Furthermore, a cornerstone of liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior at achieving an acceptable outcome. Soft bigotry. So liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own.

Conservatives have no issue with aid to the poor, or anyone for that matter. Conservatives simply don't subscribe to the view that the government is either the most appropriate, or most effective, agency for dispensing such aid. In fact, we don't believe the federal government has been properly delegated any such authority at all, and behaves in contravention to the convenant of our Constitution as regards entitlement spending.

Being a largely faithful demographic, Conservatives believe in charity and support for our fellow man as the Word of Christ, or God. But via private and faith-based organizations, in the form of a willful act between beneficiary and benefactor. Not as a compulsory act at the point of a gun for strangers, enforced by the full power of the State.

Targetted tax cuts are primarily a liberal Democrat sort of thing, aimed at modifying behavior. Social engineering, if you will. Conservative tax-cuts apply to everyone who pays taxes. If you are able to demonstrate otherwise, by all means post a link to the information. Short of that, you merely offer an empty assertion.

In summary, if we wish to consider an issue such as which political party is more "racist" with any level of seriousness above simple flame-bait, I think we have to look at the behavior of the parties.

One philosophy, Conservatism, has faith that all people can succeed to the extent of their abilities if given a fair playing field and an absence of government-imposed obstacles. The philosophy of Liberalism presumes that certain people are incapable of success despite the equality of opportunity.

You do the math.

 

[BodiSatva]

Posted by Carl -

organically incapable .....organically inferior

I assume that organically translates to "innately" in the anti-liberal dictionary that you have?

Carl, it seems that perhaps you are missing the point.

When you assign attributes to Conservatives, you make them positive and open...
"Conservatives believe in charity and support "
"Conservatives, champions of individual rights and equal opportuinty"
"Conservatives have no issue with aid to the poor"

When you assign attributes to Liberals, you assume that the Liberals base anything off of race, and that Liberals in general are white.
"liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior "
"The confusion liberals have is "
"liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own."
"Not as a compulsory act at the point of a gun for strangers, enforced by the full power of the State."
"they consistently contend that minorities cannot so prevail"
"soft bigotry that defines the core of Democrat social policy"

"the policies of the Democrat party, believe that minorities are organically incapable of prevailing in society without the help of white people."

Really? So what does that make all the non-white Democrats?
Blacks that are Democratic want to be white racists?
Latino's that are Democratic bought into a belief that they are organically inferior?
White Democrats are racist simply because what? They want to create gov. programs that are designed to help?

This entire point of view that you have been spouting is biased and assumption oriented. Back off the party politics a bit.

It could be argued that Conservatives are racist and that they play the game not to really benefit self reliance, but to not help people regardless of anything other than the fact that white people are now and have always been the power elite of this nation and that any help to anybody will result in a loss of their power and consequently money. So the blessed Conservatives sit back and say, "we want people to help themselves, if we assign a platform that is to help, it is to admit that we are racists that think that others NEED this help and can't make it on their own, so we will sit back and 'look' like good guys for promoting self reliance and call the Liberals racists for helping via government programs that we will subvert by labeling them "racist" programs due to their racist agenda's of non self reliance"
What a joke!

See, the coin can easily be tossed back...
The Liberals are just as bad with their ACLU scream tactics label anybody that does not fall into their agenda.
That is the danger in playing the stupid Liberal/Conservative Game in the first place.
You are trapped in your own self indulgent ideology.
They are equally stupid.
Don't be so "organically inferior" that you get lost in your own elitist views! :lol:

But I guess that you can't see past your own racist bias...why?
"In fact, we don't believe "
Apparently you do not believe in understanding, that is obviously and organic Conservative trait! :shock:

 

[Carl]

This entire point of view that you have been spouting is biased and assumption oriented. Back off the party politics a bit.

The title of this thread remains centered around party politics, and the assumptions of bias therein. I should like to stick to the topic, thank you.

But I guess that you can't see past your own racist bias...why?

While rotating a conversation away from the points made and towards the character of the author is an amusing rhetorical technique, it is not one that I encourage.

By all means, address any of the points I've made, and perhaps we can have a rational dialogue.

 

[ptsdkid]

Several observations, I'd like to take the last point first. The confusion liberals have is based upon a fundamental misconception as regards "equal".

For example, "equal opportunity" simply means nobody is denied having a shot at the brass ring. The results of availing one's self of opportunity are not guaranteed, however. I have the same opportunity to try-out for a professional basketball team as anyone, however I doubt I'll succeed. The outcome of opportunity depends on the abilities, motivation, skill, and natural talent of the individual.

Liberals appear to consider "equality" only with regard to outcomes. If the outcomes aren't even, or aren't at some arbitrary minimum level, the liberal concludes that the game is rigged. Conservatives believe in equal opportunity, liberals believe in equal outcomes.

Furthermore, a cornerstone of liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior at achieving an acceptable outcome. Soft bigotry. So liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own.

Conservatives have no issue with aid to the poor, or anyone for that matter. Conservatives simply don't subscribe to the view that the government is either the most appropriate, or most effective, agency for dispensing such aid. In fact, we don't believe the federal government has been properly delegated any such authority at all, and behaves in contravention to the convenant of our Constitution as regards entitlement spending.

Being a largely faithful demographic, Conservatives believe in charity and support for our fellow man as the Word of Christ, or God. But via private and faith-based organizations, in the form of a willful act between beneficiary and benefactor. Not as a compulsory act at the point of a gun for strangers, enforced by the full power of the State.

Targetted tax cuts are primarily a liberal Democrat sort of thing, aimed at modifying behavior. Social engineering, if you will. Conservative tax-cuts apply to everyone who pays taxes. If you are able to demonstrate otherwise, by all means post a link to the information. Short of that, you merely offer an empty assertion.

In summary, if we wish to consider an issue such as which political party is more "racist" with any level of seriousness above simple flame-bait, I think we have to look at the behavior of the parties.

One philosophy, Conservatism, has faith that all people can succeed to the extent of their abilities if given a fair playing field and an absence of government-imposed obstacles. The philosophy of Liberalism presumes that certain people are incapable of success despite the equality of opportunity.

You do the math.

***That was the most beautiful piece I've seen of summarizing the difference between a liberal and a conservative.

A liberal seeks outcome equality based on a perceived income inequality. They see the poor and lazy as unequals to the rich--therefore we must penalize the rich by taxing them more--which should lead to income redistribution.

A liberal (teacher's unions) seek to dumb down our schools by introducing a system that rewards the dumb students by modifying failing grades to passing grades so that no feels desensitized, hurt, or inadequate, thus competition and an urge to better oneself becomes moot.

A liberal thinks compassion is measured by how many people they can get to jin the ranks of the welfare recipients. Whereas, a conservative seeks to have the poor/unemployed get a job so that they begin to feel some self worth.

 

[BodiSatva]

The title of this thread remains centered around party politics, and the assumptions of bias therein.

True and false.
True that, "The title of this thread remains centered around party politics"
False, "assumptions of bias therein"

People can discuss the interests of a political party without being biased.
Air America Radio or Rush Limbaugh? The world is full of biased people that discuss party politics and do little more than project their delusional ideology of superiority.

I should like to stick to the topic, thank you.

And you are, and so am I.
Assumptions and bias only cloud the issue though.
That is the point that I am making, and this too, addresses party politics

Originally Posted by BodiSatva
But I guess that you can't see past your own racist bias...why?

An attempt to be funny and draw you out a bit...
You did not, I look dumb because you are solid as a rock!

While rotating a conversation away from the points made and towards the character of the author is an amusing rhetorical technique

There was no "rotating". There was "adding" though.
I am sure that for you, it is easy enough to see that this was in fact the case, and you are simply trying to belittle me with some whimsy. This would be a textbook and transparent evasion technique if it were not obvious that you were teaching me a lesson in a seemingly superior manner..."amusing"

I am glad that at least my foolishness and inexperience offers a man of wisdom and patience such as yourself some amusement. I am so silly, it is obvious. hehe me so naive. :2razz:

By all means, address any of the points I've made, and perhaps we can have a rational dialogue.

I did.
Quite clearly.
You did not offer rational dialogue then...

hmmm...Rational?
We can't if bias and assumption permeate one with a delusional sense of superiority.

 

[Carl]

The world is full of biased people that discuss party politics and do little more than project their delusional ideology of superiority.

But some ideologies, philosophies, and parties are in fact superior to others. If superiority can be demontrated, it can hardly be a delusion. Implicit in the topic of this thread is the idea that on matters of race, liberalism is superior. A study to that effect was provided.

Let's just do this the easy way. Here's the point you find most troublesome, and the one that directly confronts the point at hand. Approach it directly, and we'll go from there.

Furthermore, a cornerstone of liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior at achieving an acceptable outcome. Soft bigotry. So liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own.

 

[BodiSatva]

Carl

By all means, address any of the points I've made, and perhaps we can have a rational dialogue.

Bodi

I did.

Here it is...

Carl:
"the policies of the Democrat party, believe that minorities are organically incapable of prevailing in society without the help of white people."

Bodi:
Really? So what does that make all the non-white Democrats?
Blacks that are Democratic want to be white racists?
Latino's that are Democratic bought into a belief that they are organically inferior?
White Democrats are racist simply because what? They want to create gov. programs that are designed to help?

This was addressed initially...as I already stated.

If superiority can be demontrated, it can hardly be a delusion

The whole point...AGAIN, is that you are simply demonstrating bias without backing up your opinion. You are assuming based off of...what? What you see? What you experince? Written evidence from Democratic Party HQ stating that they are indeed racists? Provide actual evidence please...

Of course, all that has been offered thus far is biased and opinionated, and that is my point, and my point is correct.

Originally Posted by Carl
Furthermore, a cornerstone of liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior at achieving an acceptable outcome. Soft bigotry. So liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own.

This is riduculous. Of course, you will state that Liberals are inferior and that their social agenda blah blah blah...But that is the point. All I did was point out that you are making baseless points that abound with assumption and conjecture.

I pointed this out initially.

Approach it directly, and we'll go from there

Again...I did.

Where you seem to be lost is with this...
I did not challenge your belief regarding Liberals or Conservatives or Race Politics...
I challenged a premise that permeates your statements and goes something like this...

some ideologies, philosophies, and parties are in fact superior to others.

Obviously
Did this even need to be pointed out? It is obvious that you think this, for, again, this thinking is sprinkled throughout your writing.

This was not in dispute...I discussed, "biased people that ...project their delusional ideology of superiority"

I backed this up with examples of bias...

When you assign attributes to Conservatives, you make them positive and open...
"Conservatives believe in charity and support "
"Conservatives, champions of individual rights and equal opportuinty"
"Conservatives have no issue with aid to the poor"

When you assign attributes to Liberals, you assume that the Liberals base anything off of race, and that Liberals in general are white.
"liberal social policy is based on the presumption that entire races of people are organically inferior "
"The confusion liberals have is "
"liberals refuse to consider other options than handouts, because they do not believe those races can achieve on their own."
"Not as a compulsory act at the point of a gun for strangers, enforced by the full power of the State."
"they consistently contend that minorities cannot so prevail"
"soft bigotry that defines the core of Democrat social policy"

You chose to not address this in favor of assuming that I am lacking understanding regarding your terminology...
It is all good though...
We can move to the next phase if you would like, it just means that

You know, I am wasting a lot of time here...

Let's just do this the easy way.

I am not sure that it can be done. This is the third time now that I am addressing the initial point. Re-read, ask appropriate questions, provide evidence...do what it takes to figure it out.

Ignore? It is a lot easier.