Conservative Republican Brainwashing.

[Krazyskooter]

The Conservative Republicans in my state don't want homosexuals to be allowed to marry, Yet, my sister and her girlfriend are heading straight to the polls to vote conservative republican. It's that bad in MS people.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

The Conservative Republicans in my state don't want homosexuals to be allowed to marry, Yet, my sister and her girlfriend are heading straight to the polls to vote conservative republican. It's that bad in MS people.

Political parties can't be measured by their position on one extreme and statistically minimally relevant issue. You are demonstrating severly limited thinking that poisons the American political landscape.

 

[Krazyskooter]

I agree on one point, You can't say all are the same, which is why I specifically said Conservative Republican. Now, I'm of the opinion that The United States should be a place where all people are equal. Hey! Seems like I read that somewhere...... And calling the fact that homosexuals are not represented equally under the law irrelevant shows that its you sir/ma'am who are poisoning our political landscape.

 

[ArthurWilborn]

I agree on one point, You can't say all are the same, which is why I specifically said Conservative Republican. Now, I'm of the opinion that The United States should be a place where all people are equal. Hey! Seems like I read that somewhere...... And calling the fact that homosexuals are not represented equally under the law irrelevant shows that its you sir/ma'am who are poisoning our political landscape.

I said the the issue was, statistically speaking, of minimal relevance. Comparatively few people are directly affected, whereas political philosophies routinely represent policies that affect nearly everyone. Your sister may disagree on one statisically minor issue (even one that affects her personally) while still agreeing with larger and more statistically significant policies.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The Republicans(and too many Democrats) are experts at convincing people to vote against their own interests and the interests of their state and the country as a whole. If only the good guys could be as convincing when promoting the interests of the American people.

 

[Gnomesmusher]

I agree on one point, You can't say all are the same, which is why I specifically said Conservative Republican. Now, I'm of the opinion that The United States should be a place where all people are equal. Hey! Seems like I read that somewhere...... And calling the fact that homosexuals are not represented equally under the law irrelevant shows that its you sir/ma'am who are poisoning our political landscape.

I said the the issue was, statistically speaking, of minimal relevance. Comparatively few people are directly affected, whereas political philosophies routinely represent policies that affect nearly everyone. Your sister may disagree on one statisically minor issue (even one that affects her personally) while still agreeing with larger and more statistically significant policies.

The issue is of minimal relevance to this lesbian couple? I really doubt it. I mean it only affects their whole freaking love life and family life. Not to mention a whole slew of other things like whether they'll get discriminated from certain professions.

Sounds like brainwashing to me for a lesbian couple to vote against their own interests.

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

Apparently the other advantages they get from Republican Conservatives outweigh the disadvantage. Have you asked them why they voted such?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Apparently the other advantages they get from Republican Conservatives outweigh the disadvantage. Have you asked them why they voted such?

Yeah, maybe they are millionaires with large off-shore accounts, or racists! What other groups do the Republicans benefit again? :?:

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

Don't ask me, ask the lesbian couple in question, perhaps they can tell you to which group they belong that made them decide to vote the way they did. I know I wouldn't have voted GOP, but I can only think they have their reasons.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Surely the lesbian couple aren't homophobic... maybe scared of a mostly non-existent threat of international terrorism? Foolishly anti-tax? Think Obama is a Muslim/Nazi/Communist/Marxist/Martian?

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

Again, don't ask me, ask the lesbian couple in question. This is what I've been saying in the past three posts. They would've had their reasons otherwise they wouldn't have done it. I don't see why I should be the one telling you why they did so.

 

[Eidolon]

Maybe they are closet straights?

Honestly though, I hate when people vote republican. Not because of what republicans stand for, but because they vote for all the wrong reasons.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Again, don't ask me, ask the lesbian couple in question. This is what I've been saying in the past three posts. They would've had their reasons otherwise they wouldn't have done it. I don't see why I should be the one telling you why they did so.

I'm not asking you, the questions were rhetorical, unless the ladies in question decide to join the thread... the thread, the site, the Internet, the world, none of it revolves around you. Get used to it. :lol:

 

[Andiferous]

I wonder if those who use fear campaigning could be considered terrorists. That would be funny. :lol:

 

[ArthurWilborn]

The issue is of minimal relevance to this lesbian couple? I really doubt it. I mean it only affects their whole freaking love life and family life. Not to mention a whole slew of other things like whether they'll get discriminated from certain professions.

Sounds like brainwashing to me for a lesbian couple to vote against their own interests.

Because you're so intelligent that you know what's best for everyone and anyone who disagrees with you isn't in their right mind?

How arrogant.

 

[RichardMNixon]

I wonder if those who use fear campaigning could be considered terrorists. That would be funny. :lol:

I don't know how broadly to paint the brush, but Glenn Beck at least I have no qualms declaring a terrorist. He's made a career out of terrifying people, telling them Obama is a secret muslim who hates America and will destroy the country.

Because you're so intelligent that you know what's best for everyone and anyone who disagrees with you isn't in their right mind?

Would you vote for someone you agreed with on most counts but also included the campaign goal of preventing ArthurWilborn from getting married? Brainwashed may be taking a step too far but there's definitely something interesting going on here. How many black people do you think voted for Strom Thurmond?

I will add that Obama hasn't exactly been forthcoming on gay rights. He's taken a few nice steps like extending benefits of federal employees to their partners and bushing for this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_Partnership_Benefits_and_Obligations_Act, but I've never seen that in the "left-wing" media. He's been pretty weak about marriage in general and DADT though, maybe they felt taken advantage of because democrats talked the talk but didn't walk the walk?

 

[TheFlyingBastard]

I'm not asking you, the questions were rhetorical, unless the ladies in question decide to join the thread... the thread, the site, the Internet, the world, none of it revolves around you. Get used to it. :lol:

Then you really should stop quoting and responding to my posts.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I'm not asking you, the questions were rhetorical, unless the ladies in question decide to join the thread... the thread, the site, the Internet, the world, none of it revolves around you. Get used to it. :lol:

Then you really should stop quoting and responding to my posts.

Yeah, and maybe you should get over yourself.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I don't know how broadly to paint the brush, but Glenn Beck at least I have no qualms declaring a terrorist. He's made a career out of terrifying people, telling them Obama is a secret muslim who hates America and will destroy the country.

I think that's sedition, not treason... there's a difference, right?

 

[Yfelsung]

The bottom line is that the mass majority of people cannot be trusted to choose who will lead them. They're easily swayed by a variety of logical fallacies, especially appeals to emotion.

I don't know what system we could use that would be least open to abuse, but some form of limiting the vote to those who understand the logical benefits or pitfalls of a given political ideology would probably end up with a much better political system.

The majority does not always know what is good for the majority.