On December 07 2008 04:44 0cz3c wrote: " many conservatives don't realize that what America's doing is exactly that - what you're calling "free lunch"."
Do you mean social conservatives or economic conservatives?
I recently spoke with John Gordon, an economic historian, about this, and it seems to me that the general consensus among economic conservatives (I should probably specify: educated economic conservatives) is that bailing out companies, i.e. "free lunch," is ludicrous. I am assuming that you're including the possible auto-industry bailout as well. Not including it would contradict your previous point.
I am against the bailout...especially of the auto industry. And yes, I consider myself an economic conservative so I agree with this post.
On December 07 2008 04:46 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Sorry, could you clarify what you're saying a bit? I'm having a hard time understanding it, probably poor reading comprehension on my part.
If you're saying that most economic conservatives disagree heavily with the bailouts, then that's good. The other way I read it was that they didn't think a bailout was "free lunch", which is just absurd.
He is saying that economic conservatives oppose the bailout of the auto industry and that they don't think it is a free lunch, it will have costs.
Really News is meant to do one thing. Like all things, news is a business. So business try and make money. They are not going to show something that will not sell. All of the news on tv that American cattle watch is controlled by just 5 separate companies. Everyone likes Barak, so they will give everyone story's. It's all about money.
The media are making Barak sound infallible.
I definitely agree that news is primarily a business. I actually think that Murdoch made Foxnews into a conservative station not because he wants to elect republicans, but because he saw a market for conservative ideas. For years, ALL the media was liberal with Rush Limbaugh being the exception and raking in tons of $$$. He saw the market potential and it worked. People were starved for something other than liberal media and Foxnews became the most successful cable news station and it still is (BTW, I don't watch ANY cable news or television at all for that matter).
As for "The media are making Barak sound infallible." I agree and it is bad news for democrats in 2012.
Yes, Murdoch is a shrewd businessman, but I don't think that there's any disconnect between his ideals and Fox News.
I understand what you're saying about the media hype, and I don't like it all that much either, but hey, at least give him a chance to prove himself =P.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
no, thats bullshit
its when you arent around your parents and people with similar views to yours 24/7 (IE college or a diverse school system) that people realize that conservatism is stupid.
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
On December 07 2008 04:46 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Sorry, could you clarify what you're saying a bit? I'm having a hard time understanding it, probably poor reading comprehension on my part.
If you're saying that most economic conservatives disagree heavily with the bailouts, then that's good. The other way I read it was that they didn't think a bailout was "free lunch", which is just absurd.
He is saying that economic conservatives oppose the bailout of the auto industry and that they don't think it is a free lunch, it will have costs.
Well, I think we're differing on what we mean by "free lunch".
I mean that they get something they haven't paid for, not that the bailout is free.
Obviously, it will have cost, and the brunt of that cost is paid for by the taxpayers.
I can't imagine that you mean differently, but I'm probably interpreting the last part of your post wrong.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
no, thats bullshit
its when you arent around your parents and people with similar views to yours 24/7 (IE college or a diverse school system) that people realize that conservatism is stupid.
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
Whoa, whoa, let's keep the discussion civil. It's perfectly okay to have a political view, regardless of what it is.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
no, thats bullshit
its when you arent around your parents and people with similar views to yours 24/7 (IE college or a diverse school system) that people realize that conservatism is stupid.
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
Whoa, whoa, let's keep the discussion civil. It's perfectly okay to have a political view, regardless of what it is.
im not talking democrat or republican, Im talking socialogical. While I am definately against a conservative economic ideology, I am talking socially.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
I imagine you sitting at your Professor's feet gazing up into his wizened eyes as he says these exact words.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
I imagine you sitting at your Professor's feet gazing up into his wizened eyes as he says these exact words.
That's exactly like stereotyping all conservatives to church-going sheep. We're smarter than you give us credit for, you're smarter than we give you credit for. Let's start the discussion from here.
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
I love when people try to say the being liberal means you "really care" and that conservatives don't. Especially because when you look at the data you see the opposite:
Do a google search on whether Republicans or Democrats give more to charity. You will find that it is Republicans. Democrats are pretty generous with tax money taken by coercion, while Republicans tend to be more generous with their own money.
"In Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism (Basic Books), Arthur C. Brooks finds that religious conservatives are far more charitable than secular liberals, and that those who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others."
"If liberals persist in their antipathy to religion," Mr. Brooks writes, "the Democrats will become not only the party of secularism, but also the party of uncharity."
And a map of the most generous state in the Union with red being "more generous":
Here is the outcome of the 2004 Presidential race:
On December 07 2008 04:50 Sadist wrote: As exposure to liberal professors by young naive students goes up conservatism goes down
=D
(And im not talking about political parties here)
Fixed
theres absolutely nothing wrong with being liberal (especially socially) infact it is a desired trait. You are more open minded and actually give a fuck about people other than yourself and people in your tax bracket.
I imagine you sitting at your priest's feet gazing up into his mighty wang as he says these exact words.
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.lawprofessorblogs.com/taxprof/linkimages/generosity0512map.gif)
![[image loading]](http://www.lawprofessorblogs.com/taxprof/linkimages/election04.gif)
![[image loading]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/5137FN17VRL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
