HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ConservativeDemocrat » Journal
Page: 1

ConservativeDemocrat

Profile Information

Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 1,837

Journal Archives

In truth, I wish she wouldn't do the ROFL smiley bit...

Still when screamer side behaves like creationists, and responds to long strings of pertinent facts from established authorities by just repeating bullshit assertions, I can see how she would end up being sadly amused.

No one cares about whether people who have no credibility think others have credibility or not. When anyone blithely dismisses established facts, that speaks volumes. Roughly speaking, the typical exchange goes something like this:

MoronicLeftWingNut: President Obama beats his wife. A blogger from Russia Today says so. So it's true.
ProSense: It's provably false: made up by an insane southern racist. Here's a link to research debunking it.
MoronicLeftWingNut: Do you think the President should stop beating his wife?
ProSense: Did you read the link?!?
MoronicLeftWingNut: Answer my question! Do you think the President should stop beating his wife?
ProSense:


This repeats ad-nauseum on the D.U. constantly. Moron Screamers vs Information Providers. I myself have been sucked into spending hours figuring out the actual facts surrounding an issue (which I admit is a interest of itself, as sometimes research can be fun), usually finding out that the thing is quite murky with no clear "right" answer, only to be met with a response that clearly shows that the petulant D.U. screamers have absolutely zero interest in an adult, fact based, conversation.

I strongly suspect that ProSense has also given up on these people. They're the leftist equivalent of Teabaggers. They certainly appear to hate the President just as much. And are about as interesting as them as well, which is to say - not at all.

Specifically, in this thread, your entire attack was nothing but a thinly veiled Ad Hominem against ProSense, accusing her of being "ignorant" with a quote from Azimov because she was providing referenced facts to the ignorant screamers. Then you tried to justify your attack by calling those referenced facts "self-referential", when they were provably not. Right in the same thread!

I mean seriously. Are you stupid? Or do you think we are?!?


You want a picture? Here's one. It unfortunately describes all too many of the hate-filled anti-Democratic left that for some reason have decided to hang out on the D.U. instead of RevLeft.com:




- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

Posted by ConservativeDemocrat | Thu Mar 13, 2014, 11:19 PM (3 replies)

Hi realpolitics...

First, welcome to the Democratic Underground. Although this site usually has a large number of members on the left of the Democratic party, this site is open to all Democrats and people who consider voting for them.

Second, let me say that you are very intelligent for reaching out. Let me see if I can answer your questions:

> I believe that conservative ideology is best when mixed with liberal ideology.
This is fine. There are a number of things old-fashioned conservatives believe in that Democrats have taken to heart: making sure that government money isn't wasted, making sure that work is rewarded and non-work (including by what economists call "rent-seekers") is not as much, and religious-values (such as taking care of the poor). Unfortunately, that old-fashioned "conservatism" is now overshadowed by racists and hypocrites claiming to be conservative, and so has a well deserved bad reputation.

> For example I believe minimum wage should be raised but not to 15 dollars. I believe the 8 hour workday is just fine.
Before unions, there were no laws to keep employers from working people as long as they wished. President Obama has called for the minimum wage to be raised to $10.10. Even that is below the level it has been in the past.

> I believe that people in the US should have food stamps and welfare. One aspect I cannot understand is why these people, who are suffering from poverty choose to have children? That is one thing that has baffled me.
The answer is an unfortunate one. Many poor women don't choose to have children. Rather, they're pressured into sex by their boyfriends, they don't have money for birth control, and they wind up pregnant when they can't afford the baby. Planned Parenthood (the one the GOP demonizes) actually spends most of its money trying to give birth control away so that this doesn't happen; the abortions they provide are only a last resort.

> My family is "1%". However we have always helped people, cared, and my grandpa even funded an orphanage. I do not understand why people hate the wealthy. I do not show off my wealth. I dress comfortably and never to show off. I have one pair of shoes and one suit. I am not what others imagine as showy or flashy. I want to know why many of my friends once finding out about my background argue with me and criticize me.
This is unfortunate. No one should be discriminated against. There are actually many people in the 1% who are kind and decent people. Many of them well known Democrats: John Kerry, the Kennedy family, George Soros, even President Obama (though he started out middle-class).

What most people speak of when they talk about the "1%", are the people who have deliberately passed laws that have made it hard for other people to get ahead. When a family has ten million dollars, and they find a way to get another million dollars by denying their employees health care, or forcing them into poverty, or firing everyone and importing the same goods from an overseas supplier who pays 25 cents an hour, people get extremely angry. And unfortunately, this behavior has become so common among the wealthy, that people just think anyone who is rich is automatically evil. That's not true.

Here's a funny story about that. During the election that took place about 10 years ago, Kerry vs Bush, there were a bunch of protesters who ran around with "Billionaires for Bush" signs. They meant that only Billionaires would benefit from President Bush. But the strange thing was that someone went around and asked the real billionaires who they were voting for, and it turned out they supported John Kerry. Because they didn't think Bush was good for the country. (And they were right.)

> Furthermore I do believe there is opportunity. I know of hundreds of people who have nothing and work to achieve there goal. They did not rest, vacation, have children, spend, and barely ate. They were successful. I do not understand how people think success is attainable without wit, handwork, intelligence and sacrifice? They do not work 8 hours a day and do not have a "break". Every "evil" and "greedy" businessman worked and works his or her butt off to succeed. What is your take?
There is opportunity, however it's a lot harder than you might think. It's difficult to study for a test when you're hungry, for instance. So if you are, you don't do well in school. And from there, everything gets worse. You know how having a snow day is cool? Well there are students for which it's not. As one teacher put it:

> Furthermore wealth inequality is a problem. However I do not understand why people think that bringing the rich down is a solution. Why can we not try and bring the poor up? If we tax the rich insanely and the money goes into the governments pocket than how does the money "trickle" from the government to the poor. Couldn't the government spend it?
The government does spend it. Immediately. And they spend it on programs to help the poor. But many Republicans don't want any money spent to help the poor.

As far as taxing the rich "insanely", the truth is nearly the opposite. The mega-wealthy don't pay much at all. Let me explain how. Say that you have 10,000 dollars your family gave you, and you use it to start a new oil company. Now, say that this company of yours is extremely successful. And it makes $100 million dollars. How much tax do you pay?

The answer might surprise you. The answer is zero. You don't pay a dime until you sell the company. Regular people have to pay anywhere from 10% to 40% every single year, while you pay nothing. It's so bad that Warren Buffet (who is another billionaire who is a good-1%er) started complaining about the law. He said it was stupid that he was being asked to pay a lower percentage of his income each year than his own secretary.


> I believe that gun control should be in place. Mental health checks, background checks etc. are good. However I do not believe in limiting the types of weapons we should be able to have. A pistol can do damage just like an automatic weapon. By taking automatic weapons away what would we do in the event of a hypothetical invasion or revolt? I simply believe that automatic weapons should not be taken away and that it would help the economy if we imposed a larger tax on owners or a recurring gun carry fee that is higher than others! Plus it would increase production. What is your take?
You will find that Democrats disagree on this. I happen to agree with you. However, other Democrats look at other countries with much more strict gun-control laws in place and say that they have a much lower rate of gun-violence.

> I simply want to here liberal ideology straight from liberals and there arguments. Is communism actually a viable solution? It fails over and over even in the tiniest of countries.
Democrats do not believe that communism is a viable solution. In the 1930s and 1940s, it was actually Democrats who saved Capitalism from its excesses by making it work for people who were literally starving. You likely heard from your family (or their friends) that Democrats are Communists. That is untrue, and as deeply insulting to us as anything you ever have heard about 1%ers.

> Socialism works in some countries yet miserably fails in others? My friend made the argument that capitalism is a class where most get c's d's and f's and some get B's while one guy gets an A. I argued that communism brings everyone to a C. watched a video of Peter Schiff arguing with the occupy wall street movement and everyone sounded like an idiot.

First off, you will find that there are a lot of people who get so emotional, they all sound like idiots. They're not really stupid; they just are so angry that they act that way. You might be too if someone you loved was going hungry.

If I were going to make a school analogy, I'd say that socialism is like everyone being on a team. And it doesn't matter how well you do individually, it only matters how well the team does. This can work really well. If everyone on the team is committed to everyone's success, it works better than anything. But it can work really really poorly - if someone on the team slacks off, everyone else has to do the work for them. Capitalism is where each student works only for themselves. This can also go bad if the teacher only gives out a few "A" grades, doesn't pay attention as students secretly snatch rival student's homework to tear it up (to keep them from getting the "A"), or gives out grades based on what kind of materials a school project is made of, rather than whether it is right or not. Democrats believe in Capitalism, but with the teacher ("the government") keeping a very strict eye on the students so that doesn't happen. Democrats believe that the Teacher should do certain things (like teach), because you just can't do it fairly any other way. (Imagine how your grades would be if they were given by other students.)

Democrats believe in equal opportunity, not equal results.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community


Posted by ConservativeDemocrat | Wed Mar 5, 2014, 02:15 AM (4 replies)

It's ironic how the most accessible online library about Orwell...

...has a .ru (russia) country name. It's hosted there.

To me though, the most cogent passage is the one just before the one you highlighted:

In foreign politics many intellectuals follow the principle that any faction backed by Britain must be in the wrong.

Scratch out Britain, and update it with the United States, and there you have a perfectly apt description of these DUers.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

- C.D. Proud Members of the Reality Based Community
Posted by ConservativeDemocrat | Sat Mar 1, 2014, 11:24 PM (1 replies)

It would be truly interesting to have a debate...

...with people on the other side of this issue who could actually acknowledge reality. Saying something like: "Yes, obviously the law allows this, but it should be changed. Here's how we could draw the line a little closer, and not interfere with our legitimate national security concerns."

Alas, I've come to the conclusion that the D.U. isn't the place to do this. It seems to be the last bastion of magical thinking, tribalism, conspiracy theories, counterproductive screeching, willingness to completely make "facts" up, and so many different kinds of logical fallacies it's hard to keep track of them all.

The oddest thing is the absolute pure anti-Democratic party hatred. So many here really are the mirror image of the Tea Party: mindless screaming ranters determined to tear the one organized group that is actually effective in pushing forward the policies they purport to believe in. If I were as conspiracy minded as the loons that accuse me receiving a paycheck for posting on the D.U., I'd say they were secretly all Republicans conspiring to tear Democrats down. Alas, Occam's Razor tells me that instead, it's just people too wrapped in their own internal partisan morality play to acknowledge reality or the complexities of the real world.

The good news is that our party isn't plagued by these people as the Republicans are. Hard leftist loons sound doubly mad because they know normal Democrats don't pay attention to them. On the GOP side though, the inmates really have taken over the asylum. Howard Dean said it best, rather recently, to a GOP consultant on Bill Maher's show. "Your party is about 49% crackpots, ours has only 10."

And at least our crackpots know how to use a spelling checker. That's a plus.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Posted by ConservativeDemocrat | Sun Jun 30, 2013, 04:11 AM (1 replies)

This is the origin...

...of white-flight.

So the "Residents" do buy up valuable farmland and pave it over with pure white-only-in-everything-but-name gated communities, where they surround themselves in a little bubble of flag-pins, talk radio, and FOX. And due to the inherent bias toward rural and suburban spaces built into our system (by our founding fathers specifically to prevent national politics becoming a mere extension of big-city politics), they have disproportionate electoral influence.

A much less snarky, and better, reply would have been:

Dear Residents: Before you condemn them, why don't you meet them? If you're religious, recognize that they are children of God, just as you are. Different does not mean evil.


We need less hatred in this country, and it's very hard to hate people you've actually met. And by the way, this goes both ways, my dear hyper-partisan friends.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community
Posted by ConservativeDemocrat | Fri Jan 18, 2013, 02:18 PM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1