Sounds about right.

 

Tim, I agree with DL. Both of your posts were right on target in my opinion. While we fight with one another, they are raping us and filling their coffers with tons of money.

 

"Wingnuts" and President Obama

Here is a link to the Harris Interactive Poll itself:

http://news.harrisinteractive.com/p...37050&GoTopage=1&Category=1777&BzID=1963&t=30

-----

These replies are also strongly correlated with education. The less education people have had the more likely they are to believe all of these statements. Consider these differences between those with no college education and those with post-graduate education:

• He is a Muslim (43% and 9%)
• He was not born in the United States so is not eligible to be president (32% and 7%)
• He is a racist (28% and 9%)
• He is anti-American (27% and 9%)
• He is doing many of the things Hitler did (24% and 10%).

 

Okay, now I want to have a threesome with you and Tim!

And DL can watch.

 

THAT'S FUCKIN' BULLSHIT....................I guess I'll just think about it

 

Lips that lisp conservative shall never touch mine.

 

You and I cybering, you'll have a different opinion on that.:laughing:

 

Okay, but you have to promise not to piss me off.

 

Keep the politics out of it,,,,,,,I'm sure it will be all good

 

Why not a foursome?

 

*laughing* What, do you feel left out?

 

I might get lover's nuts just watching.

 

Well...you'd have to modify your views somewhat to join the club...

 

Foursome? why stop there.Caligula had orgies that would make a professional sports stadium seem too cramped.If we are gonna do this thing lets get everybody in on the action.But if we do this its gonna be bring your own bottle...and lube...and condoms...and whatever else

remember folks,if you use a feather its kinky...using the whole chicken is perverted.

 

Demonstrate that I am mistaken with facts that you can document and logical thinking, and I will modify my views.

Don't say, "This website proves that you are wrong, click on it." That is a stumbler kind of thing.

 

Proffessor Jonathan Haidt, a University of Virginia social psychologist, has developed a system to explain the different moral systems of conservatives and liberals.
In his view there are five foundations people use to define morality:

Harm: whether someone is harmed or harm is reduced.

Reciprocity: whether something is fair and treats people fairly and justly.

In-group: whether something betrays the group.

Hierarchy: whether something is respectful of authority and superiors.

Purity: whether or not something is disgusting.


Haidt says that Liberals only use the first two - and don't respond to arguments based on the other three, while conservatives use all five, and therefore will find arguments based solely on the first two unconvincing. There could be a real lesson for political communications here.


I found this interesting...

 

ya know, he's right.... I knew someone would figure them out.

 

I had never seen that theory before Ace but if you apply it, it does make sense.

 

Do we have to do this again? You've been shown facts, documents and logical thinking. But you reject all of that. You believe what you believe, with almost child-like faith. I'm not going through that exercise again.

 

You would. Perhaps the good professor would favor us with an objective definition of the entirely subjective term "disgusting".

It appears that conservative morality hinges on respect for authority. Does that mean you're now going to show some respect for Barack Obama?

I thought not.