171)This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
About Propeller | Frequently Asked Questions | Help
© 2003-2008 Propeller. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
How to twist a story. lol
You have to create something to rationalize facts you don't like. Have to make people with a different opinion beneath you in some way.
Conservatives have a well thought out viewpoint but you have to make it sound stupid to rationalize your own viewpoint. You obviously can't handle the idea that you might be wrong about anything.
The party of compassion who voted in the War on Poverty that caused a lot of unintended consequences like the tearing apart of the poor black family structure. You will never admit to any problems with your legislation. Ignore it and plow on making things worse.
For liberals the end does justify the means. Example the big lie that liberals spout. Bush lied. That is an absolute lie but you have begun believing your own lie.
No one has to work to make it sound stupid. It requires no effort at all!
Endoscopy, please enlighten us which well thought-out viewpoint requires the admininistration to repeated ignore corruption at the highest levels in the Iraqi government--the one we're trying to install--AND to keep embarrassing information secret.
Admit it. If it were a Democratic administration doing this, your head would explode.
By the way--your example of "the big lie" that Bush lied is not an absolute lie, nor is it an example of the ends justifying the means. You might want to study up on the meaning of that particular phrase.
A better example would be how torture is rationalized by the right because it supposedly saves lives. In other words, the ends--saving lives--justify any means--torture, to which we are philosophically opposed--that produce those ends.
I don't think that logic even computes with people like Endo, or for that matter, many repubs at all.
Endoscopy: "You have to create something to rationalize facts you don't like. Have to make people with a different opinion beneath you in some way."
I was referring to the article: "Conservatives Happier Than Liberals," which you may have read and definitely commented on it, saying about the Iraqi invasion, for example: "I love the illegal part. The senate gave their approval with almost everyone3 voting for it. We were going to take care of UN business. Really illegal."
That article stated in the first sentece: "Individuals with conservative ideologies are happier than liberal-leaners, and new research pinpoints the reason: Conservatives rationalize social and economic inequalities." You see, I didn't make it up. A lot of people commented on the article and conservatives tended to applaud it, reveling in the finding that they are the happy bunch.
If you had read my post carefully, you would have noticed that I qualified the word "conservatives" with "some." I did that because there are quite a few members on Propeller who are clearly conservative, but who do have well thought-out views of the world. I may disagree with their views, but they are perfectly valid, and they can usually support them without rationalizing.
If you had read my post carefully, you would have also realized that I was not equating rationalization with stupidity. My point was exactly that some of the master rationalizers may be highly intelligent. We all defend out egos, and rationalization is one of the defense mechanisms. Is it a good one? I don't think so, but that's just my opinion. When it comes to war and peace, I consider it outright dangerous.