What facts am I missing/ignoring exactly?

Question

I'm a Conservative. I find that Liberals tend to only accept facts that fit their paradigm. I see that Liberals feel the same way about conservatives. Clearly we can't both be right (no pun intended) but are we both wrong?

I believe that less government interference is good.
This includes lower taxes. What am I missing?

I believe that we should not apologize for being the most powerful economy, military, industrial complex in the world. Why is that wrong?

I believe we should have kicked Saddam out of Iraq when he first violated the Cease Fire Agreement; regardless of the WMD situation. Am I a bloodthirsty barbarian?

I believe that freedom of religion doesn't mean freedom FROM religion and that it should extend to Christians too! Where is my logic faulty?

travolta-stinks - I read Keynes too, I don't recall him saying that the government should make payments directly to individuals. I believe Lincoln was a Republican, and for that matter so was Teddy Roosevelt (establisheed National Parks service) As for wiretaps, we are at war, I believe FDR's policies were a lot more intrusive. Again you seem to only consider the facts that support your opinion.

Bruce j - we have the largest economy in history too. Stop picking only the facts that support your position and ignoring the obvious; there are a dozen economic indicators, I'm sorry one of them is negative - we are at war.

Geoff C - I agree, Our best Congress was the first congress - and they were all Freshmen! Maybe we should just kick out all of the incumbants

Beach Bum - What?!
Oh by the way, truth is NOT in the eye of the beholder.

Pythagoras-Okay, again I want my govt to provide public goods like frequency deconfliction, clean air, national defense. I don't think our Federal govt should be in the business of charity to individuals

650,000 Iraqis have not died in Iraq, no legitimate organization has ever claimed such a thing. Furthermore, Bush did not kill them, Al Qaeda and Iranian insurgents did. Do we have some complicity? Yes, but by no means are we responsible.

Answer 1

My first impulse was to go through each of your examples and explain... but by the time I came to the end of you well-articulated thoughts, I realized the problem.

Seriously, and this is a problem on both sides of the aisle I think, the problem is lack of communication; moreover, the media actually feeding 'our' interpretations of the other side.

You see, I am a far left liberal and I can honestly say the media, or something out there within the information highway, has your definition of what a liberal believes as incorrect.

I will leave this answer with the following statement: 'truth is actually within the eye of the beholder but a rumor/judgment always stems from interpretation of someone else's belief.'

Answer 2

1. The flaw in your logic with "government interference is good. is this: If less government interference is good, that must mean that no government interference would be the best possible state. If that were the case, we would be living in anarchy. Therefore, some "interference" is necessary. The million dollar question then becomes, "How much is best?"

2. The flaw with "not apologize for being the most powerful economy, military, industrial complex in the world" is that I don't hear too many people apologizing for it. I think whap people would apologize for is what we do/don't do as the most powerful. Personally, I am not in this catagory. Winston Churchill once said, "Nations are not friends, they only have common interests.", or something to that effect. I think we need to be thoughtful to the pain and suffering of others around the world and do what we think is appropriate, but our primary responsibility is to govern ourselves.

3. No problems with you on this one. It was a mistake of Bush et. al. to go searching for other justifications to this war. (WMD's, liberators of Iraq, establish democracy, etc). The case was simple: Saddam violated the cease fire, ergo no more cease fire exists.

4. No problems with you on this one, either. Government should be neutral towards religion. It should not pass laws or grant money on the basis of religion, but it should not deny laws or withhold money on the basis of religion.

Answer 3

You can, in fact, both be right. Denying facts that don't fit your way of thinking isn't even limitted to liberals and conservatives, it's basic human nature. If confronted with a fact that doesn't fit your paradigm, you have two choices: ignore the fact, or revise the paradigm. The former is easier.

Answer 4

I have NO problem with 'classic' conservatives. However, the 'new' conservatives (neo-cons) don't support your platform.

They believe that spending more doesn't require higher taxes. It's a 'spend and spend' philosophy, instead of a 'tax and spend' philosophy. (Bush has increased the national debt more than any president in history.)

They believe that America is number one at EVERYTHING. They border on xenophobia.

They believe that ALL Muslims should die. Or, at the very least, be put into concentration camps.

And I don't quite get your point on religion, but I'm fine with any religion, as long as it doesn't knock on my door and ask for money.

Look, I don't agree with all of the views of 'classic' conservatives, but I can handle them. I'll make ya a deal. When a party that declares itself conservative can be trusted with the purse strings to America, then I will trust them. But, as long as the Republicans are racking up debt and picking fights with the wrong nations, they don't have my support. Regardless of what you think we 'should' have done in Iraq...it's costing a fortune.

Answer 5

You are right in saying that you are both wrong! I consider myself a moderate, one of the people that the political parties who claim to be conservative and liberals (both terms mean nothing now) ignore.

Answer 6

There is nothing wrong with your beliefs.

One of the biggest problems is the hypocrisy of Democrats, those we call "liberal" whose only concern with freedom is how to curtail it. The prime example of "liberal" hypocrisy is the liberal refusal to accept that you have a right to your beliefs and your opinion. Liberals talk a lot about being more accepting of people, calling "conservatives" a bunch of bigots, and then, like the posts on this question, reject the FACT that you have a right to your opinion and your beliefs just like everyone else the "liberals" want to be more accepting of.

"Liberals" want to be more accepting of people who believe the same things they do and/or support them politically, monetarily or physically. The rest are "bigots".

As a moderate who is economically literate I realize that the most important resource in a growing economy is people. I believe that we, as a collective international society, need to maintain the economic resource of people, labor, at a level where it is useful during economic expansion. Useful means educated, healthy, nourished.

Currently we do not maintain people as a resource very well, generally leaving them to fend for themselves until we need them and when we need them they are uneducated and generally in poor health so when the economic expansion increases past the point of available labor wages increase substantially until the increase collapses from the "weight" of the cost of labor, circa 1999-2000.

This does not make your belief that less government and lower taxes is wrong, or my belief that we need to improve social services for the purposes of economic resources is wrong. It just means we have different ideas.

"Liberals" call us both wrong. Me, because "we need to take care of people because they are people, not because we will need them eventually" and you because "people need strong leaders to be told what to do".

Answer 7

Your problem is that you believe things regardless of the facts.

You believe deregulation and Reaganomics is superior to invest in the American people Keynesian economics. Historical economic data proves cons wrong. Plain and simple.

You believe less gov't interference is good period, but in fact the federal government had to step in to free the slaves and give women and minorities equal rights. I like the kind of gov't that defends civil rights and protects workers, consumers, and the environment. However, I do not like the big brother, warrantless wiretapping, type of gov't cons seem to support.

Wanting less taxes is a personal choice, but I think we should both be able to agree that borrowing and spending is WRONG. The current generation should pay for what it spends.

Answer 8

I see no fault in your logic.

To the people that believe in separation of church and state "Can you find it in the Constitution?"

And I Believe the Second Amendment is an individual right.

Answer 9

I am a moderate who agrees with you.

I wonder myself where the outcry is for the UN failing to uphold their own resolutions putting the US in the position to have to. 12 resolutions violated and their solution. Let's write more.

Apologizing for our status as the superpower is like a olympic athelete saying sorry for winning the gold. Americans work hard for what we have become.

I am not a Christian or anything for that matter I dont believe in god, but I do see other religions recieving special treatment so they are not offended while Christians are continually denied the same rights.

I find it hard to believe with all of the people on here complaining about the goverments (both dems and republicans) handeling of just about everything that they would be begging the goverment to take over our healthcare.

You are right both sides are wrong on a lot of things. The problem is there are too many under and uniformed people spouting off about what is wrong. They rely on a news source to provide them their information and they take it as fact. Dont they realize those news groups are a business and as a business their primary job isn't to report accurate news it is to make money and they slant their reporting in a way they think will make them the most money.

It is time to stop blaming Bush for everything from the 9/11 attacks to the amount of rain your city has had. And look at things from an educated view not fueled by slogans and sound bites given to you from some website.

People need to start thinking for them self and being honest with them self.

People tend to overlook facts that don't fit their agenda. the prime example is how they blame bush for the war and say he lied, but they overlook that the war was voted on and approved by most of Washington. Why do they let the others off the hook. If what Bush did was so bad why are the others not held accountable.

bush might not have handled everything the best way, but I have respect that he stuck to his guns and did what he thought was right even when it wasnt popular. Not a lot of politicians can say that. I am tired of these people Dems and republicans alike who are changing their policy with the polls. I want people who really believe in what they believe in.

I know I will get a lot of thumbs down but It is the truth of how I feel and unlike these politicians I am not trying to keep a seat. If we stuck to our guns and voted with what was right instead of what was popular or party line we might send a message to Washington.

ADDITION: I agree with the freshman congress statement. People on here alway refer to what our founding fathers meant when they wrote documents. Well one thing they never intended on was people holding their seat so long that they get a pension. The intention was for people to serve I say again SERVE there country for between 2 and 8 years then go back to being a farmer a store owner or what ever. If this was the case The lobbies would have less influence in our goverment and the politicians would be less likley to learn all of the ins and outs of how to milk their position for money and power. You wouldn't have people Like Ted Kennedy who knows every loophole in the system taking everything he can get his hands on. We need to return to politicians serving to serve not as a career.

Beach bum: truth is not in the eye of the beholder that is beauty. Truth is a definate thing. We can look at something that is red and I can say it is blue you can look at it and say it is yellow. Just becuase we both believe what we say is true doesnt make it true.

most of my definition of a far left liberal or a far right person doesnt come from what the news tells me it is it comes from the statements that are made on here.

When people defend terrorist dilibratley targeting civilian targets what are we suppose to think. My Ex use to say she understood the IRA killing innocent people (she is British) to further there cause. My question to her everytime was the same thing. What if it was your daughter they killed would you still feel the same. Of course it always started an argument, but out of that I got my answer. I find liberals don't look at things how they are unless it directly affects them.

I lost no one in 9/11, yet I fought in Iraq and knew my purpose there I was wounded severly (ended my military service) I would go back today if my helath was given back to me.

We need to wake up as a nation. there are people out there who want us dead and as much as you wish it was true leaving them alone will not stop them from attacking us. Take a look at Spain and see how that worked out for them with ETA

Answer 10

I totally agree with iceman, you are very ignorant and selfish.
People like you are embarrassment for America.
over 650,000 Iraqis are murdered by bush and Cheney and this what you are thinking about:

PS the resorts are opening soon, near the site of the original city of Babylon. I'd go would you?

ATTENTION, ATTENTION, ATTENTION, ATTENTION,
people you be the judge does this guy have a conscious?
Can you trust this guy ?