• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Do Conservatives really wish liberals would die?

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
23,003
770
126
The answer is, unequivocally yes, and they've taken such action already:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knoxville_Unitarian_Universalist_church_shooting

On July 27, 2008, a politically motivated[2][3] fatal shooting took place at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee, United States. Motivated by a desire to kill liberals and Democrats, gunman Jim David Adkisson fired a shotgun at members of the congregation during a youth performance of a musical, killing two people and wounding seven others.
During the interview Adkisson stated that he had targeted the church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country, and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the aid of major media outlets. Adkisson made statements that because he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he would then target those that had voted them into office. Adkisson stated that he had held these beliefs for about the last ten years.
Resident ATPN conservative, Arkaign, noticed this sentiment amongst other conservatives in his area:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=28025862&postcount=53

I'm a conservative, but find this kind of behavior absolutely reprehensible. I recently went to a backyard cookout with a few neighbors (this is an almost 100% 'Republican' area), and was shocked at: A) How fucking idiotic most of them were and B) How often I heard people talking about assassinating the POTUS and other 'liberals/commies'
Remember that scene in American History X when that white supremacist 'curb stomped' the black guy and killed him? Well, our own resident spidey seems to echo that sentiment against liberals:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=32608744&postcount=280

I told you we take care of patriots here in KY.

600 bucks to curb stomp a liberal? SO worth it.
Remember, the Republican party is the party that cheers on immoral wars, torture, and no doubt killing of their political enemies. They are the party of violent sociopaths.
 
Last edited:

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,979
1
0
I don't personally wish for anybody's death. But I could make a list of people whose deaths would leave the world a better place.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,229
25
91
Absolutely they do. They conservatives protesting outside the US embassy in Pakistan and elsewhere in the world want liberals like us DEAD.

Also, reported call-out thread.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
Concluding remark from your link...bolding is mine.
In other words, liberals and conservatives alike shaded their assessment of the facts so as to align them with their moral convictions–establishing what Liu and Ditto call a “moral coherence” between their ethical and factual views.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Absolutely they do. They conservatives protesting outside the US embassy in Pakistan and elsewhere in the world want liberals like us DEAD.

Also, reported call-out thread.
Well said, Its just sad the OP cant realize this
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
I'd be interested to see the following: I wish someone could take (waste) the time necessary to evaluate this board and establish which posters of which political orientation tend to less respectful, more vitriolic, and generally more verbally abusive.

I wonder if there's even a way to do that scientifically. Political orientation is like porn. It's hard to quantify, but you know it when you see it.
 
Feb 6, 2007
16,439
1
81
I wish everyone who uses the terms "liberal" or "conservative" as an attack would die. Get over the ridiculous partisanship people.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
Conservatives are the party of violent sociopaths? Right, because liberals are fucking angels...
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/08/27/wash-every-pro-life-sob-in-the-ocean-actress-slams-gop-on-twitter/

I wish anyone who's not willing to admit that they might be wrong would cease to breed. This goes for liberals and conservatives who are as zealous in their beliefs as a suicide bomber. Many of said inhabit and regularly post on this very forum.

At the end of the day our emotions, identities, opinions, etc in and of themselves are irrelevant outside of our skulls. They only matter indirectly in terms of how they influence us to take action.

What matters above all is the reality of the situation. Specifically what it is, not what we think it should be or would like it to be. Given that we are all human and the best of us have an extremely limited perspective, it is impossible for any one person to see things as they truly exist in all contexts. Therefore, to get a more accurate perception of reality one must first admit the possibility that their current views might be wrong. I've found VERY few who actually do this.

And for the record, I practice what I preach on this issue. On this very forum I've withdrawn more than one statement because I was presented with evidence to the contrary. I think I've seen 2 others do the same. Even a few banned members used to do it. Everyone else here just circle-jerks to infinity. The OP included.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
23,003
770
126
A ton of hypocrisy by the right in this thread, especially compared to the thread Matt started. Remember: Conservatives have actually KILLED liberals and liberal causes. I haven't even LISTED all the abortion doctors you have killed/bombed.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
A ton of hypocrisy by the right in this thread, especially compared to the thread Matt started. Remember: Conservatives have actually KILLED liberals and liberal causes. I haven't even LISTED all the abortion doctors you have killed/bombed.
Liberal causes? you mean like the Great Leap Forward?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,739
3,563
126
Concluding remark from your link...bolding is mine.
That was not the concluding remark from the link. This is what followed your quote:

However, not everyone was equally susceptible to this behavior. Rather, the researchers found three risk factors, so to speak, that seem to worsen the standard human penchant for contorting the facts to one’s moral views. Two those were pretty unsurprising: Having a strong moral view about a topic makes one’s inclination towards “moral coherence” worse, as does knowing a lot about the subject (across studies, knowledge simply seems to make us better at maintaining and defending what we already believe). But the third risk factor is likely to prove quite controversial: political conservatism.

Note, however, that it isn't controversial scientifically, but with those to whom it applies, those who turn science into shit.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
That was not the concluding remark from the link. This is what followed your quote:

However, not everyone was equally susceptible to this behavior. Rather, the researchers found three risk factors, so to speak, that seem to worsen the standard human penchant for contorting the facts to one’s moral views. Two those were pretty unsurprising: Having a strong moral view about a topic makes one’s inclination towards “moral coherence” worse, as does knowing a lot about the subject (across studies, knowledge simply seems to make us better at maintaining and defending what we already believe). But the third risk factor is likely to prove quite controversial: political conservatism.

Note, however, that it isn't controversial scientifically, but with those to whom it applies, those who turn science into shit.
Alright, so now define conservative.

I wonder if these studies and those who follow them without question or insight take into account that ~80% of the nation does not solidly fit the current partisan definitions of either "liberal" or "conservative". However, many people will still say they are "liberal" or "conservative", either ignorantly or applying their own personal definitions.

The bottom line is that these studies currently have little practical meaning; many even admit that as part of the study. Yet the lefty posters here and elsewhere seem determined to say that they do.

Which, ironically, goes along with your link perfectly.
In other words, liberals and conservatives alike shaded their assessment of the facts so as to align them with their moral convictions–establishing what Liu and Ditto call a “moral coherence” between their ethical and factual views. Neither side was innocent when it came toconfusing “is” and “ought” (as moral philosophers might put it).

However, not everyone was equally susceptible to this behavior. Rather, the researchers found three risk factors, so to speak, that seem to worsen the standard human penchant for contorting the facts to one’s moral views. Two those were pretty unsurprising: Having a strong moral view about a topic makes one’s inclination towards “moral coherence” worse, as does knowing a lot about the subject (across studies, knowledge simply seems to make us better at maintaining and defending what we already believe). But the third risk factor is likely to prove quite controversial: political conservatism.
If you actually comprehend that, it says conservatives are "more susceptible to confusing "is" and "ought"". It openly states that liberals do it to, and not with less severity, just with less apparent frequency.

Which can be analogized as saying "this serial killer shot 5 people, and this serial killer shot 4 people." If it places liberals above conservatives in any way, it does so by the slightest possible margin. But here and elsewhere, the loony left is eagerly chanting: "Look! Conservatives warp the facts! Science says so!" Once again proving that critical component of the study right: they do it to.
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,739
3,563
126
Conservatives are the party of violent sociopaths? Right, because liberals are fucking angels...
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/08/27/wash-every-pro-life-sob-in-the-ocean-actress-slams-gop-on-twitter/

I wish anyone who's not willing to admit that they might be wrong would cease to breed. This goes for liberals and conservatives who are as zealous in their beliefs as a suicide bomber. Many of said inhabit and regularly post on this very forum.

At the end of the day our emotions, identities, opinions, etc in and of themselves are irrelevant outside of our skulls. They only matter indirectly in terms of how they influence us to take action.

What matters above all is the reality of the situation. Specifically what it is, not what we think it should be or would like it to be. Given that we are all human and the best of us have an extremely limited perspective, it is impossible for any one person to see things as they truly exist in all contexts. Therefore, to get a more accurate perception of reality one must first admit the possibility that their current views might be wrong. I've found VERY few who actually do this.

And for the record, I practice what I preach on this issue. On this very forum I've withdrawn more than one statement because I was presented with evidence to the contrary. I think I've seen 2 others do the same. Even a few banned members used to do it. Everyone else here just circle-jerks to infinity. The OP included.
This is nice but doesn't it depend on what is, IS?

To me IS is best answered by scientific consensus and the scientific consensus today among modern scientists is that there are physically visible differences in conservative and liberal brains that predict and show that conservatives and not liberals are more likely to live in an altered reality and be completely resistant to the thought they can be wrong. This introduces a problem into society, considering the fact that they vote, that their irrational and delusional reality will be voted in as official. Global warming, evolution, gay rights, women's rights, voting rights, to name but a few, will be legislated by the insane. It would be just wonderful if we could all lay back and say that opinions are like assholes. The problem with assholes, however, because we vote, is that some assholes put their asshole right in the face of reason. So I have no sympathy whatsoever for your seemingly egalitarian fence sitting. If something isn't done about the fucktard disease of modern conservatism, they are going to send us over a cliff and it's really just tough shit that I am right and you are wrong. But I promise you this. When the science says something different, I'll change my mind again as I had to when I started studying the scientific facts about the altered reality modern conservatives have created and how dangerous that is.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
That was not the concluding remark from the link. This is what followed your quote:

However, not everyone was equally susceptible to this behavior. Rather, the researchers found three risk factors, so to speak, that seem to worsen the standard human penchant for contorting the facts to one’s moral views. Two those were pretty unsurprising: Having a strong moral view about a topic makes one’s inclination towards “moral coherence” worse, as does knowing a lot about the subject (across studies, knowledge simply seems to make us better at maintaining and defending what we already believe). But the third risk factor is likely to prove quite controversial: political conservatism.

Note, however, that it isn't controversial scientifically, but with those to whom it applies, those who turn science into shit.
My bad....didn't realize there was a 2nd page to the article. This part was interesting....again, bolding is mine.

In documenting an apparent left-right difference in emotional reasoning about what is factually true, the new paper wades into a growing debate over what the Yale researcher Dan Kahan has labeled “ ideological asymmetry .” This is the idea that one side of the political spectrum, more than the other, shows a form of biased or motivated assessment of facts–a view that Kahan rejects. Indeed, he recently ran a different study and found that liberals and conservatives were more symmetrical in their biases, albeit not on a live political issue.

The question of why some researchers find results seeming to support the left-right asymmetry hypothesis, even as others do not, remains unresolved. But the new paper by Liu and Ditto will surely sharpen it. Indeed, Kahan has already weighed in on the paper, acknowledging that it provides evidence in support of asymmetry, but observing that in his view, the evidence against asymmetry from other research remains more weighty.
I totally agree with you Moonie...it really is too bad personal opinion and scientific fact can be so different. Case in point. ;)
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,570
2
0
This is nice but doesn't it depend on what is, IS?

To me IS is best answered by scientific consensus and the scientific consensus today among modern scientists is that there are physically visible differences in conservative and liberal brains that predict and show that conservatives and not liberals are more likely to live in an altered reality and be completely resistant to the thought they can be wrong. This introduces a problem into society, considering the fact that they vote, that their irrational and delusional reality will be voted in as official. Global warming, evolution, gay rights, women's rights, voting rights, to name but a few, will be legislated by the insane. It would be just wonderful if we could all lay back and say that opinions are like assholes. The problem with assholes, however, because we vote, is that some assholes put their asshole right in the face of reason. So I have no sympathy whatsoever for your seemingly egalitarian fence sitting. If something isn't done about the fucktard disease of modern conservatism, they are going to send us over a cliff and it's really just tough shit that I am right and you are wrong. But I promise you this. When the science says something different, I'll change my mind again as I had to when I started studying the scientific facts about the altered reality modern conservatives have created and how dangerous that is.
Read my last post about the bolded. And your sky-is-falling rhetoric is as old and beaten as the wheel on a thousand year old donkey cart. Conservatives and Liberals have been around since the dawn of time in various forms, if you want to narrow the scope the modern American "conservative" movement has been around for over a century, and liberals for just as long. Oddly enough, we're still here. No cliffs have been fallen off of despite both sides' predictions. Welcome to history.
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
This is nice but doesn't it depend on what is, IS?

To me IS is best answered by scientific consensus and the scientific consensus today among modern scientists is that there are physically visible differences in conservative and liberal brains that predict and show that conservatives and not liberals are more likely to live in an altered reality and be completely resistant to the thought they can be wrong.
Explain this to me. What about people who switch parties? If one political side has a brain defect, what if they switch parties? It happens all the time. Are they taking that defect with them, because the brain cannot re-generate cells to replace any defective areas.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY