Serious question about the fans of Hannity, Rush etc.

[Armstead]

Due to circumstances beyond my control, I've listened to several hours of Hannity in the car over the past week or so. I also watched a bit of the O'Reilly book-signing session on CSpan.

Listening and watching the poeple who are dedicated fans of these schlubs (and other Right Wing Media Blowhards) prompts me to wonder something very basic.

A lot of these people look and sound like average, good hearted and reasonably intelligent people. They're your friends and neighbors, they're often pleasant and likable. We probably run across them in daily life all the time, and nothing seperates them from us, unless the conversation happened to steer into political matters...And the fact that they bother to listyen or watch political shows indicates that they do care about what's going on in the world.

Yes, some fall into the stereotype we have of freepers. But I'm not talking about them. (They're baffling in a different way.) I'm talking about the folks who seem like they could just as easily be Democratic liberals or moderates.

My basic question is this -- What the hell are they thinking?!?

How can they continue to swallow this Kool Aid of ultraconservative nonesense? Even if they have basically conservative values, how can they not realize how they are being spun and misled and suffering from the incompetance of the politicians and failed ideology they so blindly support? How can they contiunue to overlook the obvious evidence that they have been played for suckers by the likes of Delay, Abrahmoff, Rove, etc. etc. etc.

This is a serious question. I'm not looking for easy bashing answers. I'm not talking about the Freepers, Blindly Hard-Core Fundamentalists, etc.

I'm talking about the average folks who ought to at least have enough common sense to realize that they have been led down the wrong path. I'm really wondering how they can live on the same planet as us -- and not be so different than us -- and yet have such a totally different sense of reality?

Any thoughts or theories?

[keta11]

1. They dont realize O'Lielly, Hannity,

Coulter, Ingraham, Savage amd the other RW clowns are just using them to build upper-middle class to rich lifestyles for themselves off of them through hate and propaganda!!

[SheilaT]

2. There are probably

almost as many reasons are there are people who believe in those guys. One important thing, I think, would be that they have blinders on. Of course we all do in certain ways, but their blinders are bigger and cover more.

Plus, we must never underestimate the importance of the belief that Democrats simply are amoral existentialists. Pro-abortion atheists. Who want to raise their taxes, allow gay teachers to recruit students, and who would rather coddle terrorists than bring them to justice.

A lot of otherwise good people sincerely believe some or all of those things I've outlined above. And because they don't think very hard about what really goes on around them, they miss what we see as the truth.

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that the vast majority of people don't really want to think for themselves, but want their thinking done for them. We here are also sometimes guilty of the same thing. It's why we see posts asking for help debunking something or another, or the carefree spreading of rumors.

And in the end, even if they're worried that abortion still is legal, that there still are public schools, that all homosexuals haven't been forced back into the closet, they really believe that if they continue to vote for "their" guys, those things will eventually come about.

Read, or perhaps reread "What's the Matter With Kansas" because it talks about exactly those kinds of things.

[Armstead]

21. It seems to be beyond the What's the Matter with Kansas now

Yes I agree with much of what you say. And I realize how the Kansas factor applies. For a long time, the right-wing GOP has been able to win people over by presenting half-truths while covering over the other half of those truths.

I actually have a fairly high tolerance for political differences. I can understand how reasonable people can disagree on many issues, without being totally wrong or right.

And I am excluding those who are so extreme that they believe things like public school is inherently evil. I understand how people who are that rigid and puritan are totally locked into their views.


But what baffles me now is that things have gone so wrong, and yet so many "normal" peopel still believe that nonsense.

I mean, despite what someone might believe about abortion, how does that justify supporting a political party that lied them into a war that kills hundreds of adults every week? It's not even a matter of the morality of war in this case because Iraq has proven to be a war with no justification whatsoever.

[calimary]

27. Blinders indeed.

And they do it for God, too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2888413&mesg_id=2888413

[lectrobyte]

3. From talking to my coworkers/neighbors who are somewhat RWers -- i.e. Bush

signs in the yard for the '04 elections, etc. -- the main thing they seem to think is that everything would be fine if 1) government quit taxing them and 2) all the regulations were removed. These are the same people who are now complaining about gov't not protecting them from the chemical company whose plant exploded (Apex NC), and wanting to know how it got approval in that area in the first place. In short, it seems to be a very selfish and hypocritical stance from what I can see.

[Armstead]

28. Reasonable complaints taken to unreasonable extremes

The thing about this is that what you are referring to is human nature. Nobody like to have money taken out of their pocket or be excessively restrained by laws and regulations.....Many liberals feel the same way, on a gut level.

The hypocracy is also not necessarily ideological either. It's normal to be resentful if a person wants to build a sundeck on their house, but are prevented from doing it by building codes or other regulations....But then they will be at a planning board meeting yelling if someone else wants to build a house in a nearby vacant lot.

Basic liberalism is based on the idea that we have to restrain those instincts to an extent, and try to kep the bigger picture in mind, regarding the purtpose for those regulations -- such as preventing giant chemical explosions.

But going back to my original point, even if someone feels those resentments and dislike of oppressive bureaucracies -- Why don't they realize that instead of "freedom" they are merely supporting Right Wing Oppression?

How can someone in the same breath complain that they have to pay taxes, while at the same time supporting a war that is like a siphon from their pockets into the coffers of Halliburton?

Even given the double standards inherent in human nature, it would seem that these people should have come to the realization that they are supporting what they object to when they buy into the right wing Koolaid.

[BlueEyedSon]

32. Me vs We, but too un-self-aware to realize the conflict

[calimary]

83. WOW! Brilliant assessment!

I'm putting this in my journal so I can always find it - 10/17/06 - by BlueEyedSon: perhaps THE BEST explanation of why some people condemn liberals, mainly because they're only in it for themselves (ie: no taxes, no regulations, do whatever they want, until somebody else somehow violates their space and then they're screaming that "there oughta be a law!!!!")

"Me vs We, but too un-self-aware to realize the conflict."

That really sums it up. Simply gorgeous. Perfection! Bravo!!! And spot-on as can be.

[BlueEyedSon]

91. I read the following right here on DU a while back:

Republicans are the party of "me"
Democrats are the party of "we"

So I can't take all the credit!

It brings to mind some related ideas, like democrats are socialist (and in some good ways we are)

And how infants go from total selfishness and not understanding the concept of "other people out there" to adults who do get that they are not the only ones..... well you can figure which party is infantile.

[lectrobyte]

61. You make a lot of good points. I know that I hear the phrase

"tax and spend Democrats" a lot from these folks, so I can only assume the media is hammering that in at every opportunity. I always try to bring up the deficits and remind them that someone will have to pay for all that spending.

[4bucksagallon]

4. Answer is Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, sheep.

No other explaination. You must have heard Al Franken when he brings on his friend who is a Dittohead, Mark I think his name is, try to explain that and you will have your answer.

I also think it is the same reason people stay in the military, they don't want to think for themselves and just like the structure of being told what to do and when to do it. No thought process involved.

[BOSSHOG]

11. May I respectfully take exception

I was in the Navy for 24 years. There are young men controlling nuclear powered submarines as we speak. Such actions require "thought processes." I spent a lot of my time arguing with my contemporaries about political issues; and I had lots of allies in those discussions. I am as liberal as one might get because I've spent my life thinking; a huge hunk of that life spent in uniform. A minimum of associate degrees is now required for mid to upper level enlisted personnel (at least in the Navy.) The military is not and can not be a democracy so one is expected to do what one is told, otherwise many might get killed.

And DU is allowed to be operational and filled with a divergence of opinion because of the daily work done by our men and women in uniform. So I think I'll continue to honest to god really "support our troops."

[Bucky]

40. Well done.

A little bit of snarky elitist bullshit goes a long way in validating the crap the O'Reillys of the world say about us. One thing O'Reilly does is smart: he always talks with his audience in mind. I think what he says is crap, but he obviously says it well.

[Zodiak]

57. Interesting that you bring it up

I have a good friend (35 yrs old) who is an officer on a nuclear sub. He is anti-Bush.

Might as well state my opinion here. Let me begin by saying that I was raised in Freeperville by apatheitic Democrats. A bad pedigree, I know, but I grew out of it.

Here are the reasons why "good" people become neo-cons.

1. Imagery - We, as Americans, have all been raised on how great this country is. We have been to many 4th of July events. While in school, we learned what it was all about. I think that some listen tothe principles of America and adhere to them; others see the symbols and give them their loyalty. Both are patriotic, but one has far more potential to be manipulated. Neo-cons love waving the flags to get people to come running.

2. Religion - Most of America is raised under Christianity. Christianity has the same dual message of principles and imagery. One thing is agreed upon, though, that Christianity is "good", therefore those that follow it are "good". Those that follow the principles and adhere less to images are less likely to be manipulated. But both types of people are still trying to be "good".

3. Liberal-bashing - For two entire generations, Americans have heard over and over that liberals are undesirble without any appreciable counter-argument. Both the Republicans AND the Democrats have run as far from Liberals as possible to the point where the term has completely lost its meaning other than as a pejorative. As a result, politics in this country has radiaclly changed because a signifianct portion of it has simply not been allowed to come to the table. Liberals are still associated with the Democratic party, therefore any American who wants to be a "good American" MUST go for the Republicans because at least they do not have any dirty liberals.

4. Fear - This is not a new concept (been used to sell you everything since advertising was invented), but now the fear has risen to the level where ANYONE who wants to get tough on our perceived enemies and offer us security will be voted for without question and forgiven unbelievable tresspasses upon American principles. This works well across the board, but people who respond to images rather than principles (and there are a lot of them..not their fault) tend to adhere to the sellers of fear longer than most.

This is what I think has created this phenomenon of Hannity-listers who would otherwise be good people. It is a clever marketing strategy that takes advantage of the way a portion of any human population thinks. It is only successful because it is the only game in town.

[BBG]

81. I simply take exception

> And DU is allowed to be operational and filled with a divergence of opinion because of the daily work done by our men and women in uniform. So I think I'll continue to honest to god really "support our troops." <

I tire easily of these nonsensical claims of freedom and liberty drawn from military support and might. We are not free due to the actions of our military. We are free despite the actions of our military.

[BOSSHOG]

87. Okay

Let us mothball the fleets, shut down the Army and not have any armed forces to defend our country at all. I believe you will tire alot easier then.

[Supersedeas]

97. your exception doesn't really address the point of his analogy

you even concede that the military has no room for democracy--and his point is that a basis for Ditto heads accepting what is fed to them is the need for structure rather than free thought.

I don't see that his point disparages any support for the troops--as former submariner myself--I took no offense and can see the theoretical point he's attempting to make.

[Double T]

5. 'Their' listening, being brainwashed, BUT are not thinking........

Most just accept the propaganda as fact and never look beyond IT. With the rethugs in charge of the airwaves (ie. Clear Channel radio) there is so much repeated hammering away by the rethug pundits, no other messages are EVER HEARD.

[maseman]

6. Good analysis and question

One thing to keep in mind...

The perception is that Rush and Hannity have huge audiences and that they have tremendous power and influence. In comparison to other national talk shows they do have huge audiences. But if you look at the overall market and the ratings, they are fairly insignificant.

Without going into too much proprtietary Arbitron ratings deatail, Rush's NYC radio show performs well in the ratings. But nearly 97% of the total NYC population never tune him in. The people who do tune in are very loyal listeners. Because of that they are great advertising targets and businesses will pay good money to reach these people.hsu the succes of their show.

We have sort of made Rush and Hannity much bigger then they really are. Hannity talks about his show being on 500 radio stations. That's true. But in many of those markets his ratings are very low. So does the volume of how many stations carry your program trump overall market performance? No way.

Howard Stern had the reverse business model. His goal was not to be on tons of radio stations but to dominate in the markets his show aired. When he opened a new market it was a week or more event. And he would win ini nearly every market he was in.

Why do some people listen to the Rush/Hannity spew? Who knows. There is an audience for pretty much anything.

[Armstead]

29. Good point -- Fox viewership is the equivalent of....

one small American city in the larger scheme of things. More people are watching Squarepants Bob than Fancypants Bill O'Reilly.

But they are still more influential than they ought to be. O'reilly should have the equivalent political clout as that loudmouth who spends his time bloviating in the corner bar.

[BOSSHOG]

7. Intellectually lazy and being told what they want to hear

The right wing radio machine gives the siren song to "pariotic" "god fearing" Americans. The fact that it is tainted with lies and disinformation is totally irrelevant since those listening will make no effort to do any independent research.

You make an excellent point that most of the audience is composed of good, hard working Americans. Unfortunately they choose to listen to those who could not make a living any other way and contribute nothing but lies and divisiveness to the national conversation.

I choose not to let the listeners off the hook. I got roughed up pretty good verbally prior to the Iraqi War. My patriotism questioned etc because I thought going to Iraq was a bad idea. My patriotic credentials are unimpeachable. Those who are too lazy to discover the truth won't get my hand of friendship. They have changed the tone in America indeed.

[CrispyQ]

8. I know exactly the type you are talking about &

I'm as perplexed as you, but here is my very over-simplified theory.

They are in denial. They do not want to see that America, the greatest nation on the planet, no longer is. They don't want to admit that our government's actions & policy around the globe have contributed to immense anti-American sentiment. They not only don't know what our government has done in our name, with our tax dollars, they don't want to know. They don't want to know because the government has only been providing them with what they want -- cheap energy & goods.

Until they are ready to face reality & the hard work that changing that reality will take, they will continue to vote against their best interests.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

15. Yes it's like the wife whose husband is cheating, who ignores all the

obvious signs, the lipstick on the collar, the perfume on the shirt, the mysterious phone numbers on slips of paper found in the jacket.

She KNOWS what it means, inside.

But there are none so blind as those who will not see.

It's more "comfortable" just to pretend you didn't see it.

Around half of America, maybe a little less, is like this right now.

The reality becomes undeniable when things happen like you go bankrupt or are homeless. Short of that, keep watching American Idol or Dancing with the Stars and Monday Night Football and it's all good.

[havocmom]

9. My pet theory: Many are so starved for affection from authority figure

they get totally lost. Somewhere, early on, they did not get the love and acceptance from parental figures and they have a devouring hunger the rest of their lives.

Like you said, many are seemingly normal, even nice people. I have thought long and hard on the ones I know. They all have one common theme: Bad parenting. They didn't get something basic when little and they spend the rest of their lives trying to please what they consider to be the authority figures.

Best way to turn them? Stop bashing red states and people who tend to be herd like. Instead, find some sort of common ground and show them some genuine concern. Work toward genuine acceptance and affection. Be the 'cool kids' who let them into your clique! Show them there are other people who can appreciate them more than the pretenders of the RW!

They are not unlike the fundies who got to the prom with GOP candidates because they are deluded into thinking they are among kindred spirits, only to find out they are raped in the parking lot instead of getting inside the big dance.

Show them understanding. Try to find things to really appreciate about them. Let them know we DO understand their concerns and we DO offer solutions to problems.

Give them some of what they crave and prove the RW pundits are DEAD WRONG about liberals being elitists. Welcome them. Be positive. Show them there are other routes and political methods which are win/win for Americans instead of winners/losers. They are SO tired of being losers they will hitch onto any authority figures who give them the illusion of being winners.

Make real winners out of them. Show them acceptance and then show them new political realities which help feed their human needs.

And don't think you can turn them all. There is gonna be 30% that is just willfully ignorant and they WON'T give you a fair hearing. Don't fret over them.

Work on the ones the OP described. Be a human being first and a political creature second. It works with a lot of people. Let them come to change, don't beat them over the heads. Offer a change and make them welcome.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. Excellent post

Yes, I think that liberals and progressives could take two steps toward neutralizing hate radio. (Of course, some people are so consumed by hatred that they're unreachable, but many are just part-time listeners and herd followers.)

1) Stop dissing "rednecks" and "yokels." Working class people and farmers SHOULD be major allies of liberals and progressives, and indeed, at one time they were. But there are far so many disdainful remarks about about working class people's tastes in food, music, clothing, and other aspects of their daily lives, both on the Internet and in real life, that it's no wonder that the Republicanites have been able to make the "liberal elite" label stick.

2) Democratic groups should participate visibly in their communities as good citizens. (This is TygrBright's idea, and a damned good one, too). The county Democratic group should adopt highways, visibly make donations to the fund for the kid who needs chemotherapy (with a plug for single-payer health care), have a booth at Crazy Days, send out sandbagging crews when the river rises, and in other ways prove that they are not some remote elites but vital parts of the community.

[The Magistrate]

30. Excellent Suggestions, Ma'am

They are well worth heeding. If these practical, simple things were done widely and consistently by persons and organizations on the left, the effect would be most beneficial.

[havocmom]

35. That is a beat we could all dance to!

And we should. I try and show my GOP neighbors, every day of my life, what a DEM really is: A decent person who cares about ALL Americans and works to make our local community a better place, someone they can count on when the chips are down and someone who is more like them than unlike them.

Consider yourself to be a liberal ambassador to the people behind the RW build Iron Curtain of mis-information. Show them what Liberal REALLY MEANS and give them reason to question what the pundits have been telling them.

It works.

[omega minimo]

36. Yup

It's silly to point the finger at them, when we could point it on DU too. The range of awareness and Walkin' the Talk is pretty wide here too. Some folks righteously defend their rights to vehicles, ingestibles and mindless entertainments of their choosing. Some with their heads in the sand on one thing or another accuse others of wearing the :tinfoilhat:

If more of US weren't blind followers, all of us wouldn't be in this damn mess.


And yes, let's quit alienating the salt o' the earth.




:hi: LL

[glitch]

52. I should have read your post before posting mine. Agree, except I think

their true base is closer to 20%. That additional 10% is the trusting harried, who don't have the time to do their own research and so blindly trust. I think if they did have the time, or for some reason lose their trust, they can be turned.
But the 20%, they truly need to believe and follow a totalitarian authority figure.

edit: I think the trusting harried would blindly support anyone the media promotes. If the media had promoted Clinton they would have adored him. I think the base 20% really want a totalitarian figure, and even if the media had promoted Clinton they still would've hated him.

[VOX]

54. Wow. What a great post! Worthy of its own thread. n/t

[rodeodance]

10. i do not know---it babbles me--and makes me angry at the same time.

[Andrea]

12. This is a very serious and important question

I've been trying to understand this for years. It's very disturbing. How can they support these Republicans when they are so immoral? (And I'm talking about long before Foley - I mean immoral in the sense of killing innocent people in a pointless war, denying health care and education to the poor, just plain lying all the time and so on.) How can the fundies not see that the Republicans have been using them for all these years? (With Kuo's book, I hope they wake up, but, really, it's been obvious to us for six years at least.)

It seems that there is something fundamentally wrong with their perception of people, or their reasoning ability or something. Even though everything is coming back to bite the repigs in the butt now, and I believe we will get out of this mess starting with these midterms, we need to solve this problem so that we don't end up back here again some time in the future.

I have learned some good points about this issue from "What's the Matter with Kansas?" and John Dean's new book, "Conservatives Without Conscience" which I am still reading. It seems that a lot of people are followers (authoritarians) which makes them vulnerable to people who want to manipulate them. They also fall for being made to feel they are victims (on issues like abortion and gay marriage)and that the Republicans will try to help them (when they in fact do nothing on these issues because they want to keep them in the victim mode and therefore voting for Rs). They respond emotionally, rather than rationally, and that makes them very vulnerable to manipulation. Dems typically present rational arguments and demonstrate logical thinking, which does not connect with these people at all. I know Lakoff addresses how to approach these people when he talks about framing (a concept that Howard Dean is very strong on), but I wish we could find a way to make these people less authoritarian, and more rational, so that they would not be so vulnerable to manipulation. Maybe the answer to that lies in education?

I guess in the past, at least at times, we have had more honorable Republican leaders - maybe Everett Dirksen, Eisenhower, Rockefeller - who have not taken advantage of the fact they could twist their followers to do anything. But, now that the Repig leaders are completely amoral, they are using those people for all they are worth.

I'm really glad you make this posting and I hope others will check in on it. R & R.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

26. You're right about that

I have two siblings. One is a moderate Democrat, but the other is a perfect example of the type of talk radio listener that Armstead describes. When he got into trouble as a child and teenager, it was always because of following some other kid's dumb suggestion. Several times I heard my mother say, shaking her head, "He's a follower."

[Zavulon]

13. I asked a few fans this same question a while back.

I'm only reporting here, so if you flame don't direct the heat at me.

Every single one seems to think Democrats are all rabid socialists who believe that middle class tax rates should be 70% federal, 25% state and 4% local. When I tried to explain that Kerry only wanted to raise taxes on people making more than $200K, the answer I usually got was something along the lines of what I got from my downstairs neighbor (if this isn't verbatim, it's awfully close to it): "That's the same shit we got from Clinton in 1992, and he raised taxes on me when I was an E-5 making less than a quarter of that. Don't give me this $200K shit, it's been done to death, it was bullshit then and it's bullshit now. You'd have to be a complete fucking brain-dead asshole to think Kerry would have stopped at $200K."

Nothing else matters to these people I asked except for taxes (with one exception who said he votes straight-ticket Republican without exception because of the gun issue).

Torture?

"I don't give a shit, just keep your hand out of my wallet. Besides, panties on the head isn't torture, being beheaded is."

Quagmire?

"Clinton should have had the balls to do this in 1998, then we'd be done now. Instead he flattened five tents and killed a dozen camels hoping we wouldn't notice his girlfriend testifying."

You can't make this shit up, folks.

To be honest, I don't think Kerry would have stopped at $200K either, but how this can be the hotbutton issue for so many is completely beyond me. The answer to your question, though, is taxes.

[Armstead]

38. You're right -- but the answerto that should be simple...

No flames because you are absolutely correct about that.

But they seem to be missing the point that it boils down to the matter of WHO pays, and for what.

Maybe it's up to the Democrats to make this clearer, but it all boils down to a simple couple of questions.

"Do you want to have to make up for the taxes that the wealthy and Big Business don't pay? Do you mind paying for the soldiers you claim to support?"

The army they supposedly support costs money. And all of Bush's junkets to make politicval speeches in Iowa are being paid for by the same bozos who complain about having to pay taxes to keep their own roads and bridges in operation.

And those morons who complain about taxes in Clinton's era seem to forget that the economy was much stronger than it is today.

[Zavulon]

49. Therein lies the problem.

You write: ""Do you want to have to make up for the taxes that the wealthy and Big Business don't pay? Do you mind paying for the soldiers you claim to support?"

The answers you'll get from these people are as follows:

1.) "Corporations would just pass it on to us in the form of higher prices, like they do every time they lose a lawsuit." According to these people corporations pay no taxes whatsoever, so we may as well not charge them for anything at all.

2.) These people are willing to pay for anything the military does, regardless of how many homeless we have or regardless of how underfunded our schools are, unless it has to do with Iraqi infrastructure that we've destroyed (reasons usually along the lines of "fuck them, it's my goddamned money, I didn't give birth to these fuckers and I don't give a rat's ass if they have hospitals or schools or not"). But suggest cutting funding to the military in any way, and they'll scream bloody murder.

You have to have some compassion with the common sense - and the people I've asked have none. They're the sort of people who would rather hold on to every last dollar they have than save some kids' lives. They think the environment only has to last as long as they live, and let other people drive "those little Euroshitboxes" as long as they can cruise around in their Escalades (and then claim that taxes are their big problem). This is why their hotbutton issues center around themselves.

[Andrea]

56. At least some of them ARE selfish as you say

I remember meeting a man who seemed very nice, reasonable and intelligent. I talked to him on a variety of subjects with no serious disagreements. When the subject turned to politics, however, his true character came out. This was in 2004. While he acknowledged many of my reasons for voting for Kerry, he said he would still vote for Bush because he personally had done better financially under Republicans. I couldn't convince him that there was any reason to vote otherwise that would outweigh his own perceived best financial interests.

[CrispyQ]

58. There is definitely a sense of entitlement with many of them.

A sense of "I've got mine, now screw you."

They don't have any appreciation of community; no sense of the common good. To them, community is something that takes away from them personally (taxes). They never see the benefits they derive from community, things like streets, bridges, emergency services & on & on. It's all about them.

When they are cold & hungry they will change their tune. It will be all about community then.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

64. And that shows ignorance about how corporations are taxed

Most people probably think that corporations are taxed like individuals, i.e. higher taxes reduce their disposable income and may make them unable to afford the necessities.

Actually, no corporation could be killed by income taxes alone, since all the expenses they need to function as a business, including employee salaries and benefits, cost of goods sold, buildings, office equipment, and everything else they need to make money is subtracted to determine their taxable income. Only actual profits get taxed. Companies can reduce their taxes to zero in constructive ways, by hiring more people or investing in new equipment, for example, or in non-constructive ways, by setting up dummy corporations to fail.

The only effect that high taxes have on corporations is to reduce the payments to their shareholders.

I don't think most people know that. I think they think, "Oh, if we place higher taxes on General Electric, they'll have to shut down, and all those people who manufacture light bulbs will be out of work."

[Patiod]

42. and guns, as you say

Here in dark-blue urban Philadelphia, the people I know who vote Republican vote on 3 issues (there's not the urban vs. rural thing)

1. Taxes. They might be two-earner, atheist (in reality if not in practice), pro-choice people who hang out with gay friends, but it's 100% about who is going to take less of their high-six-figure incomes

2. Abortion and Gay Marriage - this applies mostly to elderly Catholics, but it hurts. I know former Union members who disagree with every Republican issue EXCEPT abortion and gay rights, and damned if they don't single-issue vote on these two things that their priests constantly harp about.

3. Guns - more an ex-urb thing, but I work with a couple of hunters, and they are absolutely convinced that Democrats exist solely to take away their guns.

Most of the Faux Sheep, however, fall into category #1 - the tax-obsessed. Good thing they don't live in Europe....

Can only report what I see from my own little corner of the country....

[Sweet Freedom]

14. My thoughts...

I know several people who fall into the kool-aid drinking category and of the people I know, they all have one thing in common: they all grew up in a household where someone was irrational and inconsistent in their expectations and punishments, so that the kid never knew what to expect. One day they would get in trouble and not know why and then the next day, they wouldn't get in trouble for the same infraction. Mom or dad (or both) would fly off the handle and the kid never knew why or what for. So as they got older, they never learned how to handle adversity. They can't properly identify it and don't know how to respond to it; therefore, as adults, it's easy for them to listen to these really angry commentators who are telling them exactly what to think and feel and exactly how to repond to others who think and feel differently.

Again, this is just my experience. I'd be interested to know if anyone else knows people who fall into this category (or not).

[riderinthestorm]

18. Yowza. That's my mom to a tee. Her mother (my grandmother)

was a really irrational Irish woman who used to just haul ass and throw things at the kids and who truthfully sounded just a bit crazy. I never met her, she died before I was born.

Her British father (my grandfather) was a steady eddy but he wasn't around a lot - working too much.

[Sweet Freedom]

53. I know several people raised that way.

I actually feel sorry for them. They seem very lost and very angry.

[riderinthestorm]

16. It's intellectual laziness and a desire to make the facts fit paradigms

I deal with my mother regularly who is one of these folks. From my experience with her, she wants to appear to be "on top of things" - Rush and Hannity and their ilk give people like her sound bites that appear to "work" superficially in a discussion.

She also has her paradigms that she is too lazy to dislodge: Dems are for big taxes, they are for wasteful government programs, they are historically weak on defense etc.

So she only hears "facts" that bolster her paradigms - and she hears them over and over. The repetition is actually a bit comforting for these people I believe.

So when she's confronted by Dems like me who truly want to work to dislodge her soundbites, she gets irritated. It's too much work to actually keep an open mind, and it would spotlight her intellectual laziness (which she's desperately trying to hide).

[CrispyQ]

60. Your mom could be my mom.

So when she's confronted by Dems like me who truly want to work to dislodge her soundbites, she gets irritated. It's too much work to actually keep an open mind, and it would spotlight her intellectual laziness (which she's desperately trying to hide).

I am so sick of sound bite answers every time my mother & I discuss politics.

Once she told me to "just get over it" when I brought up election fraud. I asked her exactly what it was that we were supposed to just get over. "That they stole the election! That's just ridiculous," she said. So I explained that while many people feel the election was stolen, the bigger issue is that with every election we see more & more irregularities & voter disenfranchisement. I asked her why we had to wait until there was irrefutable proof of election fraud before we addressed these issues. She stood there dumbfounded without a word to say. Got no sound bite for the facts, do ya Mom! :eyes:

[Armstead]

93. How do they choose that particular set of soundbytes though?

EWvery time I hear Ruish and Hannity et. al. my instinct is always to say "But what about the oher half of the picture you bozo?"

What is frustrating about these people's blind allegiance to the Corporatre Oligarchy is that any large bureaucratic institution is wasteful.

By giving their allegiance to the Corporate Oligarchy, these people are supporting institutions that are as big and bureaucratic and abusive as any government -- but without the public purporse and accountability of government.

My God, do they really think that private health insurance is less wasteful and bureaucratic and abusive than Medicare?

And where do they get the idea that Democrats are historically weak on defense. If anything, Democrats have perhaps been too hawkish historically.

[SammyWinstonJack]

17. Apparently they don't have "enough common sense".

:shrug: Either that or they just like being used, told what to think and generally, lied too. :shrug: I don't understand them and I don't really care too. I think anyone who can listen to those you have cited, without realizing the obvious, is beyond hope, beyond all reason.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

19. Judging from the Rushbots I've known

they're (mostly) guys who are disappointed in the way their lives have turned out. They can't blame their own bad decisions or the failings of the American economic system (because "America's the greatest country in the world") or their own lack of social and emotional skills, so they have to find external scapegoats for their misery: liberals, foreigners, and uppity women.

People can be very nice, even kind and considerate, under ordinary circumstances, until you press their buttons.

When I was in high school, I heard a talk by a woman who had been a medical missionary in a rural area of South Africa. She and her husband were warmly welcomed by the local Afrikaner farmers, who invited them to dinner at their tidy farmhouses and who continually dropped by asking if there was anything they needed or spontaneously dropping off produce from their gardens or other gifts. She found herself liking many of them, but when the subject was race, it was as if a demon had taken over their brains. They'd say things like, "I don't see how you can stand to touch those filthy savages" or "I wish you Americans knew how to keep your kaffirs in their place." (This was during the 1960s.) She'd try to remind these church-going folk that "all are one in Christ," but they believed that black people were the accursed descendants of Ham and destined forever to be the servants of white people.

So yes, people can be very nice, pleasant, even virtuous in many respects, and still have a portion of their brain that has been replaced by a pre-programmed tape of hatred.

[BoneDaddy]

25. They are not mostly guys

I think men make up more of a percentage, but it is not what you think. Plenty of women have enjoyed the status their religion and race have had in this country, and have been complicit in this republican domination.

[Marr]

20. There's no one answer, of course- but one common thread seems to be

they have a vague sense that they're being cheated and used by this system, and they're angry. Someone like Hannity steps in and offers the easy explanation that "liberals are responsible", and they buy it.

Ever notice how many conservatives are just assholes? I don't mean the celebrities or politicians- I mean the regular people in your neighborhood. I think they're very unhappy people. They're often angry and bitter- and rightly so. They ARE being cheated- but they're being cheated by their own corporatist politicians.

[Armstead]

74. It is anger -- It's also misdirected

Like some welfare mother has more impactv on their lives than the executive who is their boss making $20 mil while keeping down the wages of them.

Or some small business being killed by monopolistic competitors, who the blames the guvment for his problems.

[BoneDaddy]

22. True

Most of my friends are republican conservatives and they are intelligent, caring and often thoughtful.

They also suffer from cognitive dissonance, having a disconnect between what they believe and what they do.

Many of them do not look into alternative media and buy into mainstream tv and radio.

Many of them are loyal to a fault and stick with their republican party as if it was the Yankees in a bad year.

Many of them have made a great deal of cash with Bush in office.

Many of them are religious and have bought into the idea that the left is full of godless commies and they cannot see how they have been manipulated.

Many of them are simply unconscious and afraid and do not show the capacity for larger thought.

[Armstead]

75. They obviously don;t have the capacity for larger thought

It's puzzling how a person can be intelligenbt, caring and thoughtful on the personal level, but somehow incapable of translating those qualities onto the bigger picture.

[BoneDaddy]

89. It is tribal

How can Tony Soprano cry about his son's wayward ways, then go and kill someone else's son in a mob hit.

How can an otherwise loving German soldier who loves his family, oversee the genocide of a people.

Tribalism. It is ok to do unspeakable things to those people who are not of your tribe. Make them ungodly, a threat, alien and your could pretty much do anything to anyone.

[omega minimo]

84. That is not "cognitive dissonance" -- that's hypocrisy

"They also suffer from cognitive dissonance, having a disconnect between what they believe and what they do."

[BoneDaddy]

88. Your point?

It is both.

[omega minimo]

96. The point of the whole thread is if people aren't hypocrites

problem solved.





("Cognitive dissonance" lets them off the hook. "Cognitive dissonance" is something else-- not, as you wrote, a disconnect between belief and action.)




Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".


Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:

if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".
On cognitive dissonance and sour grapes

A more formal account

Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger and associates, arising out of a participant observation study of a cult which believed that the earth was going to be destroyed by a flood, and what happened to its members — particularly the really committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs to work for the cult — when the flood did not happen. While fringe members were more inclined to recognise that they had made fools of themselves and to "put it down to experience", committed members were more likely to re-interpret the evidence to show that they were right all along (the earth was not destroyed because of the faithfulness of the cult members).


Ordeal is therefore an effective — if spurious — way of conferring value on an educational (or any other) experience. "No pain, no gain", as they say.
the more difficult it is to get on a course, the more participants are likely to value it and view it favourably regardless of its real quality.
ditto, the more expensive it is.
the more obscure and convoluted the subject, the more profound it must be. This has of course been exploited for years to persuade us of the existence of the emperor's clothes, particularly by French "intellectuals" and "post-structuralists". (I recently came across the wonderful phrase "intellectual flatulence" which perfectly describes such rubbish.)
It is not, however, so much the qualities of the course which are significant, as the amount of effort which participants have to put in: so the same qualification may well be valued more by the student who had to struggle for it than the student who sailed through.

more............





To reference this page

copy and paste the text below:
(Note that if you are using Internet Explorer, and it is doing its "nanny" thing, the full reference will not display. There will be a bar across the top of the screen advising you of "blocked content". Click on it and select "Allow blocked content" and confirm in the pop-up box. I know it's a pain, but we're stuck with it.)

ATHERTON J S (2005) Learning and Teaching: Cognitive Dissonance and learning UK: Available: http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm Accessed: 18 October 2006





another source:

http://www.apa.org/books/4318830s.html

[BoneDaddy]

99. I am aware of the meaning

and I still think that this is what is going on. I was trying to water down the definition for the laity. It may have been simplistic but that was my point.

They cannot process the new information and assimilate it so there is a disconnect between what they think about the new information and how to assimilate or react to it.

[omega minimo]

100. I see. And that leads to behavior not consistent with beliefs

THAT is the hypocrisy strangling the nation.

"They also suffer from cognitive dissonance, having a disconnect between what they believe and what they do."

[BoneDaddy]

102. Yes

but running around calling people hypocrites rarely has them change their minds on issues, even if what you said is true.

[omega minimo]

103. we all have to look at ourselves

it's not easy


it is the solution



if we are looking for one




"Yes but running around calling people hypocrites rarely has them change their minds on issues, even if what you said is true."


I wouldn't recommend that.

[BoneDaddy]

104. True

:)

[omega minimo]

24. Authority Question

[leftofthedial]

31. stupid, lazy

and latently bigoted

[Armstead]

76. Naw that answer's too easy

Some do fit into that stereotype.

As I mentioned in my OP, I'm not wondering as much about the obvious morons and knuckledraggers and bigots. But the ones who seem no less thoughtful and caring than your average moderate or liberal are perplexing. .

[leftofthedial]

79. I don't know any like you describe

I find that 99%+ of the repuke voters I have an opportunity to discuss it with fit into one of three categories (in ascending order of their numbers:

1. the uber-wealthy, who are actually served by king george's policies--his "base"

2. the freeper moran--they'd hate their own mother if limpballs told them to--they are dangerously unhinged

3. the religiously insane, who believe the repukes are the moral party (although I've yet to meet one who had an example to back up that belief)

4. those who are too stupid, too lazy and too ignorant to have the slightest idea what is really happening, so they read a couple of headlines or hear a few minutes of FAUX while waiting at the dentist's office, or dial in limpballs on the biggest AM station in town

[izzybeans]

33. Most pleasant and likable people I know and love have to be snapped out

of the marketing trance they've been in since they were children.

They've been sucked in, largely because the places where these rightwingers have an audience stronghold provide no alternatives, and whenever they do they have been thoroughly discredited via a long term propaganda campaign. "Well that Bill O'Reilly, he's a wiley character. But he has my interests at heart cause he's just like me."

The O'Rielly's of the world garner interpersonal trust by exploiting marketing gimmicks that capitalize on the sentiments floating around the market place.

[quiet.american]

34. A very good theory on this that I'd once read

Early on in the Bush nightmare, an article was posted on Bushwatch.com that essentially put forth the theory that Bush and Bush minion supporters, no matter how pleasant, no matter how good, no matter how seemingly decent, are relieved to see their own insecurities, their own dark side reflected in the highest office in the land, and to see it reflected without apology. In other words, Bush and Bush minions make it okay to be a ne'er-do-well, to be bigoted, ignorant, downright stupid, mediocre, cruel, self-centered, hypocritical, etc. Whatever the quality is that perhaps the person was afraid to heretofore exhibit or confess to, because it was considered by and large shameful, that quality can openly be applauded and championed, because "the president's doing it."

[Lydia Leftcoast]

62. That's like Studs Terkel's explanation for Reagan's popularity

which I heard him expound in a live appearance about 12 years ago: "He made it okay to be stupid."

[omega minimo]

63. He made it "okay" to be selfish, greedy, mercenary and cutthroat

:evilfrown:

see #59

THAT is the "Reagan Legacy" -- that is the disease this nation must heal from.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

65. Yes, that too

:-(

I noted a distinct increase in publicly expressed selfishness, greed, meanness, and proud ignorance not long after he was elected.

In any organization or country, the people at the top set the tone.

[omega minimo]

66. 25+ years of that shit and people forget it was ever any other way

[Lydia Leftcoast]

67. As one who remembers when alleviating poverty and

giving all citizens equal rights were considered mainstream, centrist politics and when everyone's economic status seemed to improve year by year, I feel sorry for younger people who think that the Clinton era is as good as it gets.

[omega minimo]

69. esp. if they don't know it is a continuation of the corporatist agenda

"I feel sorry for younger people who think that the Clinton era is as good as it gets."

[Armstead]

77. Alas, that's true

I hope that's not just nostalgia, but I do think the US has lost a better sense of everyday values and standards over the last 30 years.

I remember when business could not have gotten away with the crap they pull these days without being run out of town on a rail.

Stuff that's everyday behavioir today would have been considered shockinglu immoral not very long ago.

[omega minimo]

85. nevermind

[Armstead]

92. You're so enigmaticly ornery sometimes

:)

[omega minimo]

95. I was gonna tell you you're ornerly enigmatic!

jinx!

[Gregorian]

37. It's not just one thing.

But if I could sum it up in one statement it would be- They don't think enough.

Not all conservatives are freepers. Not all listen to Rush. I know ranchers who own beautiful pieces of land and who are shredding them for all the money they're worth, and who think Bush is god. I know a conservative who was the leading engineer on the Lawrence Livermore fusion reactor project. So there are an array of these idiots. Some smart and some just stupid and greedy.

But here is what I come away with from my conversations and observations of "them". Quite simply, nothing is special to them. I mean, to me when I see an elk, I see beauty. My first thought is not to get my gun. Or my forests. They're things of beauty. I watch the sun setting on the tips of trees. I know that in a year whoever lives here won't be able to see that.

The world is special. And we are here to witness it and take care of it. I think the native Americans were good at that.

And that leads me to something very damning. We're all part of this sickness.

All I can say is think and care.

[Armstead]

78. If it doesn;t have a price tag, it's worthless they think

It's a damn shame that we've come to the point where if something doesn't make sense to an accountant, it has no inherent value.

[Bucky]

39. It's about game face. They don't take half the stuff said too seriously.

Think about all the people who call Bush a Nazi. 90% of them understand Bush isn't an actual Nazi. Dumbass couldn't operate a gas oven if his next war depended on it. People say all sorts of hokum they don't believe (e.g., a comment like "that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard in my life" is not a statement to be interpreted literally). Over hear we convince ourselves that "all" fundamentalists are callous, wicked, closet racists just the same way O'Reilly viewers believe all liberals are property-hating lunatic nanny-staters.

It's the price we pay for having too much TV time and not talking politics with our neighbors enough.

[NewJeffCT]

41. My 2 cents on this topic

These Republic talking heads liked Limbaugh, Hannity, etc make things easy for people.

It is a lot easier to blame "Muslim terrorists who hate us for our freedoms" than it is to really do an in-depth analysis of the root causes of terrorism and how to solve it for the long-term.

It's a lot easier to blame "affirmative action helping underqualifed blacks" than it is to work to actually overcome centuries of racism.

It's a lot easier to say "socialized medicine means rationing" than it is to discuss the huge amounts of benefits that come with having universal health care.

[immoderate]

43. I agree with many of the above points.

There are a few reasons I see.

Racism -- sometimes it's subtle. There can be those who have cordial interactions with people of a different group, then turn around and make sweeping generalizations about that group. I had a relative recently get into a welfare Cadillac diatribe. I asked if he knows for a fact that there were welfare recipients that he knew who had new Cadillacs. "I see them," he said. He really assumed that if you were driving a Caddy while black, you must be one of them. I tried running the numbers with him. "OK," I said, "let's say you walk into a Cadillac dealer to purchase a car, and you present your welfare check to get financing for the deal..." It was a total denial of the facts.

Plutocrats -- there are those who believe there is a ruling class and even if they are not part of it, they should be subject to their judgments. I guess this corresponds to John Dean's authoritarians. For them "greed is good."

Homophobes -- and other sexually repressed people. They are deathly afraid that someone, somewhere, is enjoying life more than they are. It is the Puritan strain in our culture. They just don't want people to enjoy sex, and are against birth control, abortion, music, and anything else that leads people to experiencing a sense of ecstasy. These are mostly fundies.

The Republicans have been good at playing off these people's perceived misfortunes, and directing the blame at "liberals." They continue even now, even though they may be at a point where that hand is overplayed, say, with the Foley scandal.

--IMM

[skygazer]

44. I think you've sort of answered your own question

They do have a different sense of reality because they tend to listen or watch that one point of view exclusively. My daughter is one of them and she doesn't believe we were lied to about Iraq, she doesn't believe that the administration is at all corrupt, she doesn't believe that the Middle East is a quagmire - and the reason she doesn't is because she's told that by Fox news and the right wing pundits.

Just as we don't believe a word that Fox airs, they don't believe anything from any other source - they're told it's all lies and spin and they accept that. Perhaps they can't face the idea that they may have been wrong but you have to admit that the right wing media has an incredible power. When a good number of people STILL believe that Iraq had WMD's, that Saddam was in league with al Quaeda, etc., it just reinforces the power of the repeated lie.

In addition, I think that a lot of those people are what I call incurious. They're not bad or unconcerned people but they don't dig for information and they're basically credulous. I personally think a lot of that is the result of a public school system that doesn't teach critical thinking at all. But a lot of it is just human nature. It IS easier to be told what to think and we are taught to believe what we're told by those in charge. I never did - probably most of us here didn't. But a lot of people do. It's kind of scary not to - to think that the people in charge are lying? That is scary.

It really is quite like 1984. ~sigh~

[nashville_brook]

45. angry white men shit where they eat

Angry White Men exist in a fast food world.

the subtext of every Angry White Man's anger is that they're being asked to pay for something they didn't order (irresponsible black women's babies). It's not a COMMUNITY that they live in -- it's a SHOPPING MALL.

everything the Angry White Man has, was earned on his own (no matter if Daddy gave it to him). abundance is THE SIGN of "goodness." ergo, the right and the good HAVE STUFF. the DEGENERATE (by definition) NEED assistance.

just try to point out the ways in which their "bootstraps" didn't spontaneously emerge from their Good Souls (your family had money... you went to great public schools in great neighborhoods...), and they shut down (That Does Not Compute). "But, you attended public schools. You use TVA power. You drive on public roads with your giant SUVs.

YOU ARE PART OF THE LARGER WORLD MOTHERFUCKER."

nada. they simply deny the fact that they are part of a culture... a community... (gasp!) a VILLAGE that is RESPONSIBLE for the commonwealth. they have no ENLIGHTENED SELF INTEREST. they shit where they eat.

it's fine if their cities are full uneducated children because the public schools are BROKE. they FAIL to see how this might impact their existence. it's fine if there's no SOCIAL SAFETY NET because THEY will never need one... again, they fail to see that they are part of a community that is going to suffer as a whole when the streets are filled with homeless, hospitals ERs are filled with the uninsured and the physical infrsastructure has crumbled.

THEY HAVE NO ENLIGHTENED SELF INTEREST. to them, you buy the Supersized Happy Meal... stuff it down your gullet while driving your SUV and talking on your phone and throw the trash out the window.

the world begins and ends at their nose.

and don't expect their FAITH to lift them out of their GLUTTONY... they are getting this message in their MEGACHURCHES, where the basic message of Fast Food Christianity is "if you are good, you are rewarded (and therefore TITHE generously)."

The Angry White Man has one metaphor for life... the cash exchange.

[YOY]

46. They make those who feel 'victimized' (ie white up-mid. suburbanites)

that they are 'justified and informed' in the lifestyle that they are accustomed to...the post Reagan lifestyle of 'I've got mine....screw you if you can't do what I've done...' They feed on that feeling of victimization

They spew bs about a 'liberal media' that does not exist pushing things moreso to the right than they ever should be. They pretend to be balanced on things using that very falacy.

Making them feel informed...that's the real 'no spin zone.'

[Jade Fox]

47. Read the book called....

"Confessions of a Former Dittohead". I forget the author's name.

I think a lot of the nicer of these people have no sense of how skewed the info is that they get from something like Fox News. They still believe that if it weren't true, it wouldn't be broadcast. And Fox has realized the effectiveness of keeping it simple. That is their true genius, IMO. Reality is complicated, and it's a relief to people to have issues (supposedly) boiled down to their essence.

I watched a few minutes of O'Reilly on CNN. What struck me was what a sourpuss he is. Here he is in the presence of his devoted fans, and the guy can't even crack a smile.

[omega minimo]

48. NO ONE LIKES TO ADMIT THEY'VE BEEN HAD

[omega minimo]

98. Cognitive Dissonance!

Cognitive Dissonance

Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".


Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:

if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".

".....TO DO SO WOULD BE TO ADMIT THAT ONE HAS BEEN 'HAD' OR 'CONNED.'"




http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm


another source:

http://www.apa.org/books/4318830s.html

[ecstatic]

50. I think its the entertainment that draws them in

Most people, when given the choice of listening to a mean/obnoxious conservative and a mild mannered/polite or boring liberal, will choose the conservative. Unfortunately, many of our own fall into the same trap and continue to watch FNC etc because it is entertaining. And then we get mad at some of our own, i.e., Rhandi Rhodes, who use similar tactics to the RW.

[glitch]

51. Why do smart people join cults? I think the answer may be quite similar.

And I think there is the same element of fear within their core personalities that these people are able to trigger and somehow ease. By easing the fears, even in ways we find irrational, they develop a bond with the fearful.

It's a complex world, a lot of people need to turn off their own analysis and "follow" authority figures to feel secure in it. I haven't read John Dean's latest yet, but it sounds like he goes into the authoritarian personality. M. Scott Peck dealt with it extensively.

[Rosemary2205]

55. Because MSM is not doing their job.

If day after day Hannity tells you we are "fighting them there" and the MSM doesn't bother to show how idiotic that is then eventually alot of people will believe it.

[Klukie]

59. The common denominator.....

among the R-wingers I know is an inability to empathize.

[Andrea]

73. You may have just put your finger on the root problem

Excellent point - cannot see any other points of view, cannot empathize with anyone different from themselves.

<edited to insert the word have in the subject line>

[ItNerd4life]

68. Simple, people only hear their 50% of the argument

People in Chicago have corrupt Democratic politicians, yet they continue to vote for them. Once associated with a party, you don't want to hear the bad things about your party. You only hear the stuff you want to hear and aren't willing to change.

It exists on both sides of the aisle, that is why I don't like calling Republicans names. You don't change people by insulting them or their party. You change them by asking questions and challenging their (and your) beliefs. But, that's the hard route to changing people. It's much easier just to insult the other side and walk away.

I like your question. Now ask yourself this. How many people have you converted from their side to our side? If you haven't then maybe you need to change as well.

I work with many die hard Republicans, some of them are now independant. Baby steps, logic, and time and you can convert them.

[Ksec]

70. Even nice people can be weak of mind.

And easily bamboozled.

[TrogL]

71. an utter inability and/or unwillingness to think

Republicans respond to emotional issues (eg. gay marriage, security) rather than any sort of logical thinking.

What little thinking they do is of the black-and-white sort (four legs good, two legs bad).

They've been taught (eg. by their religious leaders) that thinking is bad for you.

[Polemicist]

72. Experience is always the best teacher....

Many modern conservatives have developed a belief in "theories" of government derived from the Reaganites. Less government, lower taxes, stronger more activist military, and more recently the addition of conservative/Christian social values.

And all these things can be made to sound wonderful by the theorists and propagandists who rule our nation's airwaves. Daily subtle indoctrination by talk radio has muddled the minds of many. Pile on top of that conservative news and the evangelical message, with the exclamation mark of terrorism fears and you have the current conservative Republican stew.

It all sounds appealing in theory. But is impossible in fact and action. Conservatism can't govern. Those who hate government are not those who are best to control government. Their contempt for government leads them toward corruption and arrogance, and a hubris that will always end in failure.

Then experience takes over. After 12 years of conservative rule of Congress and 6 years of one party conservative rule in Washington, we now see the fruits of this rotten tree. And it's not pretty. The public now has first hand experience with which to balance the sunny ideology of the conservative propagandists. And most will believe their eyes, not the lies of the Republicans.

If there is one thing always predictable in politics and government, it's that familiarity breeds contempt. And it's why we shouldn't freak out and try to overthrow every foreign government we dislike. Just like Americans needed a taste of Conservatism to learn how disagreeable it is, Iranians needed an Islamic government to take the luster off that ideology. Iraq will likely also get it's opportunity to learn firsthand to hate the autocratic Mullahs with a theocratic government. As the Soviets hated the Communists and the Spanish hated the Fascists.

You have to let the public gain the experience. It's always the best teacher.

[moc]

80. I vote this as the best response of all!

Bravo!

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[omega minimo]

86. With better teachers, we can avoid the experience

We can avoid the preventable experience, with better education producing Jefferson's "informed populace" who can think for themselves and not be lulled by mindnumbing techniques, who view the news of the day wearing their



"It all sounds appealing in theory."

It all sounds appalling in theory, for anyone who can think through the logical future (the predictable future we are now living in) outcome. It didn't take "12 years of conservative rule of Congress and 6 years of one party conservative rule in Washington" to "see the fruits of this rotten tree." This tree was rotten from the moment it was planted by Reagan 26 years ago.

"The public now has first hand experience with which to balance the sunny ideology of the conservative propagandists. And most will believe their eyes, not the lies of the Republicans."

The evidence has been there all along for those who chose to see. For the rest, it's been one long happy face Morning In America binge and yes, thanks to them, it took the (near) destruction of the nation and our international standing to snap them out of their stupor.

And unless that changes, nothing will change and you're right, it will be a drunken lurch from one decade's totalitarian regime to the next.

[ComerPerro]

82. they may seem like good people, but they are not

I know Republicans, some are in my family, and they all seem like good people. But most of them are total shit as human beings.

How can you tell?

Easy and simple test.

Watch how they treat random people, or people who service them.


Its not how they treat you, their family, or their friends.

Its how they treat total strangers on the street.

Its how they treat their waiter, the cashier, the maid at a hotel, the janitor at work...

[Armstead]

94. That's a bit unfair

I don't think ideology can always be assolciated with personal behavioir or character. That was part of the point in my OP. I wasn't referring to the segment of GOP/conservatives who are mean-spirited, self-centered creeps.

I do know people who are conservative and/or republican, and they're not really any different than your typical liberal/progressive/Democrat in their personal behavior or character. It's just that they have this blind spot when it comes to political issues.

I also know some liberal/progressive/Democrats who act like schmucks.

That's one of the reasons for my OP. It's clear why some people who are self-centered and bigoted and arrogent are attracted to right-wing mouthpieces.

But it's more difficult when it comes to people who are not really much different from liberal Democrats but have somehow drunk the Koolaid.

[omega minimo]

101. Has this thread helped you draw some conclusions?

[Festivito]

90. POUNDED by media: TV-Radio-Mail-Clubs. TRUTH is what last lasts.

THE MESSAGE is created then pounded. Each time it goes unchallenged, it becomes more accepted. It is unchalleged when the president speaks, when pundits talk, when that mailing arrives, when that comment flies at a meeting.

That's what they're thinking.