Half the Republicans You Know Are Insane

Did any one, at all, read beyond the Title? To what was actually quoted from the article.

Padded cell - thinking anyone here would comment on what was actually said - not just what the title caused them to think what was said.

oh well ----

reply to post by FyreByrd

Dear FyreByrd,

Thanks a lot for this. It's a fine example of Bulverism (with a few non sequiturs for spice). As we have discussed, the major argument here is not whether the Administration is working to restrict guns, or Muslims are working toward Sharia, but simply, "anyone who believes these things is insane."

As an example of the Sharia in America position, consider:

The day before the anniversary of Sept. 11, 2010 the New York Times featured Sinclair Hejazi Abdus-Salaam as a typical model Muslim American in an article titled Muslims and Islam Were Part of Twin Towers' Life.

Yet, in a video taken of Abdus-Salaam less than six months later, Abdus- Salaam is seen stating unequivocally that Sharia law should replace the U.S. constitution, complete with punishments for crimes that under Islamic law require stoning.

ibloga.blogspot.com...

It's true that no significant gun control legislation has come from Congress, but:

President Obama is quietly moving forward on gun control.

The president has used his executive powers to bolster the national background check system, jump start government research on the causes of gun violence and create a million-dollar ad campaign aimed at safe gun ownership.

The executive steps will give federal law enforcement officials access to more data about guns and their owners, help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, and lay the groundwork for future legislative efforts.

The moves, which have not been widely touted by the administration, come as Obama ups his pressure on Congress to take action on gun control in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings. The Senate is expected to begin floor consideration of legislation when it returns in April. (Emphasis added)

thehill.com...

How about Obama's third term? The Daily Kos, not exactly a conservative site, writes this: (Oh, I assume "RWNJ" stands for "Right Wing Nut Job.")

There is a scenario -- a nightmare scenario for RWNJs -- under which President Obama can legally and constitutionally win a third term as President of the United States. Of course, we should know that Barack Obama is too honest and honorable a person to pursue this course of action. But do the RWNJs know that?

But for any actual RWNJs reading this, you can relax. Barack Obama is too honest, too honorable, and too great a man to try and bend or break the Constitution to hold onto the Presidency.

www.dailykos.com...#

Obama is too great, honorable and honest to bend the Constitution to get more terms? And Republicans are called insane?

There is a discussion to be had on such issues. The article's dismissiveness in calling the "other side" insane is unhelpful Bulverism.

Thanks for the example, FyreByrd.

With respect,
Charles1952

charles1952
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

Dear FyreByrd,


Thanks for the example, FyreByrd.

With respect,
Charles1952

Nice counter examples - but have you done the sums first.

The premise the article was that 2 or 3 out of 5 polled republicans believe there are 'conspiracies' by the democrates on these three issues. The next premise could be surmised as those who believe in conspiracies in these three areas are insane. The conclusion is that Half or more of the republicans (that participated in the poll) are insane.

I think the sums add up - remember Bulverism is about not doing the Sums. It's a first step in reasoning before examing the 'Truth' of the premises.

Not that aren't there are instances in support of the issues.

How do you 'prove' a conspiracy?

Sometimes I just can't control myself...

reply to post by FyreByrd

Dear FyreByrd,

I am a huge admirer of that brain of yours. Unfortunately, I don't know how you can learn to control yourself. If I knew how to exercise self control, I probably wouldn't say half the things I do.

Taken as a syllogism, you are flawless once again. Not surprisingly, people will question the second premise, that Republican believers are insane. I will admit my vision was skewed by the recent Bulverism thread, but the results are the same, even though the path is different.

I saw it as Republicans saying, "I believe in X, Y, and Z." The Democrat response is "You only say that because you're insane," thereby skipping over the truth or falsity of the argument.

The syllogistic approach asks for proof that the believers are insane. Bulveristic analysis asks "Are X, Y, and Z true?" Of course, if they are true, believing in X, Y, and Z is not insanity.

FyreByrd, I like the way your brain works. Stick around and keep kicking sense into me and the other posters on ATS.

With respect,
Charles1952

Xtrozero
Did 90% of the democrats who said similar comments about Bush for 8 years somehow become sane now?

Not a peep out of them, eh?

Too busy supporting the "war" effort.

FyreByrd
...Thing is I agree with this .... Have fun.
www.alternet.org...
...

Don't know what you're agreeing with.
The article?
The summary judgments?
790 registered voters questioned on September 25 & 26, 2013.
34% of the respondents were Republican... (39% Dem, 27% Ind/Other)
This means that we should accept that 269 randomly selected (presumably) Republicans will respond to a set of questions as all other Republicans (within a +/-3.5% margin) would... (wow!)
The author of the "alternet.org" article - William Rivers Pitt - is just a little dicey in his treatment of the truth...imo
2nd Question from the survey -

Do you think the U.S. government engages in so-called “false flag” operations, meaning that the government sometimes plans and executes mass shootings or terrorist events, and then makes it look like those activities were carried out by others, or not?

2nd Question & Editorial quote from Mr. Pitt's article -

...Is the US government secretly staging "false flag" mass shootings all across the country in order to blame others and distract the country from their gun-grabbing, office-staying, Sharia-implementing ways? A full 26% of Republicans believe this, so if you know five of them, one is convinced of this, and another is well on his way. I'm sure all the left-leaning folks who believe that 9/11 was a Cheney-orchestrated "inside job" are thrilled to know their gospel has been co-opted by people who think 26 children were massacred in Connecticut so Mr. Obama could give everyone's guns to the Syrians, because that makes sense, too, apparently. Or something.

Looks like a little more is being read-in-to the responses than the report otherwise suggests.
Oh - and ETA - He even quoted the wrong percentage in this response...as, the report actually says that 21% of Republican respondents said "Yes" to the question. ...though the 1 in 5 part was correct.

Going through the rest of the questions, responses, numbers and 'cross-tabbing', it seems this author is nothing but a cherry-picker.
So - again...I would kind of like to know what it is that you are agreeing with in the OP.
Thanks.

...and so it continues. On and on and on...

The never ending stupidity that is partisan politics in America. Democrats are evil. Republicans are evil. Independents are evil.

The list, and litany, goes on and on and on... Yadda, yadda, yadda...

Meanwhile the power brokers who support both sides equally continue to laugh at you all. This is precisely what they want. At each others throats. Tearing at the foundation of what our country is, or should be. People. Not party affiliation.

Don't you get it? No, obviously not, because thread after thread comes along blaming one group or another for the faults of the world... With others chiming in "It's not us, it's them over there...".

But, hey, let's just continue merrily along this express rail to what ever fate has in store for us... We'll have earned it, I suppose...

charles1952
reply to post by FyreByrd

 

Dear FyreByrd,

If I knew how to exercise self control, I probably wouldn't say half the things I do.

With respect,
Charles1952

Focus - that's what I'm working on - being able to ignore 95% and keep my mouth shut on another 5%.

This particular post was of the 'side spliting belly laugh' variety. I just couldn't resist posting it. I happen to like WR Pitt.

I never said anything about democrates at all. Never implied they were sane. Never implied they didn't believe in conspriacy theories too. Didn't imply anything at all. Just posted a fun article.

I think the responses define the word 'reactionary' - no stopping and thinking - just react.

We (all of us) need to do more stopping, waiting, thinking, reading before we react or decide.

sonnny1

Xtrozero
Did 90% of the democrats who said similar comments about Bush for 8 years somehow become sane now?

Not a peep out of them, eh?

Too busy supporting the "war" effort.

When one sees that Obama is Bush on steroids and not a single peep....makes you wonder...

I didn't vote for the guy nor did I drink his cool aid, but after the first 4 years I would have fired him for some very dismal performance, but he was voted back in for another, not shocking, 4 more years of dismal performance. You know that Obamacare is the one and only thing he has done off his laundry lists of priorities, and he wouldn't gotten that if it wasn't the pure luck that he owned the House and Senate for a short while. The sorry part is he has done 180 degrees on many of his promises, that if he did nothing it would have been better.

As example....Transparent government anyone?

FyreByrd
...This particular post was of the 'side spliting belly laugh' variety. I just couldn't resist posting it. I happen to like WR Pitt.
...I think the responses define the word 'reactionary' - no stopping and thinking - just react.
...We (all of us) need to do more stopping, waiting, thinking, reading before we react or decide.

If all of this is true...then, when you said "...Thing is I agree with this...", I'm still at a loss for what you're agreeing with.
Blatant misrepresentation of the facts...?
Or an insubstantial high-brow stab at others who don't share the article-author's philosophical bent?

WanDash

FyreByrd
...This particular post was of the 'side spliting belly laugh' variety. I just couldn't resist posting it. I happen to like WR Pitt.
...I think the responses define the word 'reactionary' - no stopping and thinking - just react.
...We (all of us) need to do more stopping, waiting, thinking, reading before we react or decide.

If all of this is true...then, when you said "...Thing is I agree with this...", I'm still at a loss for what you're agreeing with.
Blatant misrepresentation of the facts...?
Or an insubstantial high-brow stab at others who don't share the article-author's philosophical bent?

I agree with the statement that "half of all the republicans you know (note that) are insane". Half the repubilcans I know are insane, clinically. The other half are decent people with different priorities then mine and that leads to some interesting discussions.

FyreByrd
Half the repubilcans I know are insane, clinically.

Really? Diagnosed and everything? Just how many republicans do you know?
I'm betting not many.
P.S. "Insanity" knows no political party boundaries.
(and yes, that's me with my psychology degree stating that fact).

FlyersFan

FyreByrd
Half the repubilcans I know are insane, clinically.

Really? Diagnosed and everything? Just how many republicans do you know?
I'm betting not many.
P.S. "Insanity" knows no political party boundaries.
(and yes, that's me with my psychology degree stating that fact).

Actually quite a few - mostly employed ones to be sure and not of the Tea Party variety.

Fact - Insanity is not a pyschological diagnosis.

I'll defer to Albert Einstein about insanity - "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Read more at www.brainyquote.com...

But then most republican's want the results they get so maybe you may be on to something.

Personal gain over collective good. Yep, not insane - just selfish (something about anti-social, narcassistic, border-line, oh I don't have a DSM handy and it's been years).

FyreByrd
Half the repubilcans I know are insane, clinically.

You know there is no clinical diagnosis of insanity or insane right? It's a legal term, not a medical diagnosis.

Just saying.

ETA: I see you do know so what you're saying is the people you know are Perseverating. That's not insanity. And just as an aside, there is no proof Einstein ever said that, nor any one else it gets attributed to.

FyreByrd
...I agree with the statement that "half of all the republicans you know (note that) are insane". Half the repubilcans I know are insane, clinically. The other half are decent people with different priorities then mine and that leads to some interesting discussions.

I don't know if you're lucky...or from another planet (with Republicans)...
Virtually everyone I know is "insane" in some regard.
And they all consider me more insane than themselves (and rightfully so).

So - in reality - you just wanted to take a cheap shot at a group of people - even if the cheap shot was based on a misrepresentation of facts.

Well - have fun with that.

Thanks you for this thread!!!

You have just figured out why this Country is falling apart at the rate it is.

50% of all republicans are crazy + 95% of all liberals = 2/3's of this nation is NUTS!

Side note:
I wish we all would grow up and put these labels away. This partisan bickering is holding us back. Think of what we could change if we worked together.
Quad

FyreByrd

I'll defer to Albert Einstein about insanity - "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Read more at www.brainyquote.com...

I just want to add something to the insane as doing the same thing repeatedly expecting a specific result in the face of years (decades) of evidence to the contrary:

But it is hardly worth wasting time and killing electrons in a tit for tat with Ferguson. What matters is the underlying issues of economic policy. These affect the lives of billions of people. The absurdities pushed by Ferguson and like-minded people in positions of power, in direct defiance of massive evidence to the contrary, have ruined millions of lives and cost the world more than $10 trillion in lost output since the crisis began.

From : www.commondreams.org...

Quadrivium

Side note:
I wish we all would grow up and put these labels away. This partisan bickering is holding us back. Think of what we could change if we worked together.
Quad

Great idea. I toy with the idea of no political parties whatsoever from time to time. Everyone including candidates having to stand on their own merit.

However, in the face of the overwhelming power and influence of Corporate People, common people have to band together in some form or another just to have a seat at the table (not that there is one for the 99% at present).

Unions can and should fill that role - much as they do in Germany commanding (by law) two seats on every corporate board. But in the US conservatives and libertarians alike tend to shout Socialism at the very word Union.

So I don't know the answer. Education - Education to be a free thinker is key but Corporate Power has taken over public education and fundamentalists have taken over a large part of the home and private schooling. Children should be impowered by their education to make up their own minds about all manner of subjects and issues - not indroctronated to believe what another (parent, religion, state, etc) wants them to believe. That is what educating the Free Human Being is all about.

reply to post by FyreByrd

Dear FyreByrd,

Excuse me for wondering about the wisdom of having union members speak for the people. In 2012, 7.3 million union members worked for some level of government, and only 7 million worked in the private sector. Considering how many more jobs are in the private sector, 114 million v. 21 million in government, a government employee is 5 - 6 times as likely to be a union member.

So the majority of people you want running the government would be government employees. That doesn't work at all.

What else do we know about union members? (besides that they're less than 7% of the total population)

They tend to be blacks more than whites, men more than women, and the most represented age group is 55 and over.

Thirty per cent of union members live in California and New York, not very representative. Add in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Michigan, New Jersey, and Ohio, and you've got 53% of the union members. Sorry, I don't want to live under a union member run government.

www.bls.gov...

www.bls.gov...

With respect,
Charles1952

I find myself agreeing with everything they're saying.

I myself find most right wingers I interact with to be either... unstable or seriously limited in both depth, extend and scope of knowledge or intellect, capacity for understanding and assimilating new information. Not to mention steeped in propaganda and indoctrination, it's practically dripping out their ears.

For instance when I try and explain to them that all banks issue money out of thin air each time they extend a loan.

Yes, I agree that right wingers have serious mental issues.