Ron Paul is more of a constitutionalist than a libertarian. He is able to have liberal views on things like abortion and gay marriage by hiding behind state's rights, but I don't think he'd support abortion in his own state, maybe not even gay marriage, but I'm not sure about that.
It just means that traditional media that has had a strong hold on opinion, such as talk radio and even tv news doesn't hold as much sway as before. That isn't a necessarily bad thing either, because talk radio is pretty much just as echo chamber.
....
I understood what he meant, but I did like his implication that liberals are smarter because they open their mouths to receive every sliver of vomit the information age regurgitates to its disciples. Perhaps more conservative minded folks, like myself, treat most of that information with a degree of healthy skepticism...even if what I read is in agreement with my viewpoint(s).
then think about what you think and why
if you are skeptical of information you should be of traditional media also
I understood what he meant, but I did like his implication that liberals are smarter because they open their mouths to receive every sliver of vomit the information age regurgitates to its disciples.
Perhaps more conservative minded folks, like myself, treat most of that information with a degree of healthy skepticism...even if what I read is in agreement with my viewpoint(s).
That simply means that I am not credulous.
There's no evidence that's conservatives view information more skeptically than liberals do. The data generally shows that people:
1.) Treat data that confirms their biases as inherently trustworthy
2.) Treat data that opposes their biases skeptically and
3.) Think they don't do either of these things
I understood what he meant, but I did like his implication that liberals are smarter because they open their mouths to receive every sliver of vomit the information age regurgitates to its disciples.
Perhaps more conservative minded folks, like myself, treat most of that information with a degree of healthy skepticism...even if what I read is in agreement with my viewpoint(s).
I do the exact opposite. Wait, does that mean I'm a communist?
they are not conservative at all
Ron Paul is more of a constitutionalist than a libertarian. He is able to have liberal views on things like abortion and gay marriage by hiding behind state's rights, but I don't think he'd support abortion in his own state, maybe not even gay marriage, but I'm not sure about that.
Are you saying conservatives don't take advantage of the information age?
Perhaps liberals are more gullible for that very reason and believe bull**** that's plastered all over the internet, and therefore, are more suspicious and untrusting of everything. Secondly, its extremely easy to be ignorant since the "information age" allows folks to search for and find information that already agrees with preconceived views therefore reinforcing them instead of being forced to challenge them.
How can that be a good thing, particularly with places like Wikipedia where information can be manipulated by virtually anyone with a smart phone?
Sure, the information age serves a great purpose, but it isn't the holy grail of society and must be handled responsibly.
Edit: It's too bad they didn't ask the other generations about Millennials being self-centered twats. I'm sure that would have received an affirmative response in the 80-90% range.
There's no evidence that's conservatives view information more skeptically than liberals do. The data generally shows that people:
1.) Treat data that confirms their biases as inherently trustworthy
2.) Treat data that opposes their biases skeptically and
3.) Think they don't do either of these things
Makes me think of those "I don't trust the liberal media" bumper stickers. Ok, so you trust the "conservative media" then?
I don't trust the media, period.
Liberals will lie and liars will figure.
I just find that people generally think they are far more objective and rational than they really are. It reminds me of how many people say that they are 'independents' when research into it finds that 'independent voters' are nearly as partisan as self avowed partisans, they just try to hide it.
Oh, the irony......
What irony is this? I'm not someone like you that claims impartiality and then always conveniently ends up coming up with the same conclusion every time. (ie: whatever side you think black people aren't on)
I'm quite publicly very liberal. The only reason I wouldn't call myself a Democrat is that they aren't liberal enough for me, not because I somehow occupy the space between the parties.
I'm quite publicly very liberal. The only reason I wouldn't call myself a Democrat is that they aren't liberal enough for me, not because I somehow occupy the space between the parties.
Why not just profess Libertarianism then?
LOL That is almost profound.To put it in the best way possible:
What was once a quest of asking "How can I climb the latter to prosperity?" became a simple quest of "How can I bring the top of the latter down to me?"