Why are there conservatives in the middle class?

General reason #1, People in the USA bite on to the easiest thing they can understand. As a result, they fall prey to the conservative agenda, which is ideas expressed in simple 5 word sentances. True, just check it out.

Reason #2, some are so slow and almost legaly retarded, they need to cling on to a political party that will dictate to them what they should think is right. You know just like religion. These are the types that do not make a lot of money due to their cognitive limitations. Often if they have money it is given to them by inheratice or parents. They are the dependent type who do not have the ability to understand why they are clining on to the conservative party that is screwing them over.

Reason#3, there are people who fully understand the agendas and idology of the conservatives, and they do make a lot of money. In fact, their self profit and selfishness goes beyond the scope of the envionment they live and operate. In ohter words, these selfish greedy people will risk the destruction of their environment around them and the destruction of the USA over their self profit. Because for them it is all about themselves. You get no sacrifice for country out of these conservatives.

So there you have it. The triad of conservatism. Some will make crazy talk and say these factors are bogus and not true.. But the fact remains: they do not have the ability to understand these concepts or the concepts of how human behavior and politics mix. And they will discredit what I have stated. But that does not mean it is not true. In fact, when they start hollering liberal and socialist, they have given this post more creedence to what I state here is true. And that would be Reason #2.


Watch......

See...

 

Does anybody know if there a formal term for this sort of logical fallacy? I suppose it would be a specific sort of an ad hominem attack taking the general form of saying something along the lines of

"Anybody that disagrees with me is demonstrating that they're an idiot" before handing off to ones oppoenent.


Maybe that would be a sort of poisoning the well.

Either way, it certainly shows poor character.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=d1GqjIhRejMC&pg=PT122&lpg=PT122&dq=ad+hominem+ayn+rand&source=bl&ots=cUseudpoX4&sig=Vn89o7LRAwYZPxX14ERwGm8x_-o&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QFr6TuzKHoavsAK1vrjEAw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwBA
Ayn Rand called it argument from intimidation.

 

Arrgh link not working, looked interesting.

OK did second time, now to read.

Great read, certainly nails some of the debating style around here.

 

Because we hate the other side worse than the (R). It is not about good and evil it is just the lesser of the two.

I personally think the liberal agenda plays right along with the right wing agenda.

I did not vote because there was no real option. All the answers are the same.

 

She's certainly talking about that. Solid find!

If people are having a problem with it, I found a HTML version.
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/argument_from_intimidation.html

And I'd have to agree that we see too much of it here and it should be regarded as "is a confession of intellectual impotence".

Though the trick is calling your own side on it.

 

Welcome to capitialism as it is for us Wage Slaves comrade.Interested in a revolution?

 

Whats wrong with you, every intelligent human 'Hates Government"everywhere.

Are you well ,didn't anyone tell you.

Now repeat after me ,"All government is Corrupt and Violent and stupid ."

Especially the one in the US.

The Greatest "F Word"ed up government on Earth".

 

Another inane poll with ridiculous choices.

Conservatives are in the middle class because of basic principles. A strong central government invites corruption. The reason that corporations have the power is because the government gives it to them.

 

I know it's only flamebait, but in case you just haven't heard it, this misconception is exactly why you can't understand it.

Both parties are steeped in graft and closely tied to the finance industry, and so there's truly no party which isn't but buddies with the "1%" (if you want to use an extremely loose definition of the power class). Also there isn't a major party that doesn't work to make us poorer, since high cost of living is actually more the result of over-regulated and over-taxed commodities (think $10 cigarettes) than the result of simple income taxes. The congressional debates on "tax cuts" really only affect the upper half of the population directly, and in fact have the opposite affect on the bottom half in the form of slow economy and rising prices.

The middle class is "conveniently" located in a zone where they are often equally affected by tax rates and commodity prices, so there's no single issue most pertinent to a sufficient majority of them to cause a lean one way or another (assuming that the parties weren't being completely dishonest about their agendas of "freedom", "lower taxes", and "balanced budgets").

 

What makes you think that conservative values are one iota at variance with middle class values?

Middle class does not equal "welfare recipient."

Middle class people work.
Conservatives work.

 

Because people in the middle class tend to have active brain waves.......
.
.
.
.

The Poorest American Cities of 2008 (1-30)

1. Detroit, 33.3% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 52 years
2. Cleveland, 30.5% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 20 years
3. Buffalo, 30.3% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 43 years
4. Newark, 26.1% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 102 years
5. Miami, 25.6% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 52 years
6. Fresno, 25.5% in poverty--Republican Mayor for the last 13 years
7. Cincinnati, 25.1% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 29 years
8. Toledo, 24.7% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 20 years
9. El Paso, 24.3% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 120 years
10. Philadelphia, 24.1% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 57 years
11. Milwaukee, 23.4% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 49 years
12. Memphis, 23.1% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 133 years
13. St. Louis, 22.9% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 60 years
14. Dallas, 22.6% in poverty--Republican Mayor for the last 2 years
14 New Orleans,22.6% in poverty-Democrat Mayor for the last 141 years
16. Atlanta, 22.4% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 130 years
17. Stockton, Calif., 21.6% in poverty--No info available--probably Libs
18. Minneapolis, 21.3% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 35 years
19. Pittsburgh, 21.2% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 21 years
20. Tucson, 20.9% in poverty--No info available--probably Libs
21. Chicago, 20.6% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 78 years
22. Columbus,Ohio 20.1% in poverty-Democrat Mayor for the last 9 years
23. Long Beach, Calif., 19.8% in poverty--No info available--probably Libs
24. Houston, 19.5% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 88 years
25 Los Angeles,19.4% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for "the last 8 years"
26. Baltimore, 19.3% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 42 years
27 San Antonio,19.2% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 38 years
28. Phoenix, 18.9% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 5 years
29. Boston, 18.7% in poverty--Democrat Mayor for the last 79 years
30. Denver, 18.4% in poverty----Democrat Mayor for the last 46 years

.......why would anyone in the middle class vote for more poverty?
.
.
.
.

 

The results of this poll are funny but ture. LOL...

 

I've always wondered how people can fall for this good party/bad party crap, over and over again.

Both sides are for the financial elite, their own power, and against the people.

 

Badmutha I love your "fishing" quote, though I consder it flattery to call the socialist philosophy "liberal". I consider myself a liberal, and socialism seems to contradict every tenet of liberty I would promote!

 

Then your definition of "liberal" resides in the 19th century.......

For good or for worse......"Liberalism" today is synonymous with "Statism" and "Excrement Sandwich". I would suggest adopting a new label.......
.
.
.
.

 

Yes classical is precisely my point. I resent the usurpation of a perfectly good English word to encompass the opposite of its original meaning... political rhetoric at its most sardonic.

 

i call it Capitialist political Dictatorship through a party duopoly.Sounds good to me.

 

Capitalism is freedom, not tyranny. Markets should be watched to stop monopolies.

 

which of course signifies the absence of free markets.
The capital is controlled by those granted privilege from the ruling class.

 

Go ahead and watch all you want, I have yet to see someone show historical evidence of a private monopoly.

It turns out all the "scary" stories from Standard Oil to Microsoft turned out to be pure myth spun by other corporations. What's wrong with majority market share if commodity prices continue to fall? Unless the government outlaws competition, every business is kept in check by the threat of being undercut.

 

I think the tendancy is for people who have benefited greatly from every government program ever engineered to call themselves "conservative". Michelle Bachman is almost the perfect example. Old blue hairs using their Social Security checks to make their motorhome payments are another real good example. I've never seen a more rightwing reactionary group of people in my life.

 

The Poll is without option "others" and flame bate.

 

I see you're taking a lesson from your MSM overlords. Make a poll with completely biased answers and then flaunt the literally inevitable results as proof that the American people actually support loopy liberals.