CVC, I know, I know, I'm the party pooper as you probably want others guys to come in and post how true that neat little story is and affirm your hard line view.

But, I got to be honest, simplistic and jingoistic stories like that in my view are meant to get an emotional rise out of people. Gets them to to abandon thinking with their brain and acting on chest thumping posturing.

I would recommend a book to you by John Dean former NIxon White House Councel. It's called Conservatives Without a Conscience. It delves deeply into the authoritarian personality of many in the right wing.

Well, no worry as I am sure the usual suspects will now chime in to bolster how wrong my view is and right yours is. You got to admit though, they like it in a way. It gives them a reason to get fired up for a moment and get into the battle even if it's only a keyboard battle.

Cheers

I think we're still a long way from socialism/communism in this country. True, some folks are lured by the "free corn", but its not a majority. Capitalism is alive and well in the USA.

I do believe that Democrats are all about evening the "playing field" among all citizens. That's wrong. We do have citizens that need help, the truly handicapped, but a vast majority that want handouts are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves - and should.

Cowgal, as a Democrat I must say that I don't fully agree with your assertion. While there are some on the left who might hold extreme views of giving everyone handouts, I don't believe that's the goal of the party. I certainly don't hold that view and don't believe in giving handouts to people for nothing.

The following is taken from Wiki, here is the link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-wing_Authoritarianism and gives a good explanation of RWA= Right Wing Authoritarianism that John Dean rights about. I believe that many on the right have elements of this type of thinking in varying degrees. Extreme examples would be Rush, Nugent, Hannity, O'reilly, Savage, to name a few.

"1: Faulty reasoning — RWAs are more likely to:
Make many incorrect inferences from evidence.
Hold contradictory ideas that result from a cognitive attribute known as compartmentalized thinking.
Uncritically accept that many problems are ‘our most serious problem.’
Uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs.
Uncritically trust people who tell them what they want to hear.
Use many double standards in their thinking and judgments.
2: Hostility Toward Outgroups — RWAs are more likely to:
Weaken constitutional guarantees of liberty such as a Bill of Rights.
Severely punish ‘common’ criminals in a role-playing situation.
Admit they obtain personal pleasure from punishing such people.
Be prejudiced and hostile against racial, ethnic, nationalistic, sexual, and linguistic minorities.
Volunteer to help the government persecute almost anyone.
Be mean-spirited toward those who have made mistakes and suffered.
3: Profound Character Attributes — RWAs are more likely to:
Be dogmatic.
Be zealots.
Be hypocrites.
Be absolutists
Be bullies when they have power over others.
Help cause and inflame intergroup conflict.
Seek dominance over others by being competitive and destructive in situations requiring cooperation.
4: Blindness To One’s Own Failings And To The Failings Of Authority Figures Whom They Respect— RWAs are more likely to:
Believe they have no personal failings.
Avoid learning about their personal failings.
Be highly self-righteous.
Use religion to erase guilt over their acts and to maintain their self-righteousness.
RWA is also correlated with political conservatism — not so much at the level of ordinary voters, but with increasing strength as one moves from voters to activists to office holders, and then from lower- to higher-level officeholders. (The Authoritarian Specter). Scores on the RWA Scale predict many attitudes and behaviors related to conservatism as defined in the general culture at the time. For instance, the scale has correlated reliably with political party affiliation; reactions to Watergate; pro-capitalist attitudes; severity of jury sentencing decisions; punishment of deviants; racial prejudice; homophobia; religious orthodoxy; victim blaming; and acceptance of covert governmental activities such as illegal bugging, political harassment, denial of the right to assemble, and illegal drug raids (Altemeyer, 1981, 1988, 1996, 1998).
In one part of his summation, Altemeyer wrote that RWAs are more likely to be: "Conservative/Reform party (Canada) or Republican Party (United States) lawmakers who (1) have a conservative economic philosophy; (2) believe in social dominance; (3) are ethnocentric; (4) are highly nationalistic; (5) oppose abortion; (6) support capital punishment; (7) oppose gun-control legislation; (8) say they value freedom but actually want to undermine the Bill of Rights; (9) do not value equality very highly and oppose measures to increase it; (10) are not likely to rise in the Democratic party, but do so among Republicans." (The Authoritarian Specter)"

Now, I'm certainly not saying all Republicans think to that extreme, but many in my view do. While I believe there is no "perfect" ideology whether right or left the type of thinking outlined above and very prevalent in the republican party today to me is poisonous. I value personal freedom and that ideology in my view uses fear to manipulate and control the masses and control thinking using hot button issues like gun control and religion.

I fully understand in your view it's the democrats completely and fully who want to take your guns, take religion away, and give freebies to the poor thus instituting a "socialist" state.

Me being a moderate or more to the middle democrat I obviously don't agree with that view at all. While I also don't agree with far left thinking at all. My path is in the middle and I know there are many reasonable republicans who have similar views in the middle. One I can think of is Chuck Hagel who I do like and respect.

I cannot tolerate the extremism of Coulters, Limbaughs, O'reilly's, and will fight that kind of intolerant madness and thinking at every opportunity.

Cheers

I guess I'll be suspect #1.

I'll voulnteer to read the book, "Conservatives Without a Conscience" by John Dean. Apparently you forget that there are also liberal's without a conscience. Just like John Kerry saying he's a hunter and for the 2nd ammendment, but has a dismal voting record trying to deny our right the keep and bear arms. If the book points fingers at Nixon, I'm not surprized. However, his foreign policy was still better than that of either Carter or Clinton. Besides, John Dean did and said anything he could to save in own neck in the Watergate scandal.

Now you need to read, "Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism" by Ann Coulter.

We can debate the topics of both books when we are done.

As for the wild pig analogy, I certainly have a mistrust of those looking for a free handout and voting as such. We also have to be watchful of those too willing to give those handout's......especially when I'm paying for it and they are not.

Lastly, I'm not against helping people in need. If someone loses their job and needs TEMPORARY help, or abused children, or the severely handicapped. However, we certainly shouldn't be supporting so many people that are perfectly capable of working, but refuse to do so.

Whelland John Dean was a Republican who served under Nixon. He is a very intelligent, respectful, insightful, man who conveys his views in a highly positive manner. If you or anyone reads his views whether you agree or disagree it would be an educational experience. Ann Coulter is the type of person the book is about. I am sorry, but I won't read anything she has to offer as it would be nothing more then hate speech blaming democrats for every ill from herpes to the bubonic plague. It really wouldn't be anything new as I've watched many of her interviews on TV and am very familiar with her brand of hateful speaking. So, sorry, but no thanks on reading her book. But, again, I think you would like Dean's book.

One thing to consider is nothing is truly black and white, right or left, good or bad. The reality is if you are truly a truth seeker and open minded the truth can lie sometimes on the right, sometimes in the middle, and sometimes on the left.

Cheers

SoCoKHntr, I also consider myself middle of the road. I vote according to a candidate's track record, rather than by party line. I don't go for either extreme, conservative or liberal and can find good in both parties.

However, history has shown that Democrats do tax more and do implement more social programs than the Republicans. And like Whelland stated, yes there are many deserving individuals that should be taken care of. I believe we need better watchdogs since it is our money being spent on these social programs.

Note that I did not agree with the "wild pig" and "free corn" analogy. I don't believe we're even close to that.

Good to hear. It's the middle of the roaders from both parties that will help make positive progress forward.

Just so everyone knows who John Dean is: He was one of Nixon's advisor's during the Watergate scandal that testified in the Senate hearings. While the finger was being pointed at him for being a part of it, he said and did everything he could in order to save himself.

John Dean claims to be a Goldwater conservative, which is fine. However, he has a long history of going up against people that don't believe exactly the same way as he does and tells everyone else they are wrong in long winded diatribes and name calling. To me, he lost his credibility a long time ago.....but I'll read the book anyway.

If no one noticed, Goldwater lost the Presidential election. Ronald Reagan ended up winning the Presidential election by a landslide, because he united the economic conservatives and the religious conservatives. John Dean wants to rid the Republican party of the religious conservatives, which would ensure the loss of future elections as well.

Most of what the left portrays is that Repulicans are racist, religious fanatics that want to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. That couldn't be further from the truth. It's the whole leftists lie that bothers me. The party line of the Democrat's always seems to include something that I will have to pay for.

I vote for people based on their voting record, and yes I do cast ballots for Democrats.....although it's fewer and fewer these days. While I don't agree with McCain's entire voting record, it's much better than Obama's.

While I don't agree with everything in the Republican party line (I'm an economic conservative, not a religious conservative,) it certainly lines up with more of my beliefs than that of the liberal's.

I agree Whelland. There was a time (many years ago ) that I considered myself more of a Democrat than Republican, however like you I find myself now casting more votes for Republicans. Its also based on economics, more than anything else. All candidates, regardless of party affiliation are given a fair chance to prove themselves to me. Obama has proven to me that he's a great speaker, but I don't care for his voting record either. That says a lot more to me than any of his campaign speeches.

I remember John Dean very well and also remember the whole Watergate scandal. All Dean did in my opinion was save his own butt. I'm not fond of him.

SoCoHunter, I am surprised at you. I disagree with much of what you espouse, but I view you as a thinking person.

Why would you turn that little story into a conservative vs liberal, republican vs democrat issue when it really has nothing to do with either of them?

Here is the crux of the story....

These really are bipartisan handouts and have to with the government and not one political party.

Honestly, do you support tobacco subsidies or even dairy subsidies or payments for not planting crops?

Do you really believe our public school system is the best in the world? Or has it declined because we are afraid to make anyone achieve or fail?

Do you really believe that our government is on the right path? Or do you think we need change?