? For Those Of You Of A Conservative Nature.....

[Alan]

To be clear, to a conservative like me you ask a nonsensical loaded question. If I say it is “welfare” what takeaways from that do you have? What conclusion do you draw?

I have a theory: Liberals, here/there/everywhere, ask questions in this manner in hopes of uncovering hypocrisy which makes them giggle and feel superior. I usually try to disappoint them and possibly think twice before trying again, however it seldom seems to work.

[Yppej]

I had a conservative trying to catch me in hypocrisy. He said, "Oh, not my president but I bet you're not going to turn down the stimulus check". Actually I've never said not my president. And Congress gets some credit for the stimulus also.

[LDAHL]

In general, I see the hypocrisy game as tedious, unproductive and ultimately impossible to win. There being so much of it on all sides (thinking there are only two being one of the more destructive delusions of our time), and the scoring system so subjective.

Preferring limited government is not the same thing as wanting no government at all. Support for a given program is not the same thing as wishing to make us all children of the state. These are not the sorts of arguments that can ever be won with loaded terms, straw men or some magical gotcha moment. At best, they simply serve to confirm biases about what you imagine the other side to think.

[KnownRogue]

Life is nuanced.

[razz]

In general, I see the hypocrisy game as tedious, unproductive and ultimately impossible to win. There being so much of it on all sides (thinking there are only two being one of the more destructive delusions of our time), and the scoring system so subjective.

Preferring limited government is not the same thing as wanting no government at all. Support for a given program is not the same thing as wishing to make us all children of the state. These are not the sorts of arguments that can ever be won with loaded terms, straw men or some magical gotcha moment. At best, they simply serve to confirm biases about what you imagine the other side to think.

Idahl, it strikes me that this is the wisest post that I have seen for a long, long, long time on this site. Thank you!

[Teacher Terry]

IL, I totally agree that fancy street signs, etc are a big waste of money. When I worked for the state and they were short of money everyone had to take one furlough day a month and not get paid. We didn’t get raises for years. Our office furniture was solid oak made by the prisons. It would have lasted forever. They replaced it with built in modular furniture. When people complained they said it was a different funding source and had to be spent. During this time they bought enormous TVs for the conference rooms saying instead of traveling they would be used. That didn’t happen. Ugh!

[iris lilies]

Fancy streets signs here are stupid if we expect taxpayers to fund them, especially using money from a taxpayer in Billings, Montana to fund. But I do think they are nice, and the entry markers are nicest and consistent with our historic Park architecture.

ugh, I remember giving up my WWII era solid oak desk at my last library job in order to get cheap ugly modern modular furniture. I could have said “no “ to the modular furniture, but I knew I would be making a decision for the person coming after me in that job and so I gave in. But there was zero functionality improvement from the new pieces of furniture.And of course it looks like shit after a decade plus.