“UNAWARE OF THE CONTRADICTION…. There’s an old joke that goes something like this: my neighbor went to public schools before joining the military. He went to college on the G.I. Bill, bought his first home through the FHA, and received his health care through the V.A. and Medicare. He now receives . He’s a conservative because he wants to get the government off his back. I mention the joke because a surprising number of right-wing activists don’t seem to appreciate the humor. We talked the other day, for example, about a radical libertarian activist who encourages his allies to throw bricks through the windows of Democratic offices to protest the Affordable Care Act. He hates government involvement in the lives of citizens — but his main income is taxpayer-financed disability checks sent to him every month by the federal government. … ” “If you quit giving people that stuff, they would figure out how to do it on their own,”  “ … After a year of angry debate,” the Times article noted, ‘emotion outweighs fact.’ … how can credible people take nonsense seriously and hope to come up with a meaningful result? How can policymakers actually address substantive challenges while following the advice of angry mobs who reject reason and evidence?

The bottom line seem inescapable: too many activists have no idea what they’re talking about. Their sincerity notwithstanding, this is a confused group of misled people.”

If you read what I’ve had to say this election season you will find that I have not praised Obama or any other Democratic candidate.  I have not urged anyone to vote for any particular candidate.  Everyone should vote for candidates who’s views they agree with. What I have been doing is trying to get people to look at the facts and think about what is being said before deciding to vote for a candidate.  If, after you understand what a candidates views really are, you agree with those views you should vote for that candidate.  But how can you know if you really agree with a candidates views and plans if you don’t really know what they are?

Why is it that when a candidate says he wants to “get the government off our backs” no one ever   who is being referred to by the word  “our?”  Why is it that no one ever ask for specifics about how the government is on “our backs?”  When  a candidate says he wants to “cut spending and balance the budget” why does no one ever ask what specific cuts and specifically how the budget will be balanced?  Why is it that when the candidate says he wants to “get rid of burdensome government regulations” no one ever ask specifically what regulations and how they are “burdensome?” When a candidate says he wants to “eliminate tax breaks” why does no one ever ask specifically what “tax breaks” should be eliminated? When a candidate says the opponent supports or opposes a specific position on a particular issue why does no one ask “What do you base that on, what proof do you have of what you say?”

I’ve been trying to provide facts (and links to where I find them) that will help answer these questions.

We live in the information age.  Virtually any information needed to understand something is readily available and yet way too many Americans remain ignorant (ignorant: lacking  knowledge of some particular subject) and uninformed (uninformed : a lack of definite information or data. For example, one can be highly intelligent and well educated but still uninformed about something.) about this election and this is inexcusable. Ignorance, being uninformed, is the one human condition that is preventable and fully curable.

No more "Contradiction" content.
Nothing relevant found in other sections.
There are no attachments to Contradiction