Good connections, though as I used to say in my statistics class, "Correlation is not causation." It is entirely possible that many of the poorest, sickest and least educated populations who are still able to donate money and are willing to vote were that way before the GOP went crazy. By a likely combination of accident and cynical de…
Good connections, though as I used to say in my statistics class, "Correlation is not causation." It is entirely possible that many of the poorest, sickest and least educated populations who are still able to donate money and are willing to vote were that way before the GOP went crazy. By a likely combination of accident and cynical design, Republicans found that they could whip up such people by pretending to be their friends and also blaming "The Other" for their ills. The fact that they have done nothing for them--in fact made their situations worse--is irrelevant to marginalized folks looking for scapegoats. You would think that they would figure this out, but it's easier to stay in denial than admit you've been had. It also leaves you with no one to blame, and that's something most people don't want to accept.
Isn't there a Bible passage about "...falling on fertile soil...?" Yup, the Rep. P. rooted its opportunistic snout into the deepest, manure-fertilized bottomland of America. So many of the core rotten instincts are the eternal worst of humanity: it's a long list, but reverse snobbery against the "pointy-headed" is particularly interesting because it is so connected to anti-semitism. But your point about how hard it is to admit being wrong is so crucial. Especially with the intensity that has been whipped up by the exploiters, it's hard to have hope that many of the victims could possibly find the courage to re-assess.
I agree, which is what confidence crooks hope for, "Just a little more money will release the funds." And I'm think of a lady I know, a lovely woman but extremely conservative. She said she wanted the low income taxes of the Eisenhower era to come back. When I replied that they were quite high she paused and then said, "No they weren't." You can't argue with that sort of logic.
Oh, dear, go to my reply to well-intentioned "Teach1" below. I guess the colloquialism is "conversation-stopper." Just think what the lady would have thought if you'd told her the rates on high-earners! You would have morphed into that crazy ol' "Purple-People-Eater!"
Good connections, though as I used to say in my statistics class, "Correlation is not causation." It is entirely possible that many of the poorest, sickest and least educated populations who are still able to donate money and are willing to vote were that way before the GOP went crazy. By a likely combination of accident and cynical design, Republicans found that they could whip up such people by pretending to be their friends and also blaming "The Other" for their ills. The fact that they have done nothing for them--in fact made their situations worse--is irrelevant to marginalized folks looking for scapegoats. You would think that they would figure this out, but it's easier to stay in denial than admit you've been had. It also leaves you with no one to blame, and that's something most people don't want to accept.
Isn't there a Bible passage about "...falling on fertile soil...?" Yup, the Rep. P. rooted its opportunistic snout into the deepest, manure-fertilized bottomland of America. So many of the core rotten instincts are the eternal worst of humanity: it's a long list, but reverse snobbery against the "pointy-headed" is particularly interesting because it is so connected to anti-semitism. But your point about how hard it is to admit being wrong is so crucial. Especially with the intensity that has been whipped up by the exploiters, it's hard to have hope that many of the victims could possibly find the courage to re-assess.
I agree, which is what confidence crooks hope for, "Just a little more money will release the funds." And I'm think of a lady I know, a lovely woman but extremely conservative. She said she wanted the low income taxes of the Eisenhower era to come back. When I replied that they were quite high she paused and then said, "No they weren't." You can't argue with that sort of logic.
Oh, dear, go to my reply to well-intentioned "Teach1" below. I guess the colloquialism is "conversation-stopper." Just think what the lady would have thought if you'd told her the rates on high-earners! You would have morphed into that crazy ol' "Purple-People-Eater!"