Are there “conservatives” who are of the Kool-Aid drinking ilk, which toe the party line no matter what and generally, disconnect rational thinking from political orientation? Sure. Are they representative of conservativism. No. They are not…just as their liberwock counterparts are not necessarily representative of liberalism, or in this case, neoliberalism. This is a hasty generalization, made by a majority of politically active people who, ironically, you represent. It’s easy to see when you’re dealing with that kind of mentality. The tipoff is when they use words like “never” when dealing with a particular segment of the population (usually someone they disagree with)…i.e. “they never use facts…they never use reason…they never use logic….they never blah, blah, blah.” That tells me I’m dealing with a person who has (oops) “never” been outside the insulating cocoon of their ideology. All their friends are of that particular group. They all, in general, hold the same views. They all, in general, read the same books. They get their information from the same sources. And they are, naturally, indoctrinated, well trained naked apes….who don’t even know they’re indoctrinated, well trained naked apes.

This is a sad situation, Linda. But there it is. That is the world you and I live in and are a part of. When we start thinking in terms of what “is” instead of what we “think is,” the world will look very different and we will interact with it in a way which is affective. In the meantime, see how far your endless Sisyphusism gets you.

1. It makes claims of liberals that are exactly what I’ve come to expect from discussions with conservatives. I have never had a conservative use facts, reason, or logic in a debate. Ever.

2. The place where public policy debate falls down is exactly where the OP is saying it does in this piece. Namely, in this piece that makes the argument about the people taking a position instead of actually discussing the position itself, he captures the heart of the failure of our current political environment where the wingnuts derail the conversation about policy by ignoring the policy and attacking the opposition as people. In essence, the poster has demonstrated behaving the very way he whines that the other side of a debate acts.

Of course, the whole thing is a waste of time because it isn’t enlightened policy debate, it is what conservatives seem to think is the same thing: third-grade sandbox arguments.

If you would like to see a demonstration of enlightened conservative debate, do a youtube search on town hall disruption. If you want to have a reasoned debate, put forth a well-reasoned argument some time. Really. I believe in the power of debate to make better societies by finding the flaws in a policy and gaming them out, forcing us to address the “what-ifs” in a given scenario. That can’t work if one side’s entire argument is “you’re stupid and anything you say is good I’m voting against because you’re stupid.”