Tuesday, October 20, 2009

The World of The Conservative Base

This is an extremely illuminating article about the way the mind of your average Republican conservative works. "Why would I want to know that?" I hear you asking, "I already know they're crazy." Good point, liberal-person-in-my-head (I'm losing my mind), but there will certainly come a time when you'll encounter people like this, and if you're anything like me, you'll want to argue with them. It helps to know exactly how they think: about Obama, about themselves, about the media, and about "elites" like us. Especially chilling is their praise for some of our favorite people here at Lefty's: Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.

The Very Separate World of Conservative Republicans


Anonymous said...

In the poll above, I wonder how many people:

know someone in the military.

are more than acquaintances with someone in the military.

are in the military.

have a family member in the military.

have lost a close friend/family member serving in the military.

Tim Ryan said...

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, as I come from a military family (Dad is a colonel in the army).

Tim Ryan said...

Oh now I understand, you're referring to the poll about the banned casualty photos, not the study I posted. If it eases your curiosity, I voted for the last option, despite (or because of?) my military background.

Anonymous said...

Free speech is good and necessary. At the same time, I do not believe the image of a fallen soldier should be used to promote any political agenda or any media. How does the image of a KIA soldier enhance news. We do not need to see a dead soldier to understand that he is dead.

If your dad were to be killed in action by a roadside bomb (I pray this does not happen), would you be ok with the image of his mutilated body being spread around?

Tim Ryan said...

Well that's obviously not something I'd like to think about, but if it gets people to reevaluate the costs of the war (see: Vietnam)...

I'm not really saying if the media should or should not show these images, I'm saying the government has no right to prevent anybody from doing so.

Bill said...

usually when we have a poll that we think will spark discussion we'll make it a post as well so people can comment on it. I guess we missed the boat on this one.

My two cents?

This was a tough choice for me. My father was a captain in the army, and my cousin is currently in the air force and has served in Afghanistan and Iraq. I don't really see the news value in publishing the photos of KIA soldiers. On the other hand, I don't believe that free speech should be limited, even if it's speech that I don't like, especially if that speech is political in nature. I think the press shouldn't publish the photos but they should be allowed to.

Anonymous said...

I'm not trying do drag this out any longer, so no reply is expected. Freedom of speech isn't absolute when images are involved. Think about sexually explicit and pornographic images. These are regulated to only be available to adults only. Child porn is completely illegal. So how can we use the freedom of speech argument when we aren't allowing free access to any and all images?

Bill said...

Not all freedom of speech claims are equal in the United States. One classical example is falsely yelling fire in a public theater. This is an example of speech that is not protected by the first amendment. Such is also the case with obscenity (which would include pornography).

Political speech, on the other hand, is the most highly protected form of speech. Government restrictions of political speech are subject to strict scrutiny in the courts. I would argue that these photographs would fall under that category, and thus would merit more protection from government restrictions than child porn.