Deconstructioning this threadreskMay 29 2008, 04:58:36 UTC
Here's how I see this thread:
K-SUI -- ASSERTION: "Bridge to Nowhere = height of pork barrel spending = project of Ted Stevens, R-AK"
CASP -- RESPONSE: "And he was and is mercilessly ridiculed by fiscal conservatives." ASSERTION: "Like I said, pork barrel spending is what happens when Republicans go bad, as opposed to what happens when Democrats follow their ideology."
K-SUI -- CHALLENGE & ASSERTION SHOWDOWN: "Fine -- name a fiscal conservative in Congress and I guarantee I can find some ridiculous project they funded. I know you enjoy the black-and-white of it all, but honestly, it's not that simple. All the federal politicians do it -- it is what gets them re-elected or what they think gets them re-elected anyway."
CASP -- SIDE-STEP OF CHALLENGE BY RECLASSIFYING PREVIOUSLY NAMED POLITICAL PARTIES WITH "LIB" AND "CON" FOLLOWED BY RE-INTRODUCTION OF "DEM" IN RE-ASSERTION OF PREVIOUS POINT: "Fine, replace Dem with lib and Pub with con. The ideology of spendiness is the left. Republicans may not adhere to fiscal conservatism as much as they should (which is why I identify with conservative ideology over the Republican party) but the Dems start from an ideology of spendiness."
RESK'S ANALYSIS: It's the final comment that had me scratching my head until a friend reminded me about Distorted Thinking. We've all engaged in it. Myself on MANY occasions. I'd say that the final comment I quote from -- based on everything I quote before it -- is a clear example of at least 5 Styles of Distorted Thinking, those being Polarized Thinking, Shoulds, Emotional Reasoning -- and, most importantly -- Global Labeling and Being Right.
I know that you didn't ask to be psychoanalyzed, Casp. It was just the only way that I could make sense of this comment thread.
Re: Deconstructioning this threadcaspian_xMay 29 2008, 05:54:15 UTC
A fair point. I did dismiss the challenge because it doesn't really address my point. I'm sure you can find examples of occasional pork barrel or other unnecessary spending by normally staunchly fiscal conservatives. That doesn't prove anything because I am fully admitting that Republicans fail to uphold fiscal conservatism to the standard they should.
My point is that as far as the political ideologies are concerned - conservative versus liberal - it's the conservatives that disapprove of such spending while the liberals whole basis of existence is tax, spend, repeat.
I threw the parties back in at the end because Republicans align more with conservatism and Democrats align more with liberalism, obviously. So while it may be true that Republicans can be shown to be spendy from time to time - it's when they are betraying the ideology of their base, as opposed to Democrats who are fulfilling it.
That's the difference, and simply shouting back "Republicans are spendy too!" doesn't address that difference.
K-SUI -- ASSERTION: "Bridge to Nowhere = height of pork barrel spending = project of Ted Stevens, R-AK"
CASP -- RESPONSE: "And he was and is mercilessly ridiculed by fiscal conservatives." ASSERTION: "Like I said, pork barrel spending is what happens when Republicans go bad, as opposed to what happens when Democrats follow their ideology."
K-SUI -- CHALLENGE & ASSERTION SHOWDOWN: "Fine -- name a fiscal conservative in Congress and I guarantee I can find some ridiculous project they funded. I know you enjoy the black-and-white of it all, but honestly, it's not that simple. All the federal politicians do it -- it is what gets them re-elected or what they think gets them re-elected anyway."
CASP -- SIDE-STEP OF CHALLENGE BY RECLASSIFYING PREVIOUSLY NAMED POLITICAL PARTIES WITH "LIB" AND "CON" FOLLOWED BY RE-INTRODUCTION OF "DEM" IN RE-ASSERTION OF PREVIOUS POINT: "Fine, replace Dem with lib and Pub with con. The ideology of spendiness is the left. Republicans may not adhere to fiscal conservatism as much as they should (which is why I identify with conservative ideology over the Republican party) but the Dems start from an ideology of spendiness."
RESK'S ANALYSIS: It's the final comment that had me scratching my head until a friend reminded me about Distorted Thinking. We've all engaged in it. Myself on MANY occasions. I'd say that the final comment I quote from -- based on everything I quote before it -- is a clear example of at least 5 Styles of Distorted Thinking, those being Polarized Thinking, Shoulds, Emotional Reasoning -- and, most importantly -- Global Labeling and Being Right.
I know that you didn't ask to be psychoanalyzed, Casp. It was just the only way that I could make sense of this comment thread.
Reply
My point is that as far as the political ideologies are concerned - conservative versus liberal - it's the conservatives that disapprove of such spending while the liberals whole basis of existence is tax, spend, repeat.
I threw the parties back in at the end because Republicans align more with conservatism and Democrats align more with liberalism, obviously. So while it may be true that Republicans can be shown to be spendy from time to time - it's when they are betraying the ideology of their base, as opposed to Democrats who are fulfilling it.
That's the difference, and simply shouting back "Republicans are spendy too!" doesn't address that difference.
Reply
Leave a comment