Low IQ behind some conservative beliefs

FMF kind of said this already, but judging an idea based on the person or people that hold it is just plain daft. It's really a form of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. Ideas need to be judged on their merit and whether and even assuming this study is valid, the title of this thread is a classic example of confusing correlation with causation.

Originally posted by TerrierJack
I'm not saying that all Republicans are racists and I'm not saying that all racists are stupid. ?]

How hard was this to type? Did your fingers tremble and tears come to your eyes? 😛

Originally posted by FMF
whodey constantly creates a straw man version of what people he disagrees with believe and advocate. .

I blame my low IQ level for being a racist conservative. You must forgive me for not being part of the enlightened Obama master race. :'(

Originally posted by whodey
I blame my low IQ level for being a racist conservative. You must forgive me for not being part of the enlightened Obama master race. :'(

Creating and attacking straw men in debates, as you so often do, isn't a conservative v liberal thing. People all along the political spectrum, and all parts of the public domain, use it as a technique to manipulate discussions.

Originally posted by FMF
Creating and attacking straw men in debates, as you so often do, isn't a conservative v liberal thing. People all along the political spectrum, and all parts of the public domain, use it as a technique to manipulate discussions.

you would know !

Originally posted by utherpendragon
you would know !

Actually, we all use straw men from time to time. All of us. But I don't think I use them all that often. Nothing like whodey, for example, who often uses whole groups of them, changing the one he is referring to from post to post, abandoning them without notice, introducing new ones. I think when I was more active on this forum I was a robust but generally fair debater who perhaps spent a little bit too much time cuffing the relative weaklings like whodey and yourself around the rhetorical chops and leaving you listing - often silently - in the water, or turning you into feetless chickens [as you were already headless when you laid yourself down on my chopping board]. But using straw men [or other logical fallacies] was never a big feature of my armoury. Maybe you see it differently. Fair enough.

Originally posted by whodey
I guess this explains why all Republicans and conservatives are racists. They just can't stand that a black man made it into the White House and now they wish to kick him out just because he is black.

Disgusting!!

Well, according to the article, it isn't because they're racist. It's because they're dumb.

Originally posted by sh76
FMF kind of said this already, but judging an idea based on the person or people that hold it is just plain daft. It's really a form of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. Ideas need to be judged on their merit and whether and even assuming this study is valid, the title of this thread is a classic example of confusing correlation with causation.

It's true. Hitler passed laws against jaywalking. Does that make jaywalking laws inherently fascist?

Originally posted by utherpendragon
Thank you for your intelligent and oh so eloquent response. I especially loved the part about "coded attacks". 🙄
Seeing that you like answering for terrier jack how about listing the GOP racist that I asked for.

You think dogwhistling politics is conjured up from nothing? Former conservative Kevin Phillips says otherwise about the "southern strategy" he and others cooked up to help Nixon win in 1968, which was basically to play on white racism to draw white southern voters to the GOP. And it worked.

But like left activists learned to talk about imperialism without using the word imperialism, there are plenty of substitute words for "nigger." You can talk quotas, "reverse racism," or you can plaster the airwaves with a scary black face of someone released by a governor on furlough. And you can't be called on it because after all, what did you say that was racist? His face was used because he committed a crime, not because he was a scary looking black guy.

I fault the left as well for PC obsession with terms. When racism is defined by terminology, then you can pretty much advance any racist concept as long as you don't use the wrong words.

Originally posted by TerrierJack
The Republican Party is for all intents and purposes a Southern regional Party. The Party began life in the 1850's as a Midwest Liberal Party. Why the change? Well, I'm someone who was there when the change occurred and I can tell you. When I grew up there was only one Party in the South and that was the Democratic Party (my Parents told me, "I don't car ...[text shortened]... ow. Every day Lincoln spins in his grave and LBJ and Harry Truman sleep soundly.

LbJ proposed the '64 civil rights act, but similar legislation was defeated in the years just prior by solid Democratic opposition, and the '64 bill got greater support from Republicans than among Democrats.

Originally posted by normbenign
LbJ proposed the '64 civil rights act, but similar legislation was defeated in the years just prior by solid Democratic opposition, and the '64 bill got greater support from Republicans than among Democrats.

I've heard this claim, but nobody has ever sourced me. Do you have a link?

Originally posted by whodey
How hard was this to type? Did your fingers tremble and tears come to your eyes? 😛

It is easy to type the truth but I'm sure you wouldn't know that.

Originally posted by normbenign
LbJ proposed the '64 civil rights act, but similar legislation was defeated in the years just prior by solid Democratic opposition, and the '64 bill got greater support from Republicans than among Democrats.

I sometimes wonder how you breathe. Did you understand what I said? I never said there was anything wrong with Eisenhower and I never approved of Byrd's filibuster. Republicans were a solid support for that act in '64 (and none of those politicians would be allowed in the room at a modern Republican convention because at least half of them were solidly Liberal.)

Please name one Liberal Republican now.

Originally posted by normbenign
LbJ proposed the '64 civil rights act, but similar legislation was defeated in the years just prior by solid Democratic opposition, and the '64 bill got greater support from Republicans than among Democrats.

Okay, see, Wikipedia says otherwise. Now, I know Wikipedia can be questionable, but I keep hearing this urban legend about the majority of CRA votes coming from Republicans. It's become gospel. Only, I don't think it's true.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act

The two numbers in each line of this list refer to the number of representatives voting in favor and against the act, respectively.

Senate: 77–19

Democrats: 47–17 (73%-27😵
Republicans: 30–2 (94%-6😵

House: 333–85

Democrats: 221–61 (78%-22😵
Republicans: 112–24 (82%-18😵

Conference Report:

Senate: 79–18

Democrats: 49–17 (four Southern Democrats voted in favor: Albert Gore, Sr., Ross Bass, George Smathers and Ralph Yarborough).
Republicans: 30–1 (the lone nay was Strom Thurmond; John Tower who did not vote was paired as a nay vote with Eugene McCarthy who would have voted in favor.)

House: 328–74

Democrats: 217–54
Republicans: 111–20

Oops. Sorry. That was the Voting Rights Act. Here are the Wiki numbers for the Civil Rights Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1964

Vote totals

Totals are in "Yea-Nay" format:

The original House version: 290-130 (69%–31😵.
Cloture in the Senate: 71-29 (71%–29😵.
The Senate version: 73-27 (73%–27😵.
The Senate version, as voted on by the House: 289-126 (70%–30😵.

[edit] By party

The original House version:[13]

Democratic Party: 152-96 (61%-39😵
Republican Party: 138-34 (80%-20😵

Cloture in the Senate:[14]

Democratic Party: 44-23 (66%–34😵
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18😵

The Senate version:[13]

Democratic Party: 46-21 (69%–31😵
Republican Party: 27-6 (82%–18😵

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[13]

Democratic Party: 153-91 (63%–37😵
Republican Party: 136-35 (80%–20😵