My POV is, If you're always blaming someone for everybody elses mistakes or choices, you're going to be miserable! It's when you start taking your own life into your own hands & start worrying about what you do instead of what everyone else is doing, is when you might start being happy.

An accurate sense of reality does make for good mental health, wot?

I am talking about non-Muslims treatment in Islamic dominated countries. Something you obviously don't care about or even know about it seems, and all you can do in response is try to attack me personally. Lame.
Along with your fellow 'liberal' who criticises my spelling, instead of discussing the issue I brought up.
Lame as well.

The comments are reduced to calling conservatives stupid, greedy, and corrupt. Of course, there are many who are so, but any group has its share of bad eggs.

We can't have an adequate discussion in this short form, but I'll try to make one point.

To say that a conservative doesn't care about inequality is not the same as saying that one allows for a measure of inequality. The "rich" and everyone else should give money and time to help the needy, but it makes no sense that the government should coerce charity, because it is no longer charity at that point.

Start worrying more about how to solve the problems instead of blaming everyone else for them.

Not reality? Guess that's why you never see any small business sole proprietorships anywhere. You never get an ideal situation, but that doesn't mean the system can't work in spite of the big guys; it's called finding the niche, and people do it all the time.

True that not all liberals are socialists, but pretty close. ;o)

@Polx:

"The media is almost completely right-centrist."

If you believe that, it must mean that in the left/right continuum you're as far left as they get. From your vantage point, everybody is a right-winger.

Disclaimer: I could definitely be called liberal. In fact more liberal than most.

What you seem to be talking about is an ideal free market society, not reality. The reality is that rich people get richer because they use their wealth to put up roadblocks for competitors, making it so the little guy never gets a chance. This is why we have things like monopoly law. Or they use lobbying efforts (money) to pass laws in their favor.

For example, take a corporation like Walmart. They started out like a nice, family run business that succeeded on their merits, but have now grown into a behemoth that basically runs on slave labor. There is no "trickle down effect" there. And yes, I'm old enough to remember Reagan, the one all conservatives bring out when they need a good example.

Not all liberals are socialists.

Where exactly are these massive media empires that are slavishly devoted to the left?

There aren’t any.

The media is almost completely right-centrist.

With the Fox network bringing up the loony right.

The media is mostly fair and with a slight bias in favour of the right.

What I think you ar4e complaining about is that the Right Wing Froot Loops who run the US are such a shabby shower of theives and stand over men that they keep gettign caught out.

Just coz your guys in the White house are backwards doesn’t make the media wrong.

Secondly

Steohawk.

Did you have to wipe the foam from your lip[s after typing that BIZARRE definition of Socialism?

The last time I read anything like that it was from Sen McCarthy.

really, get a grip.

The conservative also sees rightly that many resource limitations either do not exist or are artificially imposed. Wealth, for instance, is not a finite thing that must be divvied up equally to be fair; in a proper market-based system it's something that can be grown and shared with all. Some do end up with more, but most often it's those who work harder or risk more. When the government stays out of the way, they tend to put the money they earn back into the market by expanding businesses, creating jobs, growing markets, etc... They end up earning more and become wealthier still, but others profit right along with them. It's called "trickle-down economics" and was championed by a guy named Ronald Reagan. Too bad most of you here weren't born in time to know more of him.

A couple of my favorite quotes; can you guess who said them?
"Conservatism works every time it is tried and liberalism has failed in every case it is applied."
"The only reason the political left is called that is because it sounds better than the political wrong."

Doesn't that basically say 'Conservatives are happy becasue they don't think about inequality' ?
I don't understand why liberals would disagree with that finding.

Although, now that I look at the wording, it doesn't kind of sound like it's trying to say liberals lack something that they shouldn't (which is, an ability to convince themselves to not care about inequality). I wonder, is it fair to say they *lack* the ability just because they don't *use* it?

hmmm....

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

What was that about conservatives not liking their fellow man again?

Governments and tax payers should fund all research to ensure it is independent from the market, peer reviewed and reliable.

"It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides."

You're right about being able to spot the liberals/conservatives in this thread. The liberals are falling all over themselves to persecute conservatives, and the conservatives are falling back to their automatic persecution complex.

It's a political perpetual motion machine; the bottom line is that people love to feel outraged, and they'll do anything to feel that way.

I suspect the reason this "research" was done was to counteract actual research that has shown time and time again that conservatives are the angry, insecure and easily offended ones among us.

CONSERVATISM: An ideology which seeks to preserve or return to the status quo. The actual goals of conservatives can differ greatly depending upon the country they represent and the current time period.

LIBERALISM: An ideology which seeks to optimize freedom. Classical liberals, who support capitalism, were responsible for the American Revolution. However, social liberals, who support socialism, have overshadowed classical liberals in the US since the Great Depression.

CAPITALISM: A system in which people have the freedom to work, start a business, invest money, give to charity, hoard their money, etc. Some welfare can be offered to people who are unable to work. Some restrictions can be placed on the economy in order to ensure increased freedom, such as anti-trust laws and fair use laws.

SOCIALISM: A system in which wealth is plundered via progressive taxation. The revenue goes mostly into the hands of the politicians, while some is diverted to the poor in order to ensure the reelection of those politicians. Meanwhile, progressive taxation keeps small businesses from getting bigger, thereby ensuring that only a handful of big businesses dominate the market. As a result, less jobs are available, which forces more people to get welfare, which requires more taxation. Meanwhile, greedy conglomerates aren't afraid of competition from new businesses, which allows them to raise their prices beyond reason. This raises the cost of living, which in turn forces even more people to get welfare, which requires even more taxation.

That said, I disagree with those conservatives and libertarians who absolutely oppose any welfare, anti-trust laws, fair use laws, etc. Economic freedom does require some activity on part of the government. However, I don't like the way this article confuses capitalism with an uncaring attitude towards the poor. I, for one, condemn rich people who refuse to give to charity.

I would probably be a "liberal" and I'm not all that happy. But I think I'd be even unhappier if I tried to force myself into a conservative way of thinking. It would be like trying to "un-know" things or turn off your empathy. On the upside, I guess that means I'm not a psychopath. On the downside, it means that ignorance, intolerance, and people who walk around with their brains turned off will continue to piss me off.

How do you think conservatives feel when they read EVERY NEWS NETWORK OUT THERE - you're just used to all your news aligning with your political stances, that when one differs from yours, you cry BIAS!

Wake up.

I also find it very lame and sad to criticise ones spelling and/or grammar as argument against what they said. SMAK off topic is lame too.

Making sense is another key thing you should work on. Seriously. Read what you wrote aloud.

Oh, and clearly Stanhope is responsible for the political divide in this country.