POLL: Liberals Read More Books Than Conservatives
POLL: Liberals Read More Books Than Conservatives
A new AP-Ipsos poll finds that liberals read more books than conservatives. Some highlights from the poll:
– 34 percent of conservatives have not read a book within the past year, compared with 22 percent of liberals and moderates.
– Among those who had read at least one book, conservatives “typically read eight” books in the past year. Liberals read nine, moderates five.
– “By slightly wider margins, Democrats tended to read more books than Republicans and independents. There were no differences by political party in the percentage of those who said they had not read at least one book.”
Pat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers, attempted to explain the results: “The Karl Roves of the world have built a generation that just wants a couple slogans: ‘No, don’t raise my taxes, no new taxes. It’s pretty hard to write a book saying, ‘No new taxes, no new taxes, no new taxes’ on every page.”
Responding to the poll, White House spokesman Tony Fratto attacked liberals for being too “locquacious”:
Obfuscation usually requires a lot more words than if you simply focus on fundamental principles, so I’m not at all surprised by the loquaciousness of liberals.
A recent Pew Research Study survey also found that viewers of the conservative Fox News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international affairs.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Ya and the bush is a prime example.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:08 pmAmong those who had read at least one book, conservatives “typically read eight†books in the past year. Liberals read nine, moderates five.
so it’s the moderates who have been screwing things up. stupid moderates, they’ve been falling for the monosyllabic, monolithic conservative arguments, and now we know why.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:10 pmLiberals read more. Well duh. I’ve could have told you that.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:11 pm“A recent Pew Research Study survey also found that viewers of the conservative Fox News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international affairs.” – Mission Accomplished.
ug
August 21st, 2007 at 4:11 pmI’ve read 96 books this year. That makes me a SUPER LIBERAL!!
I especially like to read every single “Bush-bashing” book that comes out, checked out at my local library. I like to think of it as my own little civil disobedience.
Tony Fratto should know about obfuscation.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pmI would like to see what KINDS of books conservatives read as opposed to liberals.. That would be an interesting poll. By using this picture it appears conservatives enjoy reading books like “My Pet Goat”…
August 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pmAgreed JG, the question is who is reading what, more then how many books a person reads.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:15 pmI’d say the most significant finding highlighted by this post doesn’t involve separating conservatives from liberals, but rather involves the separation of both from the dimwitted:
Among those who had read at least one book, conservatives “typically read eight†books in the past year. Liberals read nine, moderates five.
A lot of swing voters are illiterate; they’re moderate because they aren’t smart enough to form a real opinion.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:15 pmFolks we know that there is only one good book worth reading!
The Holy Bible Version 2.3, edited by Dick Cheney.
KILL THE GAYS!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:15 pmit would be even more interesting to know what types of books are read by each group
August 21st, 2007 at 4:16 pmLiberals Read More Books Than Conservatives…
——————————————————————–
Perhaps.
What really matters is the kinds of books.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:18 pmNow I see. Conservatives hate the Constitution, in part, because they don’t feel like reading it.
Never despair, Conservites. You can still turn in your “Constitution Worksheet” for letter grade reduced every 10 years that you haven’t turned it in.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:19 pmI know a Republican who reads a lot of books. It is what he chooses to read that bothers me. Like Chrichton’s propaganda screed State of Fear, and Friedman’s simplistic The World is Flat, and now some other book about how the Palestinians have no legitimate claims in the Middle East.
And lots of Republicans read the ultra-rightwing op-ed pages of the Wall Street Journal.
But we know one thing for sure: Bush doesn’t read books, no matter what Karl Rove says.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:20 pmTony Fratto attacks liberals for being too wordy in a sentence using the words ‘obfuscation’ and ‘loquaciousness.’
Irony.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:20 pmPerhaps.
What really matters is the kinds of books.
Comment by Ringo
Ann Coulter doesn’t count.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:21 pm“The Little Engine That Could” does not count as a ‘book,’ conservatives. I demand a recount.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:21 pmWhat really matters is the kinds of books.
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
“A recent Pew Research Study survey also found that viewers of the conservative Fox News channel had the lowest knowledge of national and international affairs.”
It certainly does matter. And, it appears that the conservatives’ book aren’t getting the job done.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:22 pmYes, but conservatives color more of the pictures.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:24 pmI just started this book: The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the West
http://www.amazon.com/Suicide-Reason-Radical-Islams-Threat/dp/046500203X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727630&sr=8-1
Just finished this one: The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America
http://www.amazon.com/Long-March-Cultural-Revolution-Changed/dp/1893554309/ref=sr_1_1/102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727683&sr=1-1
And I’m mid-way through this: Reflections on a Ravaged Century
August 21st, 2007 at 4:24 pmhttp://www.amazon.com/Reflections-Ravaged-Century-Robert-Conquest/dp/0393320863/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727831&sr=1-2
It should be ‘loquacity’.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:24 pmWhat really matters is the kinds of books.
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
The ones w/ pages that fold out don’t count.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:25 pmAnn Coulter doesn’t count.
Comment by bobwurst
—————————————–
Nor does Al Franken.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:25 pmAnd how has that reading informed your beliefs and attitudes Ringo?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:26 pmBoy this fu*king troll doesn’t just drink the kool-aid, he chugs it, then bathes in it.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:28 pmAnn Coulter’s books are completely unreadable.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:28 pmAnd how has that reading informed your beliefs and attitudes Ringo?
Comment by bobwurst
——————————————–
Well, when I was young I was a Democrat and pretty far to the Left.
I’m not today.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:29 pmSo, the dumb fu*king troll admits that he has gotten dumber from reading those books.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:32 pm“I was in Crawford and I said I was looking for a book to read and Laura said you oughtta try Camus, I also read three Shakespeares.”- George W. Bush
Gee, Bush is well read. I’ve only heard of one Shakespeare. That would be William. Who are these other two Shakespeares Bush has been reading, maybe William’s redneck cousins Bubba Shakespeare and Billy Bob Shakespeare?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:32 pm#
Ann Coulter’s books are completely unreadable.
Comment by Kiki — August 21, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
I tired once and had to quit.
Footnote after footnote, that referenced another footnote, that referenced another footnote. Gibberish, sadly enough.
Also read Limbaugh’s books, Hannity’s, O’Reilly’s (as bad as Coulter’s), Mona Charen, Malkin, Savage/Weiner…
I gave them their due. They actually a real point to make, about 10% of the time. Most of it was bad, bad, BAD writing.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:32 pmrepublicans tend to read Mein Kanff or if thats a little hard then My Pet Goat
August 21st, 2007 at 4:32 pmAnn Coulter’s “books” are just toilet paper with letters printed on it.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:32 pmBy the way, I’ve read more books than all of you (conservatives or liberals) in the past year.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
Coloring books and “Barnyard Beauties” don’t count…
August 21st, 2007 at 4:33 pmrepublicans never get past Ladybird book 3
August 21st, 2007 at 4:33 pmI really liked “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America” by Chris Hedges. My pastor recommended it.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:34 pmBesides, we all know that Bush more recently read Albert Camus’ The Stranger.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Aw, man, he’s switching over to stand-up!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:35 pm#27, I doubt that. I, like Bill Clinton, average 5-7 books a week.
They had to tell Bush how to pronounce “Camus’”….”ok, George, it’s like, the cow says MOO.”
August 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pmrepublicans tend to read Mein Kanff….
Comment by Tobey Tall
—————————————————–
It’s spelled Mein Kampf, and I did read it….but I read it back when I was a Lefty.
Haven’t read My Pet Goat, do you recommend it?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pmI think what they should break down how many parents vs. non-parents read how many books because I know I’ve started alot of books now that i’m a parent and never get to finish them or will take me months little by little to finish when I finally get time.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pmWow! You get a gold star on the bulletin board and membership in the Principal’s Reading Club! Good work, Ringo!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:37 pmActually, books by Ann Coulter and Al Franken DO count as do Harry Potter books. In my opinion, there is a lot better advice and many more lessons for growing minds in the Potter series than in O’Reilly’s advice book for children. But, there is no equivalence between Coulter and Franken – Franken is extremely careful in his sources, endnotes and footnotes. Coulter is anything but careful. Her endnotes are filled with distortions of material. How do I know this? Franken documented much of it in his last book.
And, Makarios, how do you know you’ve read more books than all of us?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:38 pmBy the way, I’ve read more books than all of you (conservatives or liberals) in the past year.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
I’m curious. How many?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:39 pmFukc you, TP!
Using the picture from 9-11 for this thread shows that you have no class.
Besides, we all know that Bush more recently read Albert Camus’ The Stranger.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Bahaha GOOD GOING TP!!
One – Bush can’t understand an audio-book.
Two – Bush SAT THERE crapping his pants because he’s the worst president.
EVER EVER EVER EVER!!
And his trolls are even stupider!
Caption:
“Wish I wasn’t so damn high on coke right now”
August 21st, 2007 at 4:39 pmWow! Just….WOW!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:39 pmOne book you may like to read is the Myth of a Christian Nation by Greg Boyd. He is a pastor that will be on CNN tonight talking about religion and politics and how they don’t mesh. Having a christian nation is like having a christian bicycle it just doesn’t work that way.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:39 pmRingo, if you really did read Mein Kampf, why have you argued that Hitler wasn’t a christian?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:40 pmHaven’t read My Pet Goat, do you recommend it?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:37 pm
Bush probably would, he did stay to finish the book despite an airplane hitting the WTC.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:40 pmBush does not look concerned about planes flying into WTC towers in that pic, in fact he has a faint smile, so did he know about attack in advance?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:40 pmWow! You get a gold star on the bulletin board and membership in the Principal’s Reading Club! Good work, Ringo!
Comment by Marcus Aurelius
————————————————–
Gee thanks.
The moonbats here at TP should read some books by Robert Conquest, he’s kind of like the anti-Chomsky.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:40 pmRepublicans can READ??
August 21st, 2007 at 4:41 pmRead any Iambic Pentameter lately?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:41 pmHustler Magazine isn’t a book Ringo.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:42 pmPersonally, I eschew obfuscation, in as loquacious a manner as conceivable.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:42 pmRingo used to be a liberal, until his liberal girlfriend dumped him. Now he hates liberals.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:43 pmThat must be how lefties get brainwashed.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:44 pmChad, you have to wait until they go to bed or until they can entertain themselves for a long period of time. And either way, the second you get interested in a book, here they come. My teenagers still do it.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:45 pmmarkarios:”Using the picture from 9-11 for this thread shows that you have no class.
Besides, we all know that Bush more recently read Albert Camus’ The Stranger.”
No, using that picture shows that thinking people have not forgotten that in the midst of our worst terrorist attack, Bush was still more interested in a photo op than leadership. We haven’t forgotten that Bush sat there like a stone when he should have been mobilized into action.
And, how exactly do “we all know” that Bush reads Camus? After all, this is how he explained the fact that he had been reading work by Shakespeare: “I’ve read three shakespeares…” Nobody who really reads Shakespeare refers to his work as “shakespeares.”
August 21st, 2007 at 4:45 pmThe moonbats here at TP should read some books by Robert Conquest, he’s kind of like the anti-Chomsky.
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
I think the lesson here is for people to read books from both sides the political spectrum to have a proper perspective of all views. Robert Conquest may be interesting I am actually a Russian History major and I havent’ had a chance to brush up on the current state of the country.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:45 pmLos Angeles become the 82nd city in the nation to draft a resolution to impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
WOW why has the Murdering dictator not been impeached 82 cities WOW
August 21st, 2007 at 4:45 pmBesides, we all know that Bush more recently read Albert Camus’ The Stranger.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
I “know” no such thing. I know he claimed Camus was on his reading list. I never saw him reading it, and I’ve never heard him refer to it again.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:46 pmRepublicans can READ??
Comment by Snidely Whiplash — August 21, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
Yes, some can.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:46 pmDoes Reader’s Digest have condensed versions of this author?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:46 pmSo, the dumb fu*king troll admits that he has gotten dumber from reading those books.
Comment by Spudge_Boy — August 21, 2007 @ 4:32 pm
Settle down fudge-packer….this one for you……and your boy friend.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ypa75axdK6o
August 21st, 2007 at 4:47 pmskim
August 21st, 2007 at 4:47 pmConservatives color more books than Liberals. They’ve got them beat on that point, especially El Chimpo Grande.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:47 pmRobert Conquest…. has he got a brother Norman?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:48 pmI just started this book: The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the West
http://www.amazon.com/ Suicide-Reason-Radical-Islams-Threat/ dp/ 046500203X/ ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/ 102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727630&sr=8-1
Just finished this one: The Long March: How the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s Changed America
http://www.amazon.com/ Long-March-Cultural-Revolution-Changed/ dp/ 1893554309/ ref=sr_1_1/ 102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727683&sr=1-1
And I’m mid-way through this: Reflections on a Ravaged Century
http://www.amazon.com/ Reflections-Ravaged-Century-Robert-Conquest/ dp/ 0393320863/ ref=pd_bbs_sr_2/ 102-5992094-6230547?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187727831&sr=1-2
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
That must be how lefties get brainwashed.
Comment by m12 — August 21, 2007 @ 4:44 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 4:49 pmLooks like this is how wingtards get brainwashed ;P
I have a shirt that has a grease stain on it from cooking. It has already been washed and the stain did not come out any suggestions?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:49 pmI read ‘Go Dog Go’ three times last night and ‘Hop on Pop’ twice…..to my 27 month old daughter.
Does that count?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:49 pmChad, you have to wait until they go to bed or until they can entertain themselves for a long period of time. And either way, the second you get interested in a book, here they come. My teenagers still do it.
Comment by Kiki — August 21, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
Yeah, I should probably be more deligent by the time they go to bed sitting on the couch is pretty inviting. But I do have to say we have done a good job of instilling a love of reading in my daughter as we will grap a book and sit down and page through it or come get me and she is only 14 months. But I hope we will grow up to read everything and then make up her own ideas and learn to criticize ideas and not people. Seems our society is lacking that skill now a days.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:51 pmBoosh read Camus, but the tape was in French and he didn’t understand a single syllable.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:51 pmI read ‘Go Dog Go’ three times last night and ‘Hop on Pop’ twice…..to my 27 month old daughter.
Does that count?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 4:52 pmSure I have Curious George and a bunch of Sandra Boyton books stuck in my head. I can probably recite my daughters books line for line.
Apparently, it does.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:52 pmI don’t get it, I’m being polite today to Ringo and my posts are disappearing, I guess I’ll go back to insulting his wife.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:53 pmCamus’ The Stranger is a stupid, pointless book, don’t waste your time.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:53 pmAnother gold star!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:53 pmI read ‘Go Dog Go’ three times last night and ‘Hop on Pop’ twice…..to my 27 month old daughter.
Does that count?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pmIf it does I’ve read millions of books. 3 books before each nap and bed time so 9 books a day since she was 4 months old equals 3285 books besides my own books. I rule!!!!!
Caption:
(thought balloon)
“I want to ride my bicycle,
August 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pmI want to ride my bike,
I want to ride my bicycle,
I want to ride it where I like…..”
pop up books don’t count. Neither do scratch and sniff books
August 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pmCaption:
Wow, this is really getting serious.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pmI had no idea that they were going to implement ‘our pearl harbor event’ so soon.
I’ve got to get dickey on the horn.
Less-see . . . what’s that number again ?
Oh wait, he’ll be in ‘the bunker’, I almost forgot.
T-Blossom ! Get me dickey’s number in the bunker !
Tell you what, Ringo: you read some Chomsky and I’ll pick up some Conquest. You’ll get something you rarely see – a true progressive’s view. I’ll get something I see a lot of already – corporatist propaganda.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pmAll thar readin’ and not a lick of sense.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pmMaybe Ringo should read:
How to answer questions instead of chickening out when asked about Iran/Israel same right to have nukes
August 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pmI don’t get it, I’m being polite today to Ringo and my posts are disappearing, I guess I’ll go back to insulting his wife.
Comment by bobwurst
——————————————
Please don’t insult my wife again, it’s rude.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pmI am astounded by this poll.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:55 pmRepublicans can read??
I know I said I read 10 books this week, no one needs to know they were books of stamps.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:56 pmDo they?
Malarkios! Funny!
August 21st, 2007 at 4:57 pmHow to answer questions instead of chickening out when asked about Iran/Israel same right to have nukes
Comment by Juan C
——————————————–
Israel needs nukes to protect itself.
Iran wants nukes to dominate the middle-east and blackmail the West.
How’s that?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:58 pmCaption:
“A goat?
August 21st, 2007 at 4:58 pmFor a pet?
Do I have to feed it everyday?”
Bush reportedly doesn’t even read his Presidential Daily Briefings. He has them condensed down to one page and that one page is read to him by a reader.
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=5078
August 21st, 2007 at 4:58 pmCaption: “Why did they use such big words in ‘My Pet Goat’?”
August 21st, 2007 at 4:59 pmI have a shirt that has a grease stain on it from cooking. It has already been washed and the stain did not come out any suggestions?
Comment by Marcus Aurelius — August 21, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
Soak it in a 12% solution of sulfuric acid for 37 minutes – the grease will come to the top and then can be recovered.
August 21st, 2007 at 4:59 pmTell you what, Ringo: you read some Chomsky and I’ll pick up some Conquest.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper
The thing is that in order to understand Chomsky you have to have common sense, instead of “John Wayne´s” sense.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:00 pmHow’s that?
Comment by Ringo
Laughable, but at least thats an answer.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:01 pmIran wants nukes to dominate the middle-east and blackmail the West.
How’s that?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Where did you get this information from?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:02 pmI am smart, S-M-R-T!
August 21st, 2007 at 5:03 pmIsrael needs nukes to protect itself.
Iran wants nukes to dominate the middle-east and blackmail the West.
How’s that?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
That makes no sense if they use the nuke anywhere in the middle ease the fallout would still kill people through out the middle east and in Israel itself. I don’t believe any country in the middle east needs to have nukes.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:03 pmCaption: I wonder if this book contains a definition of “sovereign.” Phew, I really blew THAT ONE. I am sooo stupid!
August 21st, 2007 at 5:04 pmCaption:
(I’m Prezzzidunt, Pressdint, Perezedent, planes, huh?, Pressdent, I’ll decide later)
August 21st, 2007 at 5:04 pmI don’t believe any country in the middle east needs to have nukes.
Comment by chad
You can change that to ANY COUNTRY.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:04 pmI heard a very recent KKKarl Rove interview and he was talking about how he and ‘W’ were having a friendly competition of who could read the most books. In that interview, to the best of my recollection, he said that ‘W’ had read over 90 books in a year. Karl, by the way, ‘won’ with over 100 books.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:05 pmI read a lot.
I read nowhere near 90 books a year.
I don’t buy it. And that guy who said he read more books than anyone else in the world…do you read more than ‘W’?
Fratto: Obfuscation usually requires a lot more words than if you simply focus on fundamental principles
What the poll actually said: 34 percent of conservatives have not read a book within the past year
Not more words, NO words. Geeze, Fratto is another conservative who can’t read.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:07 pm.
Notice no little American Flag lapel pin.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:10 pmI don’t believe any country in the middle east needs to have nukes.
Comment by chad
You can change that to ANY COUNTRY.
Comment by Juan C — August 21, 2007 @ 5:04 pm
Agreed, but that would be an entirely seperate agruement. For Israel to have nukes with its intended and unintended targets so close it makes even less sense. I agree the U.S. should not have nukes as it should be seen as a violation of the Geneva Convention as the indiscriminate killing of civilians and non-combantants.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pmWhen you spend all your time in some government line I guess you have time to read books.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:11 pmEverything that comes from these people are lies.
Remember Bush’s most memorable moment as president was “catching that 7 pound perch on the ranch” when the world’s record for perch is 4.5 pounds.
Republicans feel the need to lie and exaggerate about everything. It is the college frat boy mentality of never being wrong and never admitting that somebody did something bigger or better.
It is a mental condition they have.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:13 pmRingo, It’s possible that the Iranians are going the same path as North Korea. you know them, they’re the one’s that did acquire nukes while GW kept hunting for the new AQ in Iraq.
North Korea believes that by getting nukes they will be in a better negotiating stance with the US. It also believes there will be less of an invasion threat because of their own nukes.
I may be wrong and I don’t care to see Iran gaining nukes but I’m not so quick to jump behind these a$$hats and fly off the handle at yet another country.
It’s time for GWB to hand over the keys.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:13 pmThe stupid fu*king troll knows from personal experience.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:14 pmWhen you spend all your time in some government line I guess you have time to read books.
Comment by Frank J — August 21, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 5:14 pmWhich government line is that?
Opposite Day Courtesy the Huffington Post
Just so you know, the reason HuffPo and many other liberals think we conservatives turned against McCain is because he continues to support the war.
Other conclusions Arianna Huffington has reached:
* Why do Americans hate the French? Despite how courageous the French are and their immaculate hygiene, Americans could never get over how bad their wine is.
* Americans dislike of illegal immigration from Mexico stems from their hatred of Mexican food.
* Why do many Americans have problems with Muslims? They’re too nice to the Jews.
* Folks biggest problem with Hillary: She’s not shrill enough and lacks political ambition.
* Reason Michael Vick is currently being lambasted in the news: Americans hate football.
* Up is down. Black is white.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:15 pmso bush read 90 books in a year. I didn’t know there were that many Nancy Drew mysteries.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:16 pmMostlly welfare and social security, sometimes food stamps.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:16 pmIt doesn’t make sense to me when Conservative books kick the tar out of liberal books. Wait! Do you think that liberals are reading Coulter’s, Sean’s, O’Reilly’s, Ingraham’s, Savage’s, and Rush’s books?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:17 pmRingo
You read stuff like that and it will make your brain rot out. Plus, just because its in print doesn’t make it true.
Makarios
I read a book at week as a minimum, sometimes going so far as to read a book a day if I have time.
This is not due to some special virtue, I just enjoy reading and playing computer games more then I enjoy TV.
Plus my job entails one hell of a lot of reading.
So I somehow doubt that you read more then me, or anybody else here.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:17 pmUh-huh…Sure….And, of course, the fact that Pat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers, is a long-time liberal Democratic member of the House of Representatives and was nearly a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination for president in 1988 has absolutely notthing to do with the findings of this “poll.” Right…No bias there….Sure…Whatever you say…
August 21st, 2007 at 5:18 pmComment by Frank J — August 21, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 5:19 pmTry to keep your illogical rants on the right thread there is one for huffington post and one on McCain this one happens to be about READING>
In that photo, Bush looks like the kid in Junior High who sat at the back of the class and preferred spending his time telling jokes, passing notes, or throwing spit wads.
Teacher: George, can you give us the answer?
George: Hunh?
Teacher: Not paying attention again, George?
George: Hunh?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:20 pmIt is not about reading. It is about liberal illogic..Huffington Post yet another example.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:20 pmComment by michael — August 21, 2007 @ 5:17 pm
not coulter’s
August 21st, 2007 at 5:20 pmmichael
It more has to do with the fact that we liberals don’t rely on other people to do their thinking for us. We get a wide range of books which, *gasp* aren’t all political. As opposed to Conservatives, who really go for the Oprah Book Club model.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:21 pmthe “troll droppings” here support the findings of the poll.
eh?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:21 pm“you should’a seen Bush, the way he was tearing through those Dick and Jane books, and the pop ups? The pop ups LOOKOUT!!!!
*snarkysnark mcsnarklepuss*
August 21st, 2007 at 5:22 pmIt is not about reading. It is about liberal illogic..Huffington Post yet another example.
Comment by Frank J — August 21, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
ok, then how is liberal illogic applied in THIS situation?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:22 pmAs always the left pins all their hopes and beliefs on their own polls. Next.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:23 pmYou read stuff like that and it will make your brain rot out. Plus, just because its in print doesn’t make it true.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
—————————————————–
Have you read any of those books?
What would you recommend that I read?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:24 pmfrank j never read a book.
eh?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:24 pmThis is meaningless, although I’m sure it will make people who call themselves liberal feel good about themselves. The fact is that very literate people have committed terrible atrocities. Literacy does not mean wisdom. Sorry to pop people’s bubble on this on.
From a literacy expert.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:24 pm“It more has to do with the fact that we liberals don’t rely on other people to do their thinking for us.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — August 21, 2007″
That’s one of the funniest posts I’ve read in a long time! But then again some of the things you liberals post are so far out there I can’t imagine anyone would jeapordize their reputation by actually printing it in a book with their name on the cover.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:25 pmWhat would you recommend that I read?
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
1>Foxes in the Henhouse
2>Lies and the Lying Liers Who Tell Them
3>ANY Harry Potter book-it’s ALL good baby!!
4>George Takai’s autobiography(Sulu from Star Trek)
August 21st, 2007 at 5:27 pmread michael’s comments.
look at above picture of w.
laugh.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:28 pmView the video of George that morning, and try to tell me he didn’t know.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:30 pmHe’s such a poor actor.
If all you liberals are so smart and read more books than the Republicans, how come the Republicans are in charge?
Almost modified my question to recognize that the Democrats control congress, but decided that they haven’t been able to really “get it together” since taking over.
So same question different slant: Why is it the ‘C’ students are always the bosses and the ‘A’ students are always the peons? Did someone read too many books?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:31 pmYou gotta ask ourselves: Is our conservatives learning?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:31 pmYeah? Well, I don’t believe everything I read. Show me some credentials.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:33 pm“It more has to do with the fact that we liberals don’t rely on other people to do their thinking for us.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — August 21, 2007
August 21st, 2007 at 5:34 pmFor the most part republicans like their thinking done for them that is why the like viewing fox news and having preachers politicize the pulpit they like a father type figure that will do all the heavy lifting for them and tell them what to think and how to be a good “christians” and “patriots.” They view things in absolutes it is either black or white when most people are dealing with variations of gray. They do not see how limiting that is to the discussion if there are only two possible outcomes to any question.
how come the Republicans are in charge?
Comment by double**star
Banana Republic Democracy at your service.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:34 pmRingo
Books I would recommend?
For nonfiction; Tsun Tsu’s Art of War. Get the one with James Clavell’s foreword. Its short, to the point and surprisingly relevant today.
Isaac Asimov’s Foundation trilogy for fiction. Also fairly short, but a good read and it opens your eyes to a different way of looking at things.
The Kellermans (Faye and her husband) are generally good for relaxing with.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:36 pmHey, did you know that GW claimed that he has actually seen the first plane hit the first tower on 9/11 just minutes before this photo was taken? That’s right, he didn’t say it just once, he said it twice – that he saw it live on TV.
Let that sink in real good.
Each time he was relating the story publicly, he acught himself, and through in the caveat that there was a TV in the holding area near the classroom, and that’s where he’d seen it live on TV.
HOW?
That is physically impossible. Why would there have been a live (open) broadcast feed of the twin towers on the morning of 9/11 in advance of the first plane strike? Clearly there wouldn’t have been, and wasn’t.
He saw it on a TV screen before he went into that classroom, but the screen he saw it on was in the back seat of the limo sitting next to Ari Fleisher.
The ONLY way that could happen is with foreknowledge and intricate planning, including a closed circuit video feed to Potus.
It happened just like that.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:38 pmBy the way things are going, I guess ‘C’ stands for inCompetence.
BTW – I don’t know where you work, but they probably won’t be in business for long.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:38 pmI can’t wait to read the books that President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, and the Honorable Karl Christian Rove will write!!!
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 5:39 pmMe too and hopefully the proceeds go to the katrina victims, the soldiers families in Iraq and the 9/11 victims.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
We can only hope the VP Cheney will be a ghost writer.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:40 pmI would suggest One hundred years of solitude by Nobel Laureate GarcÃa Márquez.
Nobody should be punished by not reading it. A true masterpiece.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:41 pmRingo, my reply continued…
For poetry, I am a William Blake fan but I think you would get more out of Wilfred Owen. Thomas MacCauley Babbington is about the best contrast you will get.
If you are going for myth and fantasy, I actually like Rosemary Suthcliff. Don’t go for JK Rowling, the woman is all hype and no quality. Marrian Zimmer Bradley’s Darkover series is good if you like lesbians.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:42 pmI’m helping George, Dick and Karl write their memoirs, now that it is clear their days are numbered.
It is titled: Rub-Dub-Dub, Three Chums in a Tub
I don’t want to give to much away,
August 21st, 2007 at 5:43 pmbut there’s another chum under the soap scum you never see!
Me!
They view things in absolutes it is either black or white when most people are dealing with variations of gray. They do not see how limiting that is to the discussion if there are only two possible outcomes to any question.
Comment by chad
——————————————————————————
I see all the shades from thw brightest white – http://www.mama-children.org/english/images/Happy-children.jpg – to the blackest of black – http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-05/12/xin_06050112085844514911.jpg …and all shades between.
Lefties think they are sophisticated because they only see one shade of grey.
That’s what moral-relativism does to the mind.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:44 pmI would suggest One hundred years of solitude by Nobel Laureate GarcÃa Márquez.
Nobody should be punished by not reading it. A true masterpiece.
Comment by Juan C
————————————————–
Read it many years ago…and I liked it at the time.
My favorite novel is Ask the Dust by John Fante.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:46 pmPet My Goat, by GW Bush
How to Intimidate and Aleiniate People By Showing Your Bottom Teeth (for Pu$$ies), by Richard “the Big Vagina” Cheney
My Life as a Prison Bit(h and Snitch, by Karl “Find the Soap” Rove
August 21st, 2007 at 5:47 pmExley disregards any poll findings conducted by an organization run by Pat Schroder. OK. Since Gallup is run by born-again christians, I’m going to assume Exley thinks liberals should disregard any Gallup poll results.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:47 pmI must be going now, but I”l come back later to read your book suggestions.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:47 pmThe two titles that pop into mind when considering the current administration are:
August 21st, 2007 at 5:48 pm“A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift
and
“1984″ by George Orwell.
Both are uide books for the current admin. The first is actually an essay.
Bruce for Sci-Fi I would recommend almost anything by Ian M. Banks, with special recommendations for “Use of Weapons”,and “Against a Dark Background”. I would also suggest anything by Peter F. Hamilton, including his most recent two book series “Pandora’s Star” and “Judas Unchained”.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:49 pmRingo, part three:
For philosophy, for you I would recomend the Tao Te Ching, its not a philosophy I ascribe to, but it is a much better rendering of libertarian philosophy then most libertarians are capable of. I don’t think you would appreciate the God Delusion, though it makes some cogent points you would probably just end up ignoring them.
For economics, well there isn’t really a good one. Most are based off of the ideas of Karl Marx, and while Marx was brilliant, he was also an ideologue.
History, is best done by reading lots of sources. What I would recomend you do if you are really interested in it is this; ignore the political types and go for the straight historians who aren’t trying to score points. IE: Anybody who says “Liberals XYZ” or “Conservatives XYZ” should be read as comic relief only.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:49 pmuide s/b guide in my 5:48 PM post.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:49 pmI recommend “All the Shah’s Men” by Stephen Kinzer. It’s about the 1953 coup against the democratically elected Govt. in Iran.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:50 pmPast as prologue. Maybe they hate us for something besides our Freedoms?
My favorite novel is Ask the Dust by John Fante.
Comment by Ringo
I will read it. Promise.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmRingo: “Lefties think they are sophisticated because they only see one shade of grey.
That’s what moral-relativism does to the mind.”
This post brings “projection” to a new level of foolishness. We’ve been hearing for years now that neocons “make their own reality.” We’ve read that they are spiritual children of Leo Strauss and his concept of the “noble lie.” We know that Grover Norquist and Karl Rove both believe that the ends justify the means. We’ve even had neocon posters here try to make the argument that morals are subjective and almost unnecessary. There has NEVER been a movement so steeped in moral-relativism than the modern neoconservative philosophy.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmLiberals who read books read per eight year, Conservatives who read books read per seven year and Patricia Schroeder did the counting.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:52 pmSo the liberals win by one book.This is a rather meaningless statistic. The statistic I would like to know is what is the percentage of conservatives regularly read books and what percentage liberals regularly read books. I would also like to know what types of books that they are reading. If Liberals are mostly reading books by authors like Michael Moore and Conservatives are reading books by authors like Anne Coulter than neither side has anything to crow about.
Lefties think they are sophisticated because they only see one shade of grey.
Comment by Ringo — August 21, 2007 @ 5:44 pm
We’re sophisticated because we see the black, the white and the grey. Conservatives don’t have nuanced thought and that’s why they’re so easily lead into anything.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:53 pmFor what it’s worth — I belong to three library book clubs with a combined total of about 50 people. Inevitably, when discussing the book of the month, certain philosopies, perspectives, and opinions are evident in the discussion and it is my observation that most people who read – whether fiction or non-fiction – are more broadminded, more open to different ideas, less certain that they alone have the only correct opinion; the majority are liberal/progressive.
August 21st, 2007 at 5:54 pm“For the most part republicans like their thinking done for them that is why the like viewing fox news and having preachers politicize the pulpit they like a father type figure that will do all the heavy lifting for them and tell them what to think and how to be a good “christians†and “patriots.†They view things in absolutes it is either black or white when most people are dealing with variations of gray. They do not see how limiting that is to the discussion if there are only two possible outcomes to any question.
Comment by chad — August 21, 2007″
Wow! All that blabber and not 1 example!
August 21st, 2007 at 5:55 pmNat
We also see the reds, the blues, the yellows, the greens etc…
August 21st, 2007 at 5:56 pmwell Ringo I am more a pragmatist that there is no absolute truth all knowledge is subjective, contextual and fallible. Any truth is measured its reflectiion in the experiences at the individual level and its overall benefit to society as a whole. Seeing black and white does not mean seeing things in positive and negative lights it means being able to see a multitude of possible outcomes to a situation. What is your stance?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:56 pmWow! All that blabber and not 1 example!
Comment by michael — August 21, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
August 21st, 2007 at 5:57 pmI learn for the best slappy!!!!
michael
A person disagrees with the war and protests against it.
He also protests in favour of protecting and even expanding troops benefits.
Does he support the troops?
August 21st, 2007 at 5:59 pmFor economics, well there isn’t really a good one. Most are based off of the ideas of Karl Marx, and while Marx was brilliant, he was also an ideologue.
Comment by Bruce Gorton
————————————————
Here is where we differ…..I believe that Marx was not only NOT brilliant, but was, in fact, wrong about almost everything. I really don’t have time right now but you shoud read ‘The Road to Serfdom’ and ‘The Fatal Conceit’, both by F.A.Hayek as well as Milton Freidman’s Free to Choose.
Thomas Sowell’s ‘Basic Economics’ is also quite good (as are most of his books).
Gotta go…really.
Adios.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:02 pmOh, and on my book recomendations: If you are going to get the Tao te Ching, don’t get the Sacred Texts version. It murders it.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:02 pmI’ve known this for awhile:
Lived in rural PA briefly in the Electin year of 2004…and joined the only book club in the nearest town for socialization. We determined that every single person in the book club was a Democrat!! …even though that area was predominently Republican. One person in the group belonged to yet another book club in the next town…and said that group was also composed of only Democrats.
We concluded that Republicans don’t read and are not intellectually curious.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:05 pmhttp://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28456
Democrat Congress Approval Rating Matches Historical Low
August 21st, 2007 at 6:09 pmRingo
Marx wasn’t wrong about mechanisation at all, and his contemporaries totally missed it. Further, the way the world has worked out has been far closer to Marx’s ideal then most politicians nowadays feel comfortable with mentioning.
Where Marx went wrong was he mixed ideology with his economic theory, thus turning what should have been a science, into a political platform. Economists ever since him have tried to cleanse it of that, but miss the basic day to day realities of the economics of survival – forgetting in their haste to predict the markets that the economy is basically a reflection of the people living in it.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:11 pmfrom the website that noname links:
Typically, partisans view Congress much more positively when their party is in control of the institution, so the fact that Democrats’ ratings are not materially better than Republicans’ is notable.
so, noname, what we learn from this is that democrats will actually call their leaders on not getting anything done, whereas authoritarian-loving republicans will just continue their partisan reacharound, as they did when republicans ran congress and were screwing us left and right.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:14 pmnoname1234
That’s mainly because people voted Democrat in the hopes that they Democrats would do something about the president, the war, and the deficit. The lack of results is not exactly heartening to the American public.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:15 pmmore from the gallup website
Americans elected the Democrats as the majority party in Congress in November 2006’s midterm election in large part due to frustration with the Iraq war and an ineffective and scandal-plagued Republican-led Congress. But any hopes that the elections would lead to change have not been realized as Democrats’ repeated attempts to force a change in Iraq war policy have been largely unsuccessful due to presidential vetoes, disagreements within their own party, and the inability to attract Republican support for their policy proposals. Also, many of the Democratic leadership’s domestic agenda items have not become law even though some have passed one or both houses of Congress.
obstructionism, anyone?
August 21st, 2007 at 6:18 pmMarx put economics in math terms.
He discovered surplus.
He figured out the cyclic mechanism of societies.
He discovered that power was achievable only by those who had access to production methods and tools.
He said that capitalism is doomed to fail.
Take a look around. After “communism” fell do you see a better world? A world where economic justice prevails? How many people are poor in comparison with people who are rich?
He was a goddamn genius. And even his most furious detractors agree at that.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:18 pmlonesomerobot
And that is why, Nancy Pelosi is a moron. The Democrats should be impeaching Bush, because there isn’t a terrible amount else they are going to get done so long as he is in office and he has broken the law.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:19 pmNot even on the toilet? What are they doing, meditating?
August 21st, 2007 at 6:23 pmIF liberals read more books, why are the majority of political bestsellers books with a conservative bent?? There are a number successful leftard authors (the libraries are full of their work). Too bad liberals don’t read more books about giving to charity and less on how to buy carbon offsets – such precious hypocrites!!
August 21st, 2007 at 6:39 pmValiant Venus: “IF liberals read more books, why are the majority of political bestsellers books with a conservative bent??”
To begin with, your premise is wrong. The majority of political bestsellers are not with a “conservative bent.”
But, if your statement were true, it would probably be because of the fact that wealthy corporatist like Richard Mellon Scaife do bulk buys to jack up the numbers. The NYT list even puts a “*” next to books when indicating that it’s numbers are the result of bulk buys. Coulters books, for example, almost always have the bulk buy sign.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:45 pmJuan C. – Marx was a lazy drunkard who refused to care for his own family….that’s why he was so interested in co-opting other people’s money..…(”In Paris Marx met Friedrich Engels. Engels was a wealthy capitalist and went on supporting Marx through his entire life.” from Independent Movie Database) Hmmmm….I wonder if his poor/absentee parenting was responsible for the deaths of three of his kids at early ages and the suicide of two others?
Hmmmm…..maybe Marx should have taken care of his own family (the way self-respecting parents do) before he thought of changing the world……
August 21st, 2007 at 6:46 pmOK, Makarios, let’s play polls. I’ll call your Gallup and raise you a Pew which shows that 50% of respondents are glad Dems control congress against 24% who wish Repubs did.
And, I’ll add the latest CNN poll which shows that 48% trust the Dems in congress to do what’s right for the country against only 32% who trust Bush.
Furthermore, here’s a suggestion. Since Congress is made up of both Dems and Repubs, why not look at the respective polling for both. I think you know what you’ll find if you look there.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:54 pmVV: “Hmmmm…..maybe Marx should have taken care of his own family (the way self-respecting parents do) before he thought of changing the world……”
This from someone who admires Ayn Rand????!!!!
August 21st, 2007 at 6:55 pm#178
August 21st, 2007 at 6:56 pmVV
The book clubs to which I belong rarely discuss the “hot button” inflammatory books of the month. Instead we read novels, biographies and other books which give the reader a broader understanding of differences in social, political and cutural differences.
It is so hard to penetrate your closed mind – I feel sorry for you. You are so convinced that you are correct in everything, Your smug attitude, your snarky remarks are keeping you from learning anything more than that which you believe you are already an authority.
You are not a stupid person, but your attitude is limiting.
Your inability, unwillingness to accept that you might not have all the answers is a real liability – perhaps one day you’ll realize that.
why, look, it’s the fully-discredited sociopath valiant [mighty] venus [aphrodite] trolling the threads again. only a sociopath would still frequent a community where their reputation was in shambles, still acting like people should respect what they say.
it would be almost admirable if it weren’t so pathetic.
August 21st, 2007 at 6:59 pmTony Fratto attacks liberals for being too wordy in a sentence using the words ‘obfuscation’ and ‘loquaciousness.’
Irony.
And what exactly does loquaciousness (which means talkativeness) have to do with reading books? I know plenty of people who don’t read shit that never shut up.
Way to defend conservatives against a claim of ignorance, Tony.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:01 pmMakarios: “In short, liberals choose to read books written by liars and traitors to The UNITED STATES of AMERICA.”
Yawn….. do you have anything, ANYTHING intelligent to add to this discussion?
August 21st, 2007 at 7:02 pmRipper – Look up the sales numbers for Friedrich von Hayek, Milton and Rose Friedman, William F. Buckley, Phyllis Schlafley, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, Michael Reagan, Laura Schlessinger – now compare those numbers to John Kenneth Galbraith, Al Franken, Jim Hightower, Al Gore, John Kerry, etc. Take a look at the revenue generated at conservative publisher Regenery vs. non-fiction at Simon and Schuster…..You might be surprised…..
Speaking of bulk buys….does the name Jim Wright ring a bell?? Hmmmm Does Howard Zinn’s “A Peoples’ History of the US” qualify…being required reading in TOOO many high schools and colleges is one way of booosting sales.
I wonder why so many NYT bestsellers are NEVER reviewed by the intelligensia at the NYT?..
It would be nice if you knew half as much as you pretend to know…..
August 21st, 2007 at 7:02 pmand i agree- pelosi is a moron, for taking impeachment off the table, bruce. funny, the constitution doesn’t say ‘there are certain times when impeachment is off the table’…this is exactly the sort of thing our founding fathers envisioned when they wrote impeachment into the constitution.
leahy’s really starting to piss me off also. show some guts and realize they are laughing at your idle threats, patrick. they don’t care about the rule of law, they’re trying to run out the clock.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:03 pmonly a sociopath would still frequent a community where their reputation was in shambles, still acting like people should respect what they say.
Comment by lonesomerobot
Lonesome (BTW – pathetic moniker) – IF my reputation among the “Leftard Intelligensia” was stellar, I would be worried…….
August 21st, 2007 at 7:04 pmTony Fartto is a fu*king retard, plain and simple. One hopes that Tony Snow’s condition is contagious — that way, he may share it with the rest of the morons (et al, Dana Perino, Tony Fartto, the rest of the WH liars).
August 21st, 2007 at 7:04 pmIf this is true why didn’t you ************* liberals buy Olbermann’s book???
August 21st, 2007 at 7:05 pmnoname1234: Wow, you got us there *************. Try contributing something vageuly intelligent next time — like telling us what circus gorilla impregnated your mom.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:10 pmMarie – I enjoy listening to a variety of viewpoints….the fact that I do not endorse confiscatory monetary practices or failed social political systems does not make me limited in my thinking. I recognize that utopia is not possible no matter how often humanists click their ruby red stilettos.
Unlike leftards, I don’t think I have allll the answers for everybody about everything…..Like you, I enjoy a wide variety of books from politics to murder mysteries and an occasional frothy ‘beach read”.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:12 pmHey Tony Fratto – is this succinct enough? – F_ _ K OFF! -
Nope… I’m not conservative and this is not obtuse.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:13 pmYour comment at #195 is further evidence of your smug and sanctimonious attitude. You cannot even agree to disagree without making a snarky insult.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:35 pmMore than once, I have tried to be civil to you and offer a different rational thought from you, but you cannot resist being a smart aleck.
Bullies who want to control the playground are smart alecks too.
Makarios – If you want to read an excellent little book on the dangers of misguided Repubs and “progressive/s*cialist” thought (such an oxymoron!) read “None Dare Call it Treason” by John Stormer , 1964. It clearly spells out the orchestrated destruction of capitalism and the US by liberal clergy, teachers unions, labour unions, leftist “journalists”, etc. I found a copy on Amazon.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:39 pmValiant Venus and the standard conservative strawman: “I recognize that utopia is not possible no matter how often humanists click their ruby red stilettos.”
Nobody’s talking about “utopia.” A well-run, effective, reasonably priced healthcare system would be a start. Limiting the political power of large corporations would help. A sustainable energy policy would make things a lot better….
Utopia? That’s your strawman and it’s pretty tired and pathetic at that.
August 21st, 2007 at 7:42 pmHey, Not true, I just read “Jemimah Puddle Duck”…twice….aaaand pulled the tabs on all of the Pop-Ups….
August 21st, 2007 at 7:49 pmMarie’s idea of civility, “It is so hard to penetrate your closed mind – I feel sorry for you.” (Save your sympathy.)
More “civility”, “You are so convinced that you are correct in everything,”
(like you aren’t????)
Pot meet kettle,”Your smug attitude, your snarky remarks are keeping you from learning anything more than that which you believe you are already an authority.” My snarky remark was in factually noting libtards donate less money to charity and hypocritically tell everyone else HOW to conserve energy?? Tooo precious! FYI, that’s not snarky – - that’s fact.
Marie wraps up her lesson in civility with, “You are not a stupid person, but your attitude is limiting. Your inability, unwillingness to accept that you might not have all the answers is a real liability.” Let me guess…..you consider your unwillingness to accept anything other than liberalism a ++plus++??
August 21st, 2007 at 7:51 pmCol Jack – Do you consider Labour unions special interest groups??
August 21st, 2007 at 7:52 pmCol Ripper’s delusions continue, “A well-run, effective, reasonably priced healthcare system would be a start.”
And you think bloated bureaucrats of government can deliver THAT?? What meds have they got you on??
Toooodles….til later………
August 21st, 2007 at 7:58 pmlol! Was there ANY doubt?
August 21st, 2007 at 7:59 pmYes. Of course they are special interest groups. Their interest is in political and economic power for workers who are members of their unions.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:01 pmVV
August 21st, 2007 at 8:03 pmActually I do listen to others and I do learn from them. My mind is not closed, nor do I believe that my own intellect is superior. (unlike the tone and language of your own screeds. here)
You have no idea what I or anyone else donates, nor do you know what I or anyone else does to conserve — the fact that liberals have recognized the necessity of each of those worthy pursuits must be what has your panties in a twist.
In the past I have tried to be civil to you—it accomplishes nothing. You cannot debate in any way except in your belligerent manner.
Libtards, stillettoes, utopian – your typical, uncalled for bullying jabs.
My mind is always open to new ideas and different approaches — unfortunately I have never heard anything from you that approaches anything worth thinking about.
Even if something you believe actually were worth hearing out, the way you present it, your insults, your snarky attitude, your bullying manner, your rudeness and your smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous ways are a real turn off for anyone who may otherwise be interested.
I am through trying to reason with you.
Valiant Venus: “And you think bloated bureaucrats of government can deliver THAT?? What meds have they got you on??”
The governments of every single industrialized nation in the world deliver healthcare more efficiently than we do and at a lower cost per capita. We deliver it to seniors with a single-payer plan called Medicare. We deliver it to veterans with a socialized medicine scheme known as the Veterans Administration. The only problems either of these systems have is that they could be better funded. Hard to believe you are not aware of that.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:05 pmAnd what exactly does loquaciousness (which means talkativeness) have to do with reading books? I know plenty of people who don’t read shit that never shut up.
Way to defend conservatives against a claim of ignorance, Tony.
Comment by Jeremy Henderson — August 21, 2007 @ 7:01 pm
Talk about ignorance! He was saying liberals read more books to find more ways of saying the same thing over and over again. ;)
——-
We concluded that Republicans don’t read and are not intellectually curious.
Comment by Evergreen — August 21, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
No, it’s just Republicans can figure out for themselves what the book says. They don’t need others to interpret for them. ;)
August 21st, 2007 at 8:12 pmLike most egocentric libs, Marie, you personalize EVERYTHING……I don’t know or care what you conserve or donate…..The fact is American and European liberals have “been noted to donate less because they feel charity is the governments responsibility….Why amm I not surprised???
While you’re at it ….since you learn so much from opposition views, please share with the class a viewpoint of yours not typically liberal. (Me? I’m opposed to the death penalty.)
PLEASE read the following while looking in the mirror:
“My mind is always open to new ideas and different approaches — unfortunately I have never heard anything from you that approaches anything worth thinking about.
Even if something you believe actually were worth hearing out, the way you present it, your insults, your snarky attitude, your bullying manner, your rudeness and your smug, sanctimonious, self-righteous ways are a real turn off for anyone who may otherwise be interested. I am through trying to reason with you.
Whew!! I thought I was going to have to tolerate more of your sanctimonious bullying and smug self-righteousness!!! Let’s go back to ignoring each other as we find each other insufferable.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:14 pmValiant: “sanctimonious bullying and smug self-righteousness!!!”
I couldn’t have thought of better words to describe you, Venus. Let’s keep in mind that it is you who uses words like “libtard.” You’re the one who responds to an argument with “What meds have they got you on??” You are the one who referred to another’s name as a “pathetic moniker.” You are the one who referred to all progressives as “precious hypocrits.”
So, please. Enough of this “look in the mirror” bull. You write the book on santimonius and self-righteousness.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:20 pmLet’s not get too excited here, it’s not like the poll told us what books everyone is reading, just how many. I’m not saying this poll is useless but it is a rather incomplete picture.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:25 pmwell, at the risk of repeating myself, but then my posts had disappeared for a moment.
having lived in another country with national healthcare myself (and having gone there as a libertarian and dubious as to the effectiveness of government) i have to say the only reason government doesn’t work in america is because there is a substantial ideologically motivated group that intends to make it that way.
conservatives are breaking america. because they want it to be as good as it was, and not better than it ever has been.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:28 pmConservatives are breaking America because of their inbred fear and loathing of compassion and reasonableness. They are drawn to authoritarians because they can’t trust themselves to figure out what things mean; they don’t trust their ability to choose because they buy into the most extremist views of religions that insist that man is inherently evil. It’s a cycle of ignorance and fear, with a large amount of greed, and once the cycle is broken, the victim becomes enlightened, free, and…liberal. The nose-in-the-air “I’m better than you” attitude of viscious venus is typical of the bully who never confronts her demons, but avoids them with nasty ad hominems and generalizations or straw. the lies spill out of her fingers with ease, because on a serious lack of self-respect. They are to be pitied, when they’re not busy destroying our country.
August 21st, 2007 at 8:45 pmmaladministration flack Tony Fratto: Obfuscation usually requires a lot more words than if you simply focus on fundamental principles, so I’m not at all surprised by the loquaciousness of liberals.
Wow. I stand in awe. These guys are into self-parody “big-time” (as Cheney would say). But he’s plagiarizing (big surprise!) someone else’s prior bon mot: “Eschew obfuscation….”
Cheers,
August 21st, 2007 at 9:24 pmI am a conservative, and I doubt that many read more books than I do (nobody polled me). I’ve read over 30 books this year already (history, biographies, scientific, etc.). I read at least 2 hours every day. The implication that somehow liberals are more learned is absurd. This survey probably is biased by the many brainwashed liberal students at Universities who are reading lots of books. I used to be a brain washed liberal too when I was a student. Or maybe it’s all the comic books that liberals are reading.
By the way, the comment about Fox news is inaccurate. The poll did NOT show Fox News viewers to have the lowest knowledge of national and international affairs. The slanted poll just gave higher ratings for some other shows. It did NOT come in last in the poll (even though it was not a very scientific study).
And this web site (Think Progress) is a highly liberal biased source. So consider the source when reading it.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:24 pmSome moron (oh, yeah, name’s “Rush … Rush Limbaugh….”) said that Dubya reads 135 books a year. If’t'were true, that might explain the bollix in NO, Iraq, the environment, the markets, gummint, etc., etc. etc. But no one that’s not a heroin addict would think that the Deciderator-In-Chief reads that many books … oh … waiddaminnit.
Cheers.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:27 pmI have read all the Chomsky books. He is god.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:31 pmIn defense of inbred, home-schooled conned’selfservatives…
…My Pet Goat…
…is a tough read…
August 21st, 2007 at 9:36 pmAdd up all of the Faux News scrolls and I’ve read pert near 10 books this year.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:41 pmOnce you don’t include Tim Lehaye trash conservatives are down to one…the bible.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:42 pm“I am a conservative, and I doubt that many read more books than I do (nobody polled me). I’ve read over 30 books this year already (history, biographies, scientific, etc.).”
So, since you have read over 30 that cancels out about 4 that haven’t read one. Darn outliers.
August 21st, 2007 at 9:45 pmP.S. The “Fox News” survey that Think Progress refers to also “showed” that the MOST educated audience regarding national and international affairs was the one that listens to conservative talk radio.
Liberals also are quick to “point out” that conservatives are richer (I wonder how they get more money without better education.), and it is well known that the poor and uneducated gravitate to the democratic party. So how does that correlate with this survey?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:58 pmAMERICA-HATE, AMERICA’S-GREATEST-PRESIDENT-HATE, CHENEY-HATE, AMERICAN-FLAG-HATE, AMERICAN-TROOPS-HATE, VALUES-HATE, ROBERT-NOVAK-HATE, JOHN-HAGEE-HATE, RUMSFELD-HATE, CONDOLEEZA-HATE, PATRIOT-ACT-HATE, MCCAIN-HATE, FREEDOM-AGENDA-HATE, GOP-HATE, FAIR-AND-BALANCED-REPORTING-HATE, FOX-NEWS-HATE, C0ULTER-HATE, GLENN-BECK-HATE, BASEBALL-HATE, JOYCE-MEYER-MINISTRIES-HATE, MALKIN-HATE, PERSONAL-RESPONSIBILITY-HATE, LIBERTY-BELL-HATE, FAITH-HATE, HETEROSEXUAL-MARRIAGE-HATE, O’REILLY-HATE, HANITY-HATE, TRUTH-HATE, FACTS-HATE, FAMILY-VALUES-HATE, KJV-HATE, WILLIAM-KRISTOL-HATE, AND HUMANITY-HATE!!!!!!!!!!
Hmmmm…. I haven’t read any of these… Where do you find them?
August 21st, 2007 at 9:58 pmNo, John, Conservatives in general are NOT richer. It is the Bill Gates effect. An insanely rich a-hole goes to a trailer park and all of a sudden ALL of the Republicans are richer. It doesn’t change the fact that most Conservatives are one tornado away from oblivion.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:01 pmAn insanely rich a-hole goes to a trailer park and all of a sudden ALL of the Republicans are richer. It doesn’t change the fact that most Conservatives are one tornado away from oblivion.
Comment by JPark #226
BRILLIANT!
August 21st, 2007 at 10:02 pmThanks big papa. It is nice to see you and your undeniable style on TP again.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:14 pmLiberals also are quick to “point out†that conservatives are richer (I wonder how they get more money without better education.), and it is well known that the poor and uneducated gravitate to the democratic party. So how does that correlate with this survey?
Comment by John Davis — August 21, 2007 @ 9:58 pm
This sounds like logical thinking- something most libs dont get
August 21st, 2007 at 10:15 pmSEE SPOT RUN, RUN SPOT RUN, SEE TOM SKIP, SKIP TOM SKIP. LOL
August 21st, 2007 at 10:16 pmIt doesn’t change the fact that most Conservatives are one tornado away from oblivion.
Um i guess then most libs are one earthquake or sunami away from oblivion – if ya need help i can esplain dat one for ya
August 21st, 2007 at 10:19 pmIt doesn’t change the fact that most Conservatives are one tornado away from oblivion.
Comment by JPark — August 21, 2007 @ 10:01 pm
Getting hit by a tornado is less chance than a sunami or earthquake for you coastal dwellers
August 21st, 2007 at 10:21 pmYeah, Hurricane Lake Michigan is making me shake (cause that is the only name I can think of that they would give to a tropical storm in the upper midwest).
August 21st, 2007 at 10:24 pmPat Schroeder, president of the American Association of Publishers
this is the former left wing presidential hopeful who cried like a baby because she couldnt become pres. nobody thinks this survey is accurate– more liberal bs
August 21st, 2007 at 10:25 pmComment by John Davis — August 21, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
how many shakespeares?
prezdunt bush read a coupla shakespeares… didju???
August 21st, 2007 at 10:27 pmComment by ron — August 21, 2007 @ 10:25 pm
ron you suck gop dick, what the hell r u doin’ here?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:28 pmron, did you ever watch Boehner talk about gays? He cries like a little girl. Such manly guys you righties are.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:32 pmNotice the carefully worded title “Liberals read more books than conservatives” Take out the word “books” and the statement is no longer true. Conservatives read newspapers, news magazines, financial reports, quarterly reports, and all the other printed material required to keep the world running so the libs have time read Hillary’s “Rewriting History” or “It Takes a Village to see that I’m God”. Anyone looking for real evidence of the intellegence inherit to conservatives or liberals need only read some of the drivel posted here. How is the spelling, capitalization and punctuation in all those books that the liberals are reading?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:43 pmComment by JPark — August 21, 2007 @ 10:32 pm
i believe ron IS boehner, i really do!
ron?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:44 pmComment by terry — August 21, 2007 @ 10:43 pm
wtf? boy what have you been smokin’, whacky weed?
August 21st, 2007 at 10:45 pmUm, no Terry, Republicans read the Star, the Examiner and whatever tripe Coulter comes out with. You guys have ALL of my respect. By the way, most Republicans wouldn’t know an Income Statement from a tax return.
August 21st, 2007 at 10:53 pmwell fook me!!! – conservatives can read?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:03 pmComment by JPark — August 21, 2007 @ 10:53 pm
must be true by god, terry and ron have been STUNNED into silence. the troll surege has failed by god!
eh?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:04 pmlook at that picture of w…
like he took a crap in his pants!!!
terry, ron???
August 21st, 2007 at 11:06 pmNo, joe, there last 2 neurons just haven’t fired yet.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:06 pmWell, that is for ron. Terry was just a drive-by coward.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:06 pmAnd, their, not there.
August 21st, 2007 at 11:07 pmConservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives. ——-(economist, philosopher) John Stuart Mill
August 21st, 2007 at 11:08 pmComment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
And we know that how exactly?
His press secretary “told” us he read it, but then why when Brian Williams asked him about it, did he get his deer in the headlights look and go dumb?
It was a taped interview. He had all the time he needed to answer.
Could it be the closest to read a book Bush has been in a decade or so is skimming the TV guide?
August 21st, 2007 at 11:21 pmthis posting thing sucks.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:05 amThe following is a summary of all the books that liberals read:
AMERICA-HATE, AMERICA’S-GREATEST-PRESIDENT-HATE, CHENEY-HATE, AMERICAN-FLAG-HATE, AMERICAN-TROOPS-HATE, VALUES-HATE, ROBERT-NOVAK-HATE, JOHN-HAGEE-HATE, RUMSFELD-HATE, CONDOLEEZA-HATE, PATRIOT-ACT-HATE, MCCAIN-HATE, FREEDOM-AGENDA-HATE, GOP-HATE, FAIR-AND-BALANCED-REPORTING-HATE, FOX-NEWS-HATE, C0ULTER-HATE, GLENN-BECK-HATE, BASEBALL-HATE, JOYCE-MEYER-MINISTRIES-HATE, MALKIN-HATE, PERSONAL-RESPONSIBILITY-HATE, LIBERTY-BELL-HATE, FAITH-HATE, HETEROSEXUAL-MARRIAGE-HATE, O’REILLY-HATE, HANITY-HATE, TRUTH-HATE, FACTS-HATE, FAMILY-VALUES-HATE, KJV-HATE, WILLIAM-KRISTOL-HATE, AND HUMANITY-HATE!!!!!!!!!!
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:16 am—————————————————————————–
JOoOOoooooOOOOooOoooOo-HATE
How this serves your point of view is beyond my understanding. By these statements, you imply that Conservatives (of which I am one) are in essence stupid and illiterate. Additionally, if I watch FOX news or listen to FOX broadcasts, I am less than educated. I take umbrage with this article and the vitriol that you spew. Rather, spend time bridging the gap between parties and remembering that we are all Americans, that we are all entitled to our opinion and preference in religion, political parties and beliefs and remember that we all live in one of the greatest countries on the earth. With that, I challenge you to write something the seeks to bridge our differences and come to some consensus, rather than to insult those you call your fellow Americans.
Thank you
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:38 amI agree with you, Ed. I think most of you pos(t)ers are in terrible need of some idealistic preparation-H. Because, on the whole, it does feel good.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:02 amI challenge you to write something the seeks to bridge our differences…
comment by Ed — August 22, 2007 @ 12:38 am
how about this:
The following is a summary of all the books that liberals read:
AMERICA-HATE, AMERICA’S-GREATEST-PRESIDENT-HATE, CHENEY-HATE, AMERICAN-FLAG-HATE, AMERICAN-TROOPS-HATE, VALUES-HATE, ROBERT-NOVAK-HATE, JOHN-HAGEE-HATE, RUMSFELD-HATE, CONDOLEEZA-HATE, PATRIOT-ACT-HATE, MCCAIN-HATE, FREEDOM-AGENDA-HATE, GOP-HATE, FAIR-AND-BALANCED-REPORTING-HATE, FOX-NEWS-HATE, C0ULTER-HATE, GLENN-BECK-HATE, BASEBALL-HATE, JOYCE-MEYER-MINISTRIES-HATE, MALKIN-HATE, PERSONAL-RESPONSIBILITY-HATE, LIBERTY-BELL-HATE, FAITH-HATE, HETEROSEXUAL-MARRIAGE-HATE, O’REILLY-HATE, HANITY-HATE, TRUTH-HATE, FACTS-HATE, FAMILY-VALUES-HATE, KJV-HATE, WILLIAM-KRISTOL-HATE, AND HUMANITY-HATE!!!!!!!!!!
—————————————————————————–
JOoOOoooooOOOOooOoooOo-HATE
Comment by Bob — August 22, 2007 @ 12:16 am
posted by a “compassionate conservative”.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:06 amDid you ever notice that Democrat Presidents are always geniuses and Republican Presidents are always stupid? Of course a study and poll conducted by the usual suspects would find that conservatives read less than the enlightened liberals.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:30 amDid you ever notice that Democrat Presidents are always geniuses and Republican Presidents are always stupid? Of course a study and poll conducted by the usual suspects would find that conservatives read less than the enlightened liberals.
Comment by Jimbo — August 22, 2007 @ 1:30 am
Validation, links, or just attitude?
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:52 amComment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 22, 2007 @ 1:52 am
call yerself “stupid”? boy you been smokin’ whacky weed!
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:57 amEd
Nope. Actually it finds that centrists are the least well read. What really implies that Conservatives are illiterate, is this whole thing Conservatives have against just about every source on information outside of their pundits.
I mean, education has a liberal bias, TV has a liberal bias, newspapers have a liberal bias, Hollywood has a liberal bias, scientific reports have a liberal bias, the judiciary has a liberal bias, etc… Whenever a conservative is criticised about anything, ever, I hear this bias story.
Maybe the facts have a liberal bias.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:04 amEd
wipe yer ass after you take a crap.
’nuff said!
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:06 amAlso, VV
Whatever makes you think anybody who has read your posts will ever forget you joking about your child comforting you with its sibling at least not growing up to hold differing political views to you?
Oh, and unlike Marie, I don’t think you are intellegent, I think you are just a sanctimonious old liar who likes to pretend to be things that you are not: Such as being either Jewish or Christian whenever it suits the argument.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:09 amI challenge you to write something the seeks to bridge our differences and come to some consensus, rather than to insult those you call your fellow Americans
Comment by Ed — August 22, 2007 @ 12:38 am
What a sanctimonious, passive-aggressive bloody twit.
As if the those of us who disagree with the current occupier of the White House and his many failed policies hadn’t have to endure years of being called “surrender monkeys”, “defeatocrats”, “appeasers”, “traitors”, and many other lovely names by people like him.
(Of course by “consensus” he means we all need to stop voicing our opinion, fall in line, and follow the Glorious Leader’s orders.)
Get lost, Ed. You won’t get much sympathy here.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:34 amReading more just means that liberals don’t like to just blindly follow their leaders unlike republicans who are often divorced from reality and the truth.
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:35 amRe: #213 and #214 Makarios:
Guess we can halve the number of actual books conservatives read; they count ‘em all twice because they have to reread them (including, I suppose, such as “My Pet Goat”)….
Cheers,
August 22nd, 2007 at 6:54 amI know this might seem quaint, but since when has it been the white house press secretary’s job to call 1/3 of Americans (i.e. “liberals”) rude names?
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:52 amNickFFF
Its closer to around 68% of Americans now.
Basically, its been ever since the Republicans managed to win all three houses for six years.
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:57 amBasically, its been ever since the Republicans managed to win all three houses for six years.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — August 22, 2007 @ 7:57 am
You mean steal all three houses, don’t you?
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:17 amronjazz
Either way they ended up with unprecedented power, which they promptly abused, whether they cheated or not is kind of academic.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:20 amI mean, education has a liberal bias, TV has a liberal bias, newspapers have a liberal bias, Hollywood has a liberal bias, scientific reports have a liberal bias, the judiciary has a liberal bias, etc… Whenever a conservative is criticised about anything, ever, I hear this bias story.
Maybe the facts have a liberal bias.
Comment by Bruce Gorton — August 22, 2007 @ 2:04 am
———————-
Yes, I grow weary of hearing how “biased” everything is toward the liberal side, too. This is because IDEAS are generally considered liberal. The conservative point of view ranges from status quo to very reactionary. New ideas are scary.
The idea of the earth being round instead of flat was liberally biased, you know.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:23 amHighly literate men designed the genocide of Native Americans, highly literate men built and dropped nuclear weapons, highly literate men designed the Nazi takeover. Literacy does not equal smart, or better, it is just one of many communication tools available during the course of history. I don’t think it benefits anyone to take this pole as proving that one group is better than the other. It’s like the old stereotype that people with glasses are smarter. It’s really a meaningless statistic not worth arguing about.
August 22nd, 2007 at 8:54 amAntonio
Of your three examples, only one was a really good one.
The Native Americans were wiped out by a combination of European deseases and ignorant rednecks hicks deciding they wanted the land.
The Nazis’ rise to power was largely sponsored by the Brown Shirts, and the Nazis themselves were known as book burners (Not exactly pro being intellectuals.) Mein Kampf, when divorced from who wrote it, was basically drivel.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:15 amHmm. Maybe it’s because Conservatives are so busy working instead of spending as much time as possible at the coffee shop. I am so tired from running my a$$ off all day long that if I open a book I will fall asleep in about 3 minutes. Not enough diet dew in this world to keep me awake if I sit down for more than a minute.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:27 amAntonio, it’s poll, not pole.
While I agree that literacy by no means equals enlightenment, in our current political climate the ability to scan a “text” (media report, speech, etc) for truth certainly helps separate the administration’s BS from the facts.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:17 amResponce to;
By the way, I’ve read more books than all of you (conservatives or liberals) in the past year.
Comment by Makarios — August 21, 2007 @ 4:29 pm
I’ve kissed a girl.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:24 amLooks like southeners read more than the rest of the country though.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:28 amI am conservative (Not of the current type, more old school) and I read 9 books a month. One thing I have noticed is that more recent books seem to lack “information density”. That is my term for the amount of useful information per page. Have other noticed this?
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:45 amJames
I’ve noticed it too, a lot of books seem to have started bulking out pages into being chapters.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:09 amUS civil rights activist Jesse Jackson has called on Britain to apologise and make reparations for its role in the slave trade
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:18 amI could read eight books in my life: Aristotle’s “The Politics,” Machiavelli’s “The Prince,” Thucydides’ “History of the Peloponnesian War,” The Federalist Papers (collected), Gibbons’ “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,” Alexis de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America,” Marcus Aurelius’ “Meditations,” Hobbes’ “Leviathan” and, of course, “The Bible” and forget more than most liberals know about real-world politics. It’s not the number of books, it’s the quality; and liberals can get all huffy and puffy about Al Gore and Noam Chomsky all they want, they still will act like a collective bunch of lemmings and PC group-thinkers. This poll is irrelevant, self-congratulatory libs.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:23 amthe question is who is reading what, more then how many books a person reads.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:35 amkiss
the question is who is reading what, more then how many books a person reads.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:35 amHere is the complete list of the 8 books a conservative reads :
* 1. Genesis
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:40 am* 2. Exodus
* 3. Leviticus
* 4. Numbers
* 5. Deuteronomy
* 6. Judges
* 7. Kings
* 8. Revelation
Guys :D the first “stat” included liberals and moderates when it helped liberals with the #’s
” 34 percent of conservatives have not read a book within the past year, compared with 22 percent of liberals and moderates.”
Later when the Liberal/moderate stat would have been below the conservative stat they were separated , ” conservatives “typically read eight†books in the past year. Liberals read nine, moderates five.”
Liberal/mod average = 9+5 /2 = 7 compared to conservative 8. If they used the same stat reporting method as the first category you’d see liberals had higher and lower stats based upon which ones you chose. Plus, if you want to always get stats like this interview liberals on a college campus and conservatives on an assembly line job that pays minimum wage. I saw no sample size or double blind methods in detail. If I reported stats like this in my graduate Psyc classes I would have failed the program.
Plus every time I read any journal this year, Brain, Neuroscience, etc, that wasnt counted in this study since they aren’t books. I guess scientific journals are for idiots.
I am a conservative and I do read books, Journals, etc. :D
Be wary of taking stats from an article as absolute truth. Its easy to leave ones out that don’t support your case and the reporter of the stats is always in control of what you hear in that situation.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:42 am-Marx put economics in math terms.
No…no…no. Earlier economists put economics into math terms. The empiricist school of economics (which existed even before Adam Smith) was numbers oriented. Ricardo and Malthus were also mathematically oriented. Certainly, Marx added some of his own.
In the end, the true mathematical revolution in economics did not come until well after Marx lead by people like Marshall.
-He discovered surplus.
Yes, and today most economist agree that his “discovery” was misguided. It was Marshall who helped accurately describe economic surplus.
He figured out the cyclic mechanism of societies.
-No, he described the cyclical mechanism. His theories about the driving forces behind them were not correct.
He discovered that power was achievable only by those who had access to production methods and tools.
-Whatever that means. That sounds tautological to me. Marx like many economists was willing to waste a lot of time on tautologies.
He said that capitalism is doomed to fail.
-He said that capitalism would fail because its own inherent contradictions would eventually cause a revolution. Economists have come to believe that the Marx was wrong about the contraditions while history has proven his predictions wrong.
Take a look around. After “communism†fell do you see a better world? A world where economic justice prevails? How many people are poor in comparison with people who are rich?
-Talk to people from eastern Europe about that one…
He was a goddamn genius. And even his most furious detractors agree at that.
-Yes, I agree with that. I personally think that Marx’s primary contributions include (i) understanding the industrial revolution represented a unprecedented change from the previous economic system; (ii) discussing the role of innovation in economic change; and (iii) realizing that business cycles exist and were important. There are probably other that I could name if I took the time.
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:48 amAnd,,,,the Libs believe what they read.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:27 pmThat’s why they cannot see reality.
You are all a bunch of brainwashed idiots. Go find a real news site. Even Fox news is less biased than this piece of trash.
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:55 pmYes I do believe this poll is right on. The type of material for example would be in the areas of Harlequin Romance Novels and Nancy Drew Mystery Series.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:08 pm21 percent counted romance novels in this survey
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:19 pmI can verify this from my own personal experience…the more I have read and the more educated I have become, the more progressive and tolerant I have become.
August 22nd, 2007 at 1:40 pm1) The survey itself asks people to make “their best guess” at how many books they read. It is almost guaranteed to be inaccurate.
2) The survey difference between Liberals (average of 9) and Conservatives (average of 8) is hardly significant (especially when it is a “best guess”). In fact it is statistically INSIGNIFICANT.
3) And yet the conclusion is that Liberals read more than Conservatives?
This is a ridiculous conclusion and a very unscientific survey. The fact that the conclusion is posted on a highly liberal biased site (Think Progress) is more informative than the survey itself.
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:02 pmContards do read books. As long as you count coloring books!
August 22nd, 2007 at 2:22 pmJoe
The statistically significant bit is…
34% Cons, vs 22% liberals and moderates haven’t read a book in the last year.
12% is statistically significant.
August 22nd, 2007 at 3:00 pmSo now we know that liberals read more romance novels.
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:14 pmLiberals read more because they take longer to learn!
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:17 pmWhere’s the cross data from this poll? I don’t any of the results mentioned in the summary.
“There were no differences by political party in the percentage of those who said they had not read at least one book.â€
This poll tells me that people don’t know how to classify themselves.
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:24 pmBruce,
So 12% (or thereabouts) don’t know whether they are Liberal or Conservative (since there was no difference by political party for those who hadn’t read a book).
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 pmLiberals hire more hookers to ………..
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:40 pmThere were probably25 respondents to this poll and now Liberals are considered more intelligent? I am sure that 3 of the response answers came from none other than granny, Jed and elle-mae.
August 22nd, 2007 at 4:43 pmTo insinuate that reading makes you loquacious is ridiculous and irresponsible coming from the White House!
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:13 pm“Obfuscation usually requires a lot more words than if you simply focus on fundamental principles, so I’m not at all surprised by the loquaciousness of liberals.”
While I disagree with the premise here, it seems to me if his argument was valid, this would not be a good way to explain why “liberals read more books”. Assuming liberals are more loquacious, they wouldn’t release their arguments in a multi-volume set of books! Rather, it just means their books would be longer…which would suggest that not only do liberals read more books, but they read longer books too, meaning they read EVEN MORE than the study indicates.
But his premise is unfounded so the point is moot anyway.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:22 pmIf one wants to get a glimpse of the Bush/Rove/Norquist ideology read The Dream and the Nightmare by Myron Magnet.
It talks of smaller goverment, but that hasn’t happened now has it Cons? It’s as if they take a book and do just the opposite of its intent. This is Roves favorite book.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:27 pmHere is the complete list of the 8 books a conservative reads
You left out the Tim LaHaye series of Left Behind [after the rapture] books.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:29 pmLiberals hire more hookers to ………..Comment by Zed Lefflin
Hah. Can you say Cunningham? The GOP is known for its many hookers at conventions, other Cons are sexually repressed Heres an example of a young GOP Michael Flory star.
Never fall asleep around a conpervative.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:40 pmI think that people missed my point when I said various historical genocides were committed by literate men. Maybe the foot soldiers were illeterate, but rest assured the planners and designers were most definetely in command of literacy as a primary tool for information sharing and planning. Many Nazis were professors and philosophers. The entire Christian doctrine of just war was elaborated and created by literate monks who studied philosophy and logic.
The history of writing is that it was developed to document commercial transactions. Writing is what has made empires possible because it allows orders and reports to travel from remote locations. I am not saying writing is bad, I’m just saying that it is a communication tool that can be used for good and bad. There have been amazing societies with no books or writing.
BTW, I consider myself a liberal person, so I’m not making this argument to knock down the cause, but I think the elitist charge against the Left is legitimate and it would be wise for people to get of their high horse and to stop treating the opposition like they are stupid.
August 22nd, 2007 at 5:53 pmUseful fools, as if the AP, reuters and TASS, I mean the New York Times are credible sources.
http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
All you Marxist espousing how literate you are is rather funny, keep it up and the only thing you’ll read is the Koran.
August 22nd, 2007 at 9:47 pmI can verify this from my own personal experience…the more I have read and the more educated I have become, the more progressive and tolerant I have become.
Comment by JB in Texas — August 22, 2007 @ 1:40 pm
I suppose you became very tolerant of getting your ass streched out and progessive in the number of strange men you had sex with.
Go sue a church JB, you reprehensible scumbag.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:03 pmHah. Can you say Cunningham?
Comment by Magnet — August 22, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
Yeah Magnet, you little worm, rat coward. Cunningham did more for this country in one hour over the skies of Vietnam, than every caterwauling, leftist traitor, dissemanting communist crap on this shitty post, did in their disgusting lives.
You punk, drop dead.
August 22nd, 2007 at 10:11 pmlook at that picture of w…
like he took a crap in his pants!!!
terry, ron???
Comment by joe cantwell — August 21, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
Not everyone danced and sang like you did upon learning of the attack on America, bud. ;)
August 22nd, 2007 at 11:49 pmThe language here is abusive. I don’t think it’s appropriate for this kind of forum.
August 23rd, 2007 at 5:04 amAntonio
The real seperation comes not in the leaders, but the followers.
Joe
The Democrats are, in real terms, a centre right party. Its only the extreme rightwing philosophy of the Republicans that make them look sort of left.
Jonathan
Aaawe, you no likey when the left points out the foibles of your gods? The guy could fly a plane. Doesn’t make him any less of a crook.
Oh, and while we are on about that Chambliss guy who attacked Max Cleland on homeland defense?
You know Cleland, a triple amputee Vietnam war hero, and Chambliss, the guy who got four student deferments and a knee injury?
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:58 amAnother stupid meaningless poll riddle me this….how many publishing houses put out conservatives books or are conservative leaning as opposed to liberal leaning? So as for all the book published what percentage of those would have a conservative twist or a liberal twist ( and pick a topic any topic) even college text books are filed with liberal PC BS…so riddle me this. Why would conservative read more of the horse s#$t?
August 23rd, 2007 at 7:59 amOh, and while we are on about that Chambliss guy who attacked Max Cleland on homeland defense?
Should read
Oh, and while we are on about that, what about that Chambliss guy who attacked Max Cleland on homeland defense?
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:00 amJunior – translated:
Waaah, waaah, waaah, my teacher gave me an F for my book report just because I didn’t read the book, waaah.
Kid, maybe you should stop trying to pretend that all sources have a liberal bias, and just accept that the facts do.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:05 amWhere I come from, we say, “Look how you are,” which means your behavior is more revealing than your ideas. Judging from the quality of some commentator’s words, I’m wondering whether or not I should take seriously people who are more obsessed with sexual metaphors than making a reasonable argument. Also, I read somewhere that people basically learned everything they need to know in the kindergarten sandbox. Who ever said that must have been right.
August 23rd, 2007 at 8:51 amAntonio
I was raised more on the idea that this is not the fifth form at Saint Fanny’s.
I insult people quite frankly, because I am a short tempered liberal with enough of a sense of what is happening to not tolerate some little snot accusing his textbooks of being liberal, when his real problem is he doesn’t like school.
You will note the lack of sexual inuendo in my posts when I say that to you.
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:27 amFactor out comic, coloring and match books and the roles reverse… :)
August 23rd, 2007 at 11:11 amBruce, thanks for omitting the locker room humor. Just a thought for everyone else in the forum. When I was a teacher I once learned from working in a class full of very difficult girls whose sole mission was to destroy my sense of self worth, that if I let them tear me one, they would. One solution is to be a major a-hole once at the beginning of the school year, but what I found that worked best was never to take the bate. Of course I didn’t figure this out on my own. A seasoned teacher who had been at the school for 25 years pulled me aside and said, “If they go after you, don’t respond.” Sure enough, the next time they baited me I didn’t take it, and the behavior stopped. It is basic human psychology. People will attack you because they want attention, and I suspect the angry right-wing lurkers who love homosexual metaphors are just dying for some love and attention. If all else fails, I suggest throwing some water balloons. It will just confuse them because they didn’t get the response they were looking for, and it breaks the circuit.
Just a thought, because frankly I thought the Web was supposed to be about democratic participation, but sometimes it just seems like a big pissing contest.
August 23rd, 2007 at 1:43 pmPeople will attack you because they want attention, and I suspect the angry right-wing lurkers who love homosexual metaphors are just dying for some love and attention.
Comment by Antonio — August 23, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
If you look a little closer, Antonio, you’ll see that most sexual references here, homo and hetero, are made by lefties. ;)
August 23rd, 2007 at 3:29 pmOh, and while we are on about that Chambliss guy who attacked Max Cleland on homeland defense?
Oh, and while we are on about that, what about that Chambliss guy who attacked Max Cleland on homeland defense?
Comment by Bruce Gorton — August 23, 2007 @ 8:00 am
Max Cleland was a war hero who lost his limbs as a result of Viet Cong grenades, giving him the stature to gleefully taunt George Bush and Dick Cheney. “Where the hell were you in the Vietnam War?” Cleland responded to Cheney. “If you had gone to Vietnam like the rest of us, maybe you would have learned something about war.”
Then we learned Cleland was a victim only of his own clumsiness and had dropped the grenade on himself in Vietnam after stopping for a beer.
Bruce you gutless, femenized lying coward, Cleland dropped a grenade on himself, drunk in a non-combat situation.
The type of of coward you and your scumbag treanous buddies love to fawn over.
Go back to bath house Bruce.
August 23rd, 2007 at 11:51 pmLet me be clear on something else there , Brucey boy, you punk. Bush and Cheney stabbed my Marine brothers in the back.
August 24th, 2007 at 12:05 amJust like you, so the two people you hate so much, you actually have a lot in common with. You despise the Military, the flag, and this country.
With thier trumped up charges against the Heros who fought in Haditha.
There soon will be a flash point in this country there, Bruce, you mouthy coward, I will not articulate on this commie web page what will happen to you……………….
Johnathan
From Wikipedia
Cleland served in the United States Army during the Vietnam War, attaining the rank of Captain. He was awarded the Silver Star and the Bronze Star for valorous action in combat, including during the Battle of Khe Sanh on April 4th, 1968.
This is opposed to a guy who stayed out of Vietnam via four deferments and a knee injury.
Oh, and the Grenade being Clelands?
No, actually. It was not. It was a case of accidental friendly fire.
Of course, it is much easier for a chickenhawk coward like you to lie about this sort of thing, then to actually check up on your own facts.
August 24th, 2007 at 4:05 amOh, and you championing the Haditha massacre?
Also from Wikipedia:
[edit] 2005 Haditha massacre
August 24th, 2007 at 4:07 amMain article: Haditha killings
On 19 November 2005, 24 Iraqi noncombatants, including 11 women and children, were reported to have been killed by 12 Marines from 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines. The US military is investigating these claims,[7] and two captains and a lieutenant colonel have been relieved of duty.[8] Some allege the massacre was in retribution for an incident earlier in the day in which US Marine Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas was killed in a roadside bomb attack on Marines from Kilo Company.[9] In August of 2006 a commission reviewing the killings found probable cause for charging the Marines.[10] The same day, one of the accused Marines sued Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) for libel because of Murtha’s characterization of the incident saying the Marines killed the civilians “in cold blood.”
Jonathan
Yeah, you Jonathan, it is really a good thing when America gets idenitified with killing women and children now isn’t it?
You are a pig, a sick, disgusting pig Jonathan.
August 24th, 2007 at 4:08 amBruce you are a liar and you most likely made those entries in Commiepedia. Wikopedia is a foundationless source, with entries mostly from Marxist, drug crazed, baby boomer morons, spreading their sedition and hate of this country.
Cleland was not wounded in combat. He dropped a grenade on himself drunk.
The Haditha Marines were cleared of all charges, you seditious scumbag. Charges that were alleged by the enemy. It is only because of dirt merchants like yourself that this even goes on.
It addition the prosecutor in the Haditha case is now being charged.
Murtha should be as well, along with you, rounded up and thrown in Leavenworth for Sedition.
In addition you are all over the map, praising one soldier then accusing another of murder. Which is it Bruce? I see the Marines did not publicly denounce Chaney, and the Liar Cleland has your same agenda-Sedition.
You Dick and George all have a lot in common.
The pig is you for disseminating propaganda to undermine and tarnish the United States Marine Corps.
Now Bruce after some Prozac and a trip to a bondage club, you can go desecrate the Statue Of Iwa Jima, you crackhead.
Traitor. A pox on your House.
August 24th, 2007 at 12:12 pmAh, now I get it. This is a parody of adults having a discussion. Now I see that these guys are Daily Show plants running a dialog for their next show to make a funny joke about how civilized we have become in this booming age of democracy.
August 24th, 2007 at 4:36 pmJonathan
Cleland’s injuries were sustained when a fellow soldier’s grenade popped out of his jacket. Cleland thought the grenade was his, picked up and it went off. They were exiting from a Helicopter at the time, and entering battle. Somehow I doubt the US military is so nice as to host booze ups on the way to the combat zone.
The young, other soldier in question had been wearing a jacket full of grenade’s with straight pins, making him a disaster waiting to happen.
Of course, don’t let the facts get in the way of your propaganda you lying sack of shit.
August 25th, 2007 at 2:52 pmAntonio
I see no reason to ever tolerate a liar like Jonathan. He is spreading lies to try and bolster his weak defenses of his political position. He is a typical rightwinger in this, he thinks it is acceptable to lie to further his own cause.
August 25th, 2007 at 2:55 pmdid not even knew they could read at all
August 28th, 2007 at 12:33 pmLiberals read more because they are drones and incapable of independent thought. They are paralyzed by their thumb sucking, whining diatribe of everything that they themselves are guilty of. Don’t like it here…leave
September 11th, 2007 at 11:13 am