Originally Posted by alansmithee

You can't seriously believe this. You don't take any critique as serious. If someone disagrees, they are labeled conservative, and anything they say is quicky dismissed. This is shown by your obvious disbelief that anyone could actually not accept your arguments-anyone who doesn't accept them is clearly not listening. There is no room in that reasoning for accepting criticism.




Where did I say that lifestyle has nothing to do with economics? Again, by dismissing what I say as a conservative argument, you save yourself the trouble of having to actually listen and try to understand what I am saying. Maybe if I were to fly a plane into your house you would sympathise and try to understand better.

As to the rest, you don't look into the cause of cancer when you have cancer, you just eliminate it. Afterwards is the time for looking into reasons and assigning blame, and working on prevention if it was your actions at fault. But it doesn't do any good to know that your smoking was to blame while you lay dying of lung cancer.



You could replace liberal, and that section is just as valid. You are just using conservative as a label for those who don't agree with you. And obviously, if someone doesn't agree with you, it's because of a personal failing of theirs and not the ridiculousness of your argument, right?



Your whole viewpoint boils down to this:

I have discovered everything living in my ivory tower, and any intellectual inferior (aka conservative) who disagrees with me is obviously wrong, so why should I try to understand anything they might say?

Why are they wrong? Because they're conservative and don't agree with me.

And why should I compromise when I'm obviously so right and they're obviously so wrong?