Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Seriously, wrong forum. Jeff and his acolytes shout over reasoned discourse. We hang in other places.
Where do you hang? Seriously, I would love to see intelligent conservative discourse.
Me too! I'm open.
PP who claims it's just the crazies: no, it isn't. The birthers have much more influence than they should. And as for the conspiracy theorists, they're more often equal opportunity anti-government types and pseudo-libertarians than far left.
I think that when there's calculated lying, the real pants-on-fire stuff, from powerful folk like candidates, we are seeing one of two things. There's the belief that because they're on the side of right, they can do and say anything that achieves the goal of gaining power in order to make change. It's a war, and all's fair, even blatant lying and cheating. Or, there's that bizarre cognitive wrinkle displayed by some conservatives in which there is such a strong reaction to evidence against their position that they double down and believe harder. This is where the fear-based distortions come in.
Then there's the powerful in-group identification thing that makes it difficult for some conservatives to impute sound motives to people with whom they don't identify. I think the real dumb and crazy people, like my in-laws, cannot handle his blackness, of course, but also his foreignness - the name, the time spent in Indonesia. Those facts make it impossible for her to see other points of commonality; as the son of a single mother who struggled financially, he has more in common with her own son than with lucky sperm club folks like Bush and Romney. She just can't see it. And because she's dumb and crazy, and everything's so black and white for her, his out group status makes him one step from the devil. She can believe anything about him.
So, you know, SIL posts this bullshit article with the headline "Obamacare begins child sterilization without consent." It sounds at first as though the ACA is mandating sterilization of teenagers. And what it actually is is a bizarre juxtaposition of the ACA's requirement that insurance companies cover all birth control technologies without a copayment with a pre-existing Oregon law mandating a specific consent form for people 15-20 requesting sterilization. This consent form is designed to discourage the procedure in the strongest possible terms.
So I point this out, and MIL responds that she just doesn't think that doctors should be forced to perform procedures to which they have a moral objection.
Um. Uh. You see that? Totally fabricated. She is not only unable to accept that the article is a distortion, but she has *added* information that was not in the article. She's not even lying, exactly; she literally does not relate to the truth. It's irrelevant.