"Liberty always comes first."
Are you being ironic, or are you speaking of some other government?

Yes.

That whole study is silly. Movie studios have already figured out how to make robots that people can like -- just make them all look like Wall-E.

I'm talking about all the hate I'm reading here. There are lots of people who are so willing to group "others" under a label and then ascribe to that "group" all sorts of attributes such as "stupid", "evil", and assign various opinions and statements to them -- and then hate "them" and spread that hate.

That's ignorant, incorrect and not helpful.

Half the country thinks the other half is ignorant, stupid, evil. That is, Republicans seem to think Democrats are all that. And Democrats are sure that Republicans are all of that. Neither attitude is correct and that viewpoint ensures we will never find solutions to our problems.

I never said that various extreme viewpoints are "equivalent". You just want to create that strawman so you can "win" against him. That's nice, but neatly avoids confronting what I actually said.

And, you are an example of what I am talking about. You are happy-happy-happy to demonize a group you apparently know nothing about -- except what you have been told. While I am not, in any way, religious, and definitely not conservative, the fact that you paint everyone who is Republican and religious as "extremist" simply means that you are part of the problem.

If you only talk to people who agree with you, you will remain ignorant. If you talk to people who disagree with you, you will learn something.

Ah, never mind, I'm talking to the problem.

Interesting.

I'm afraid I just don't understand the linear plotting of viewpoints. The people I know and talk to cannot be plotted on a simple line. I picture all the various possible viewpoints scattered about in some kind of three-dimensional space. That whole left-right paradigm doesn't actually fit real people -- only the extremists.

<whooooosh!>

I understand you completely missed the point. I didn't say "both sides are equal" and I didn't say they "behave the same way all the time". But I did say that stupid, ignorant hate speech isn't isolated to one "group" and the person making such accusations is pretty likely spewing hate speech themselves -- love the irony.

Here's a tip. If person X says stupid, ignorant things, they said it -- not "Democrats", not "Republicans", not "those crazy ...". That one person said it. The hallmark of an ignorant person is that they cannot properly spot the source of some statement and, therefore, tend to generalize.

I disagree with much of what Republicans, Democrats, liberals, conservatives, religious right, et.al. believe. But I can talk with them, I can find agreements, I can understand their viewpoints even when I disagree. They are not, for the most part, "ignorant", "stupid", "hateful", "evil". The idea that one must demonize those who disagree with you in order to be right is not a very bright idea.

When we can talk to those we disagree with, when we can understand their viewpoints, then we can find a way through our difficulties. The desire to demonize ensures we can never find a real solution to our common problems.

*sigh* Thanks, I needed another example of ignorant hate speech, ignorant grouping of people under a label and ignorant generalities about them. Just what I needed.

The United States has lots of extreme viewpoints, right, left, center and "other". And they all hammer their own little, ignorant hate messages.

Yes, the religious right does that -- and the extreme left does it too. You don't have to look at only one extreme to see all the hate being generated. Your post is an example of yet another one-sided hate spewing viewpoint.

Our recent politics on all sides have generated the idea that anyone who disagrees with the One True Viewpoint is either Evil or Stupid ... or both.

A pox on all your houses.

The way to combat such stupid, ignorant hate is to stop doing it!

That's your interpretation. Even if that's so, it was a very, very poor choice of example. By the fact of his example's juxtaposition to Google's tax avoidance, the connection certainly was implied. I have no trouble thinking up examples that are closer to the actual, alleged "bad conduct".

Understand that I was not disputing his argument, nor did I claim this argument was invalid. All I was saying and all I continue to say is he made a very, very poor choice for an example. -- a point no one seems to have figured out.

Ah, never mind.

Before yet another kind commenter feels compelled to correct me (and insult me for my mistake) I'd like to acknowledge that I was mistaken about NORAD not taking phone calls any more.

Gee, thanks! That's so very, very kind of you to help a poor, misguided individual such as myself to improve himself. I'm so glad you are here to impart your incredible wisdom to those less fortunate. Truly, I am so very grateful. I hope you can hang around and continue to help me in all my posting endeavors. Once again, you have my deep and undying gratitude for your careful, thoughtful and detailed instructions. I really don't know what I would do without your tremendous assistance. Thanks again!

Also, did you notice that I have been corrected for this one mistake twice before? Did you miss that or did you just think I hadn't been insulted enough for your satisfaction?

I didn't think I was talking to kids. If anyone reading this is a child, I take it all back: Santa is real!

Nice. Glad to hear some of the old stuff is still going on.