No, Liberals, You’re Wrong: Conservatism Isn’t About Fear
Liberals don’t get conservatives. New York University psychologist Jonathan Haidt, formerly a liberal himself, showed how much more liberals misunderstand conservatives than vice versa. And when they get conservatives wrong, often it’s by saying we’re “afraid.” Irrationally afraid, even; in fact, we’re “driven by fear.” They’re wrong: conservatism isn’t about fear. But they keep repeating it anyway.
Take the Psychology Today article, “Fear and Anxiety Drive Conservatives’ Political Attitudes.” (I just love it when they portray us in such a healthy light, don’t you?)
Biased Interpretations (Part 1)
The author, Bobby Azarian, tells us conservatives have a problem. People on the right “fear new experiences,” says. Based on what evidence, you ask? It’s the stuff college students keep in their dorm rooms. Researchers at Berkeley found that liberal students have more travel-related items, while conservatives have more planning- and cleaning-related items.
“This tells us that liberals more often seek adventure and novel experiences,” says Azarian. “Conservatives, on the other hand, seem to prefer a more ordered, disciplined lifestyle.” Okay, I get that there’s a difference there. I’ve got several questions, though. (First rule of reading science journalism: Ask lots of questions.)
First, why weren’t fear or anxiety even mentioned in the original research report? (They’re brought up briefly in the literature review section, but not where the current research was discussed.)
Second, what about the thousands upon thousands of conservative Christians who take mission trips to less-developed, often deadly parts of the world every year? How is Azarian going to explain this “fear” to them?
How on earth do planning, orderliness and discipline equate to fear?
And third, based strictly on Azarian’s article alone, how on earth do planning, orderliness and discipline equate to fear?
Conservatives’ dorm rooms only reflect fear if fear is what you’re looking for.
Biased Interpretation (Part 2)
Azarian goes on to report on a brain study; he has to, actually. Everything in psychology takes a brain study these days. (Everything.)
He tells us that MRIs show that the amygdala, a fear-related brain region, is larger on average in conservatives than in liberals. “It is possible,” says Azarian, “that an oversized amygdala could create a heightened sensitivity that may cause one to habitually overreact to anything that appears to be a potential threat, whether it actually is one or not.”
Note carefully how he hedges his words. “It is possible that… could create … may cause.” That’s good. It’s the right, responsible way to report on science of this sort.
Help us champion truth, freedom, limited government and human dignity. Support The Stream »
But hang on! Watch what happens next: “This disproportionate fear response could explain how, for example, Bush’s administration was able to gather wide public support amongst conservatives for invading Iraq.”
He’s gone straight from a list of maybes to a firm statement that conservatives have a “disproportionate fear response.” Applying our first rule, I have to ask why. The most likely answer? Bias. Not science.
Biased Interpretation (Part 2)
Azarian also tells us conservatives are way too aware of potential threats. How do we know this? Because in controlled experimental settings, they tend to focus more attention on pictures of “car wrecks, spiders on faces, and open wounds crawling with maggots.” Liberals, in contrast, tend to look more at “a happy child or a cute bunny rabbit.”
But I’ve got another question: Why not think instead that liberals avoid negative images because they can’t handle them? Who knows — maybe they’re that much more fearful than conservatives!
So I read the original research report to see if it said anything about that, one way or another. Turns out there’s not much there, if anything, to contradict that suggestion. (In fairness, other studies suggest that it’s at least very complicated, if not totally unlikely.)
What I did find there, though, is very interesting. It’s in the closing “Discussion” section, meaning that it’s one of the researchers’ own conclusions:
It appears individuals on the political right are not so much ‘fearful’ and ‘vulnerable’ as attuned and attentive to the aversive in life.
The researchers go on to connect that awareness to conservatives’ interest in social stability — one of the chief things Jonathan Haidt showed that liberals don’t get about conservatives!
How could Azarian have missed that? How could he think this study showed fear on the right, when its authors said it didn’t mean that at all? Was this an intentional error? Or was it his own bias misleading him? After all, the first duty of those who would explain what’s wrong with conservatives is to find something wrong with conservatives.
The first duty of those who would explain what’s wrong with conservatives is to find something wrong with conservatives.
”Stoking Fear”? No!
Azarian isn’t the only one latching on to conservative “fear.” Slate writer Christina Cauterucci says in regard to Down Syndrome and abortion,
Women’s rights and disability rights are not mutually exclusive movements; they intersect and inform one another in important ways. Anti-abortion activists are stoking fear in advocates of the latter in hopes that they’ll join an assault on the former.
Actually, the pro-life arguments I typically see for letting Down syndrome babies live — like our own Nancy Flory’s recent article — have everything to do with love, joy and laughter, and nothing at all to do with “stoking fear.”
Driven By Fear? No!
Then there’s Harvard professor R. Marie Griffith. Her book Moral Combat: How Sex Divided American Christians & Fractured American Politics takes the fear theme to impressive new heights. (Or depths.)
She writes in the introduction, “For those who worked to sustain the old sexual order and resisted models for sexual relationships and behavior outside traditional marriage, a driving force has been fear.”
Or, in case you don’t catch it there, you’ll find this a few pages later.
Those fearing change have instilled that dread in others through warnings of moral ruin and the wholesale failure of American civilization if sexual rules are relaxed, while those welcoming it have offered visions of a healthier society freed from archaic restraints.
But maybe you still don’t get it. Not to worry: Griffith repeats the fear theme fully a dozen times in the introduction alone.
Seeing Both Good and Bad
She would do well to read conservatives’ actual writings on marriage and morality. Naturally, we don’t shrink back from noting what can go wrong if people do wrong. Why should we? Life isn’t all just happy children frolicking in the meadow.
Still, in all that I’ve read and written on marriage and morality — and I’ve done a lot of both — the dominant conservative tone has been positive, not negative. A healthy marriage between a man and a woman is very, very good. The reason to keep sexual relationships within marriage is because it supports the health of marriage itself, it’s better for the couple, better for their children and better for communities.
Don’t let them make you feel smaller than you are. Keep on pressing forward in the confidence and the hope that fit who we really are.
Now does sound our “driving force” is fear? Only if you don’t know how to read. Or, as Haidt found, if you don’t know how to consider viewpoints other than your own. Or if you think there’s something wrong with people whose view of reality encompasses more than cute little bunnies.
The Point
The point of all this for liberals is, don’t believe everything you read about conservatives. We’re not as motivated by fear as some people want you to think we are.
As for conservatives, come to think of it, the point is exactly the same! This “fear” language is intended to shame us, belittle us, even dehumanize us. It’s mostly false rhetoric, though.
Of course it still never hurts to examine ourselves. Are we motivated by faith, hope and love? Are we seeking to recover and preserve that which is really good — while keeping a realistic eye open to what threatens to harm it?
If not, then it’s time to recover a proper focus. But if so, then ignore the shaming attempts. Don’t let them make you feel smaller than you are. Keep on pressing forward in the confidence and the hope that fit who we really are. https://stream.org/no-liberals-youre-wrong-conservatism-isnt-about-fear/
Conservatives and morality. What a fucking joke.
What do Liberals know about "Morality" anyway.
Choose your bathroom, choose your gender, Winds Blowing in the Oral Office, Epstein Flights, Stewart Smalley tit grabs, 0.001% Native American perks, Kissy Kissy with Weinstein for bucks, Twitter Photos of Weiner-s, Conning Conyers sex for favors....etc.
Give me a fucking break with this "Holier than thou" stuff.
Rightwing projection at it's most extreme. One of the most egregious traits they have is the complete lack of any self-awareness.
Ditto, Dude !
Do trans people scare or disgust you? The problem is that you do not understand gender identity. Nobody chooses their gender or their bathroom. People are born transgender and change their physical gender as much as medically possible to align with their psychological gender, which is their innate sense of self. You do not see a person who is transgendered before they begin to transition, so you think that they just randomly decided to change their gender which is not true. Almost all trans people have known that they were born with the wrong physical gender for their psychological gender identity but that is not seen by others unless you are a friend or family member. You also don't see LGB people before they come out and admit that they are not hetero but nobody consciously chooses to be LGB either.
The cure is not more government regulations or more religious morality, but you l to learn about human sexuality.
It sure does seem that Christian extremists and conservatives in general are terrified by anyone who doesn't fit into a rigid gender norm. It must really frustrate their authoritarian instincts.
When People are born with certain pieces and parts, claim they are something else while keeping those pieces and parts, and then want to use the bathroom opposite their true born gender, that's immoral.
Use of a bathroom is immoral?? Alrighty then Sammy!
It's so cute when you "try".
But at least you try.
You just proved my previous statement about your ignorance of the issue. Stop trying to take their equal rights away from others because of your ignorance of this subject.
A persons gender identity is not determined by their physical gender because trans people would not exist if it did. Our chromosomes only conclusively determine your physical gender but there are occasionally cases where a person's physical gender does not align with their psychological gender identity. Those cases create a person that is transgendered. Our brain determines our sense of self and our behavior and not the physical body or the hormones. Our gender identity is in our brain and it cannot be changed, even with surgery so the medical solution is to change the body as much as possible with hormones and then surgery to math the persons gender idenity. This is accompined with physacial counseling to help a person transtion into their identified gender role.
Do you typically look at a person's genitals when you use the bathroom? If you would concern yourself less with other's lives and instead keep to yourself you wouldnt have this problem.
Are intersex people also immoral in your conservative universe?
Thumpers think that all LGBTQ people are pedophiles, and they fear the competition.
biological sex - not gender identity
so they are taking care of their gender identity and you seem to worry about their biological sex. do you check everyone's genitals in bathrooms to make sure the "right ones" are present ?
what is a "true born gender" ? it seems you think that gender identity is biological sex which highlights a misunderstanding of gender identity.
so can we have a manual of your "Morality" and it's rules ?
YOUR rights don't supersede MY RIGHTS !
That's what "Diversity" is all about ! You can Like, I can dislike, and so on. "And that's the way it is" !
what "right" of yours is being superseded ?
good - point me in the direction of this clear-cut easily understood, explained to the letter, book on your "morality" and its rules.
How exactly do equal rights for others take away your rights? What law took away your rights?
Can "I" go in the lady's room without a cop showing up ?
if you are of the female gender - yes you can. If you are of the male gender - then it's tricky, depending on the state (and depending on private business vs public etc). There are states that do not make it illegal for a person of the male gender to enter into the women's restrooms (obviously committing illegal acts in either restroom will get you a visit from the cops) Of course, your gender is different than your biological sex so you are asking a seemingly "complex" question to those people (mostly the conservative minded) who don't grasp that simple concept.
But we all know - it is quite possible for either gender to enter into either bathroom and successfully relieve themselves of bodily waste in either bathroom - so obviously bathrooms are not separated by biological sex but are separated by gender.
again - what "right" of yours is being superseded ?
Unless you are transgendered the answer is no. Being transgendered is a medical diagnosis. Do you have anything to prove that you are transgendered?
Do you have a letter from your therapist? Are you taking hormones and living full time as a member of the opposite gender from your birth gender?
skirting the CoC [ph]
Says a person who defends and supports Trump, with no qualifiers. I'm not sure conservatives recognize 'moral' and 'disgusting people' any more.
That comment flies in the face of the meme that teabags and thumpers are the best at everything.
That's what the purpose of these idiotic, absurdly self-serving articles is: to convince themselves that their perverted ideas are the norm and everyone else are aberrant. It's an inversion of their constant projection of all their hideousness onto their critics.
If Donald Trump, Raul Ryan, Steven Bannon or Newt Gingerich are your idea of moral people, I'd rather be immoral.
Only at treason, white collar crime, pedophilia, and adultery.
...the new set of teavangelical values.
Conservatives do run primarily on fear.
Fear of change.
Fear of foreigners.
Fear of non-Christians.
Fear of non-Capitalists.
Fear of minorities.
Fear of feminists.
Fear of LGBTs.
Fear of education.
Fear of losing access to guns.
Fear of objective reality.
Etc.
All of that fear and hate is directly linked to the overly enlarged Amygdala in conservative brains.
Colloquially known as part of "the lizard brain" (limbic system) for it's being responsible for our most primitive and often destructive reflexes.
I don't see any Conservatives needing 'safe spaces', do you? I don't see any Conservatives 'screaming at the sky', do you?
You "war on Christmas" must not be paying any attention at all in addition to being complete hypocrites given that the persecution complex is core to the identity of Christian conservatives.
Not only are whiny Christian extremists demanding safe refuge from public accommodation laws but we even have this gem of bigot logic from bible-babbling Republicans in SC who are demanding special rights and a safe place from "secular humanists".....this is from a new Jim Crow bill where they want to assign married gay couples to "parody marriages", while all other married couples get to retain the term "marriage." Their linguistic gymnastics and intellectual dishonesty are worth an LOL, as is their rather obvious butt-hurt and need for a safe place:
That's FoxNews--at least the most heavily used safe space of the vast array of rightwing places to go in order to be protected from facts and truth. The ultimate shelter from reality and decency that rightwingers must have in order to "function," as it were. Without that escape from reality and the massive amount of lies, false propaganda and slander it provides rightwingers wouldn't be able to show up anywhere else. And it's not just the bilge that rightwing pukefunnels discharge by the second it's the fact that there's an impermeable firewall against any truth or fact ever even accidentally finding its way in.
have you looked around here lately ? were you apart of the last vote for the COC ? are you telling me that we are now more limited with our speech because its only the liberal-minded who needed a "safe space" from words they didn't like and voted accordingly ?
and this isn't the only place either:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-a-campaign-season-of-riotous-rallies-and-mockery-of-safe-spaces-some-republicans-are-feeling-sensitive/2017/01/26/ca5ab770-e346-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html?utm_term=.c0113ef2fe5c
so yes, i see "conservatives" needing "safe spaces", do you ?
This list is correct.
You forgot the #1 Fear religious conservatives admit controls their lives, "Fear of Hellfire". The vast majority of religious conservatives I've spoken to don't believe humans can choose to be good without imagining a God looking over their shoulders watching their every move and threatening them with eternal punishment.
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph] what it amounts to is "preaching to the choir." Its purpose is not to try to convince liberals or even moderates that rightwingers aren't really the monsters they seem to be but really just misunderstood and unfairly (unfairness is a big and constant theme for these turdflakes) portrayed because they know they're just the nicest and most moral and patriotic and decent people in the universe. Of course, this isn't going to get any traction with anyone whose senses are intact but it's what rightwingers need to keep telling themselves in order to continue to be horrible.
My Mommy taught me that life is unfair and to stop whining
Yes, she was. Thank-you
I had to help in the kitchen. And so I learned to cook at my mother's elbow. There were times I resented it, but I can at least feed myself without burning down the house
Was that translated from the original Russian via google?
Atheism is the opposite of relgious belif.
... or atheism is the absence of religious belief
An interesting claim particularly given the emails which prove that Trump campaign officials encouraged George Papadopoulos to reach out to Russian operatives to help get Trump elected.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/you-should-do-it-trump-officials-encouraged-george-papadopouloss-foreign-outreach-documents-show/2018/03/23/2dae8c8e-2d38-11e8-8688-e053ba58f1e4_story.html?utm_term=.7e616f94d375
.
By the way can you support your moronic claim in any way?
You are conflating atheism with science and simultaneously distorting science itself. What a mess.
I will help you untangle. First step, however, is to steer clear of sites like Answers In Genesis. They exist to promote a YEC agenda and freely redefine words and distort science to do so. They have no shame.
First, atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god. Where 'god' means any god that has been defined throughout history. It is not a belief system because it holds no belief. Atheists are simply those who are not convinced there is a god.
Next, it is science that holds that the universe and life arose by natural processes. This is also not a belief - it is an evidence based conclusion that will be refined per new evidence. Science offers the best explanation we have to-date based on evidence .
Redefining terms to make a point is the crudest form of intellectual dishonesty. This is the modus operandi of AiG. Best not to emulate them.
Atheism has no beliefs, other than the lack of evidence for a supernatural creator.
You are confusing the ideas of humanism and political progressives with the logical stance of atheism.
could you tell everyone what exactly the "belief system" is that Atheism adheres to and where you found this information ? is it in an "Anti-Bible" book somewhere ?
That may be the stupidest comment in all of the bible. To use the words of the author of the quote to act as "proof" that there are no true atheists is like having Theodore Bundy writing a treatise that there are no true serial killers. The believer is going to believe regardless of all of the evidence to the contrary and the lack of evidence in support. The atheist certainly doesn't need someone who talks to imaginary friends that once wore a diaper telling him or her that there are no atheists. You can believe whatever delusion you like, that is your right. You can fear eternal damnation. That is your right. You can be afraid of gays, transgendered individuals, the educated, science, etc. That is your right {and the function of the part of the brain that controls fear and primal responses}. The truth is you can't help it.....your brain makes you think that way.
The bottom line, however, between liberals and conservatives is that we understand and can show empathy for your fears and realize that you can't help it, even though you're wrong, while the conservative thinks that the liberal is EVIL and that their ideas should somehow be eradicated.
It's a good thing that every great advance in this country's history has come from those of us on the liberal side of the aisle.
Then you find honorable an organization that distorts science and redefines words to meet their needs. Confirmation bias at play.
As usual there are no emails to be seen in those two articles, but both are filled with innuendos without any evidence at all. The Liberals keep falling for em, so the Left Wing sites keeps feeding em. They have high hopes and the truth isn't going to get in their way.
Shake you up there Doc? Why don't you analyze your comment from an unbiased position? I think you gave it away with that comment.
You obviously didn't bother to read either article. This is from the WaPost:
That's why I don't live in the bible belt. No need to be collateral damage for the sins of thumper heretics.
There are a lot of so called Christians that are in deep trouble.
Do not believe everything you read. Holding the Bible as divine disables critical thinking as evidenced by your fully misunderstanding the very concept of atheism and the apparent likelihood that you will never try to understand this using objective reasoning and sound evidence.
You believe because you were conditioned to believe. If you were born into a Muslim family, you would believe in Allah as the true and unerring God; if you were born into an Orthodox Jewish family, you would believe that the God of the Old Testament is singular and that Jesus didn't fulfill any of the promises of the Moshiach. If you were born into a Hindu family, you would believe in the pantheon of Hindu Gods. If you were born into a Wiccan family, you would have adopted those beliefs.
For most of us, we believe in what we were brainwashed into. It is only those who seek to question the absurdities of faith and doctrine that either change religious affiliation or become atheists. The world is changing.....more and more people are being educated and they are beginning to ask more questions. As those questions are asked, people move away from the archaic views of god and toward atheism. Chuck Todd showed an interesting statistic today on Meet the Press. 24.2% of Americans now identify themselves as not identifying with any theism {therefore either agnostic or atheistic}. That means that 1/4 of Americans, up from 9.4% in 2000 tells us that religion is dying.
The view of the young is antagonistic to your "heartland American" viewpoint. They refuse to view right with conservatism, guns with safety, religion with morality, education with elitism, ethnicity with crime and drugs. You have already lost the war. Your daily jibberish sounds like the last gasp of a dying dynasty. The day of the conservative is dying with our generation. This isn't a condemnation, it is a fact.
A position that one comes to through study and the evolution of thought is an unbiased position. I began my life as a theist, minored in comparative religion, and have studied the "holy" texts in detail. The fact that those studies have led to a science supported conclusion rather than a faith supported supposition is far more defensible as being less influenced by bias than the conclusion that one has been brainwashed in since birth. When ultimate truth is driven by the faith of belief in the unbelievable, that is bias. That is also the antithesis of sound scientific inquiry.
and we've been right and the statistics prove it in absolute terms.........you can cry and denigrate the non-believer all you want, but you lose.......your arguments do nothing but reinforce the fears that this entire thread began with.
They simultaneously cry about how they're victims while actively attempting to victimize others.
How have you ever or are you being victimized by secular progressives?
Projection. That's the thumper MO.
Apart from their ethical failures caused by their superstition, thumpers must be the dumbest and most gullible people on the planet.
How exactly were you victimized by the free speech of people that you have never met?
Liberals set up safe rooms on college campuses where they can have milk and cookies while hugging a Teddy bear.
You know this how? Currently living in one?
You think in a year or so the same question will be asked again?
Time to intellectually destroy yet another HA opinion piece.
Proof.
More proof.
More proof.
More proof.
Another HA article taken down. Next.
Oh, and there'll always be a next and a next and a next.........
He's got a Himalaya of BS yet to unload here.
And they're all about the same thing, how wicked and evil the Left is, and how chaste and pure the Right is. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Superstition and irrationality aren't beneficial traits even if they are common.
However it's not surprising that dumb or uneducated folks are far more likely to be superstitious and believe in the supernatural than smart or educated folks.
Excuse me...but...look again, I did not make that statement in any way.
You might take some time to actually read who the comments are by.
Don't put words in my mouth. I'm actually quite capable of speaking for myself.
In what way? I didn't mentioned anything about what you suggested.
Again, don't put words in my mouth.
Given you were 'impassed' upon, I will now explicitly note that your complaint is quite valid. The quote was -through syntax and context- falsely attributed to you.
The proper response, IMO, is not impasse but apology.
Thank you for the confirmation, TiG. The incorrect attribution was clearly HA's, not once, but, twice. The first was the misdirecting reference of the wording to me to me in the first place, and second was to buckle down on it and refusing to admit it was his error, preferring to call an Impasse instead.
And, while I am not a Christian, I am NOT an atheist.
However, I won't hold my breath for an apology from him.
There is no science in the value judgment that conservatives are "way too aware." We can just as easily make the judgment that Liberals refuse to face reality. You can focus on the child or the bunny all day long, but that doesn't change the fact that the car wreck, spider, and maggots are still there and have to be dealt with.
Off Topic [ph]
"Aware" certainly isn't an accurate description. I'd just describe you folks as sensitive and frail.
Conservatism Isn’t About Fear
Absolutely correct. The problem is that most who claim to wear the mantle of conservatism today, would not know a real conservative if bitten on the arse by one.
Yeah, today it seems synonymous with reactionary and ignorant bible-babbler.
Based on that article it sounds like bible-babblers are quite fragile creatures indeed! Do you need a safe place to hide from the mean atheists?
That's not what your citation said. It made it very clear that Christian extremists are terrified of anyone who doesn't support their nutty superstitions. It even falsely claims that secular persons are responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths, and seems to endorse violence against people who aren't superstitious. It sounds a lot like the preaching by Muslim extremists against heretics and gays in order to provoke mob violence against those groups, much like Christians do in oppressive authoritarian states like Russia, Uganda and the Republic of Georgia.
I'll alert Fox News.
That's obviously untrue since you seem to be terrified of gays, atheists and transgender folks. Presumably you even check for Muslims under your bed before you go to sleep at night. You're even whining now about being "persecuted" yet you've never been able to cite even one example of such persecution.
By the way are you still fighting the thirty years war on Christmas? It must be tough to be such a paranoid Christian these days with monsters and dust bunnies all out to getcha.
Try praying for that comment to reappear.
Skirting CoC {SP}
Sounds like you're one of those irritating people who goes around the neighborhood ringing doorbells while people are trying to sleep on the weekend, all because you lack confidence in your own superstitions and you think you need other folks to help prop up your cult.
Born again scum don't represent or demonstrate the teachings of Jesus, and never will.
Look who's talking.
HUH?
Nobody is persecuting you. What is a gospel commission?
I speculate posting teavangelical bullshit is just the latest self-persecution complex ploy on this site. My guess is it means we'll be seeing a lot more bible babble and jesus jabber here. I'm pretty sure the gospel commission are the guys in brown shirts that haven't earned the feet for the crosses on their armbands yet. Past history shows that christo-fascists usually try to convert first, as justification for committing genocide.
That is just mindless Christian apologetics. Ever time I read that nonsense I can't help but think that it's the logical equivalent of 2 blind men arguing about what the color red is. It's a lot of sound and emotions but ultimately is mindless verbal diarrhea.
Seeds need to be moved to the religious wasteland of NT as soon as the bible thumping starts.
you have many of your fellow conservatives and religious brethren on here to thank for that since they also voted the same way during the COC vote - so you can stop the '"liberals" and "atheists" are trying to persecute you by silencing you act' when in reality its a lot of your own brethren that are silencing you.
And now, let do the "SPECIFICS" thing.
CONSERVATIVE FEAR-MONGERING FROM RECENT YEARS/EVENTS
1. Michelle Nunn Is Pro-Terrorist Because She Worked With A Muslim Charity: In Georgia's remarkably close Senate race, GOP nominee David Perdue ran a smear commercial claiming her charity was linked to terrorists because of its work with the Islamic Relief USA. Poltifact found the claim so outlandish it gave it one of its coveted “ Pants on Fire ” ratings.
2. Obama Cut A Secret Deal To Bring Ebola To The United States: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) had this revelation on Sean Hannity's radio show: “I can’t help but believe, just based on the way we’ve got all these nebulous excuses why not to have a travel ban, this president, I guarantee you, we’re going to find out, he has cut a deal with African leaders. They’re going to bring people in.”
3. ISIS Is Coming Over The Border Due To Discovered Prayer Rugs That Are Actually Adidas Jerseys: Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst claimed that ISIS prayer rugs were recently found at the border, signaling a possible invasion. The prayer rugs turned out to be Adidas jerseys .
4. Sexual Assault Is A Result Of Taking The Bible Out Of Schools: Jody Hice, the GOP nominee for Georgia's 10th congressional district, which is currently represented by extremist Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA), warned that if we don't stop taking prayer out of public school, we'll see more of the kind of sexual assault that took place at Penn State
5. ISIS Will Send Ebola-Infected Fighters To The U.S.: Topping Gohmert and Dewhurst, Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) went as far as to say that ISIS will weaponize Ebola suicide bombs. "Think about the job they could do, the harm they could inflict on the American people by bringing this deadly disease into our cities, into schools, into our towns, and into our homes. Horrible, horrible,” he said.
6. Arm Yourself, Just In case The Government Tries To Take Away Your Guns: Iowa Senate GOP candidate Joni Ernst warned that she carries her pistol just in case the government tries to confiscate it: “I have a beautiful little Smith & Wesson, 9 millimeter, and it goes with me virtually everywhere. But I do believe in the right to carry, and I believe in the right to defend myself and my family — whether it’s from an intruder, or whether it’s from the government, should they decide that my rights are no longer important."
7. If You Vote For Democrats, They'll Let Loose Violent African-American Inmates: In Nebraska's second congressional district , Republicans are running a Willie Horton-esque ad that implies Democrats were responsible for a mentally ill violent inmate being released and then going on a murder spree. The ad juxtaposes the Democratic candidate with the African American inmate.
8. Obama Is Going To Import Terrorists Into Our Neighborhoods: The RNC cut an ad warning of Obama's “plans to bring terrorists from Guantanamo to our country,” implying that under any successful executive action somehow terrorist suspects will be walking American neighborhoods rather than be sitting in maximum-security prisons.
9. Equal Pay Laws Would Scare Employers And Put Women Out Of Work: Monica Wehby, running for Oregon's Senate seat, said that she opposed equal pay laws for women because it would “make it more difficult to hire women, because of the fear of lawsuits. They would tend to steer away.”
10. Social Programs Are Leading To Suicide: Rep. Don Young (R-AK) said that government social programs are leading to a rise in suicides due to corresponding decline in support from family and friends. He eventually apologized .
What's scarier, these lies, or, the fact the GOP knows many right-wing American voters will fall for them?
Want more … got more