1. The U.S. is in every way vastly superior to every other nation on earth. And we’re God’s favorite.
2. Everyone deserves his or her financial status, whether rich or poor. If you work hard enough, you’ll be successful, and if you’re poor, you’re just lazy. The only rich people who are just lucky are Hollywood celebrities, who are pampered airheads totally out of touch with the real world. (Except for Chuck Norris.)
3. Giving a pittance in handouts to the poor encourages dependency and is a major burden to taxpayers; giving billions in handouts to the rich encourages industriousness and is good for the economy. If we take care of the rich first, it will trickle down to everyone else.
4. The Confederacy was a noble cause, and the Civil War was inevitable. It was really about states’ rights rather than slavery.
5. The bombing of Japan was necessary to end the war, and it saved more lives than it destroyed.
6. The Democratic Party is the party of tax and spend, and the Republican Party is the party of fiscal restraint.
7. Eating meat makes you strong and healthy.
8. Ronald Reagan won the cold war, and brought about the downfall of the Soviet Union.
9. The Founding Fathers were all Christian, and intended the U.S. to be a Christian nation.
10. Islam is a more violent religion than Christianity.
11. It’s impossible to have a moral compass without religion.
12. It’s easy to read and understand the Bible; the English translations we have are very accurate.
13. Trying to guarantee equality of economic opportunity is the same as trying to guarantee equality of economic achievement; and it’s socialist/ communist/ fascist/ whateverist.
14. Capital punishment deters crime.
15. Outlawing abortion is an effective way to prevent it.
16. Pro-choice is the same as pro-abortion.
17. The Second Amendment gives you the right to own a gun.
18. Firearm regulation (“gun control”) means trying to outlaw guns.
19. Evolution means that humans descended from apes; and it’s only a theory.
20. Secularism means suppression of religious freedom.
21. There is an “invisible hand” guiding the economy, and if we just leave it alone, everything will turn out fine on its own.
22. Regulation of business practices is an unwarranted interference in free enterprise, and is socialist/ communist./ fascist/ whateverist.
23. Sex education just gives kids ideas that they’d never be able to think of otherwise; what really works is to tell kids to just say no.
24. “Political correctness” is a totalitarian mindset that squashes free speech.
25. There is a “liberal” bias to American media.
The Propaganda Professor 
Greetings from CheeseFlap
Love what you are doing here
Will be watching site!
Thanks! Nice to hear from you.
POP, have some thoughts on 3 of these this including another post you did attacking Christmas (Nov. 2010) which I couldn’t reply to.
1. Hiroshima and Nagasaki-my view always has and will be that atom bombs should’ve been dropped elsewhere in Japan with fewer civilians killed and wounded (such as 5,000 killed & wounded rather than over 150,000), they did end the war. If Japan and Germany had the atom bombs they’d have used them against us. Yes, the 3 year olds killed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are innocent war victims, but President Harry S. Truman only had bad choices. A ground war with Japan would’ve resulted in more civilian deaths as Japanese would’ve used women and children in combat. War is something bad and what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki is a bad choice, but they did end war.
2. Abortion, I’m pro-abortion in some cases such as if it can be predicted that an unborn baby would have deformity such as Down Syndrome, but that it must be the mom’s choice. But as pro-lifers call me pro-abortion as as they regarded abortion as murdering a baby, then that’s fine with me. Pro-choice does mean the same thing as pro-abortion because pro-lifers believe abortion is killing a baby which they believe should not be a choice except to save mother‘s life. What they’d say is no, making abortion illegal doesn’t stop it 100% just as having laws against stealing doesn’t stop it 100%, but making them illegal does reduce them as most people don’t want to go to prison.
3. Death penalty-I’m against death penalty in almost all cases, though not as far as abolishing death penalty. If it’s done, then it must only be for worst cases, after a jury has decided and I support long appeals for death row inmates which includes commuting a death sentence to life in prison. Death penalty would deter the individual who is executed. But again, I’m mostly against death penalty and though I don’t believe in abolition, do believe that we use every chance to avoid death penalty.
POP, with Thanksgiving and Christmas. I’m not a Christian, but I’d rather people tell me Merry Christmas than Happy Holidays. I wouldn’t care for people saying Happy Holidays if there wasn’t controversy over Merry Christmas, but there has been controversy over saying Merry Christmas. Most non-Christians aren’t offended by people saying Merry Christmas. My problem is with companies who tell their workers that they can’t say Merry Christmas or when they call a Christmas Tree a Holiday Tree. People should have the right to say either Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays and not be punished for saying either. Yes, Christmas is a religious holiday celebrating Jesus Christ’s birth, but non-Christians must not be offended by Merry Christmas. With Thanksgiving, among the people who have defended Thanksgiving is a Mrs. Linda P. Harvey of Mission America and Mrs. Linda P. Harvey is part American Indian-Cherokee. I praise Mrs. Linda P. Harvey of Misssion America for defending Columbus Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas.
Mrs. Linda P. Harvey has said that American Indians lived hard and scrabble lives and would kill each other for territory. American Indians including the (Tainos and Caribs (or Canibs) discovered by Columbus) lived mostly like street gangs. Each tribe had their own land & when an American Indian tribe wanted land from another American Indian tribe, they used violence to get the land. American Indians killed eachother with tomahawks (ax), bows and arrows,etc. to get land from eachother. When American Indians won land by wars, they were proud winners. But when American Indians lost the land by wars, then they became sore losers complaining about stolen land. Mrs. Linda P. Harvey also defends Thanksgiving and Christmas she is Christian. Mrs. Linda P. Harvey is again a part American Indian woman who has critiqued people who distort history to attack these holidays.
Also with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. People do discuss this many years after the war. My view to repeat always has and will be that the atom bombs should’ve been dropped elsewhere in Japan with fewer civilians killed & wounded as both cities were incidental when it came to military strategy, that most Japanese pepole are fine-most people of any group want to stay out of the war.
@ the same time, they did end the war. Japan was using a kamikaze airforce, had bushido (Samurai’s Way) where fighting to death and suicide was their option over surrender. Biological warfare was used against China. Incidentally, I’ve been to both China (2010) & Japan (1993).
Most Hiroshima & Nagasaki survivors have said that they don’t blame President Harry S. Truman because they know the intent was to end the war and that it wasn’t against the victims personally, though they think it should’ve been done with fewer civilians killed and wounded. & again, if both Germany & Japan had the atom bombs, they’d have used them against us as Japan used biological warfare such as Shiro Ishi’s fleabombs carrying plague, typhoid and anthrax against China. 19 to 40 million Chinese were killed during the WW2 (1931-45).
War is a bad thing and sadly as long as wars have been with us, people who don’t want part of the war, end up being the victims, as the 3 year olds killed in Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Dresden are innocent victims who are not to blame for what their relatives did in Nanking, Bataan & Auschwitz. I don’t like the idea of bombing cities with intent to kill civilians, but during WW2, both sides believed that by bombing cities, the other side would surrender. Again war is a bad thing which is not understandable.
With Islam. While it’s true Christianity has sometimes had a violent history such as with the Crusades, persecution of non-Christians such as Goa Inquisition (Inquisition in Spain isn’t as bad as people think as death penalty was usually not given-late Warren H. Carroll of Christendom College) & while it’s true most Moslems aren’t terrorists, the Koran does justify killing to spread the faith.
It doesn’t require it, in that it says that you must try peaceful ways to try to convert others. But if a person refuses to convert to Islam, the Quran or Koran does justify killing to spread the religion.
Also in mostly Muslim nations, they have laws which persecute non-Muslims and it’s a crime for some1 to convert from Islam to Christianity. Most Moslems aren’t terrorists, but what has been found is that when Muslims become a majority population, then it’s more likely to have Muslim religious leaders to ask that a place become a Muslim nation or have laws based on Sharia whether others like it or not. I hope P.O.P. you can give your view.
I’m no P.O.P, But I think that much of the policies with Islam and non-Christians stem from acts to maintain Sharia. The nature of Sharia being placed as direct governmental laws by God may’ve boosted more attempts towards maintain Islamic dominance. Christianity (like how P.O.P mentions in his crusades post) and Judaism are far from being absent from such policies (and likely having similar motivations) but with Islam’s early roots you had much more unity in terms of sects than Christianity so likely have higher concentrations in a single text.
So my point lies that you are correct in that what the Koran has, however the problem that many have is not recognizing similar occurrences in Christianity and Judaism (I’m sorry that I can’t provide a link to a source, but I’ve just discussed recently the topic of the Old Testament and slavery as one example) as well as not realizing the same capacity of violence within people of different beliefs.
Hypocrisy that occurs concerning the latter problem would be with White supremacists criticizing terrorists. They act like Islamists doing all the crimes out of pure savagery and that they are sub humans when many are motivated by political feelings as strong as their own. True they may go to further lengths than White supremacist terrorism but 1 can argue that they have more at stake when you take in mind that as we speak you have refugees and Israeli apartheid when the MOST white supremacist have to worry about are disadvantages with affirmative action, the removal of the Confederate Flag, and illegal aliens (which is an issue that MANY OTHER countries deal with). You would indeed have arguments on each of these but they don’t necessarily have to be undertook by KKK standards. True Islamic terrorism has a major effect on the modern world in a exceedingly negative impact, but at the same time 1 can argue with a white supremacist that their “cause” is a tribal (since they view things as group vs group) and static influence toward a developed and diverse nation like the U.S.
Concerning diversity in America as an African American I see my self as an American with West African Ancestry, not an African suppressed by the “white man” that many think know. I personally am ashamed of the reversed racism that is done on behalf of Blacks in this country, so any civil discussion concerning such as well as more efficient alt. to affirmative action I promote, but I sure as hell ,from too much heart ache and frustration, am not going tolerate or be apologetic towards Lynching, Southern restriction of Voting rights, Eurocentric History concerning Blacks and other Groups, or sugar coating Slavery. One that I’m sick of hearing is that slaves were treated good because they were expensive. My problem is how that was interpreted because treating PROPERTY good isn’t the same as respecting and recognizing a human being because that would contradict views towards blacks during reconstruction. Another point would be that this would probably be more of the position towards the Slave OWNERS, not those who were Farm hands who must’ve been the ones who abused slaves (if not the farmers) to the point that the wounds contributed to modern American medical science. I don’t blame people now for then but I won’t tolerate ignoring such when the topic is presented.
I’ve read your discussions concern Native Americans and I must agree with many of the points you made in recognizing what they did while not being apologetic towards their lose of land on bias towards Europeans. I personally thought of similar thing with Blacks in Ancient Central Africa pushing away Pygmy populations by war and cannibalism and Current discrimination, but at the same time I find many Africans justified towards views concerning the Scramble for Africa, particularly Leopold era violence because I have NEVER read someone try to justify such. But I’m getting off topic, just introducing myself and replying to your thoughts.
Propaganda Professor, hope you can give your view though you didn’t say this here and it’s about Social Security. Social Security must only be for people who need this. Millionaires should not be allowed to get Social Security. Eg. The Eagles Donald Hugh Henley (Don Henley born 1947 formerly of Shiloh), Bernie Leadon (Bernard Matthew Leadon born 1947) & Glenn Lewis Frey (1946-1985) should not be allowed to get Social Security but can collect, though all are millionaires. The Eagles should’ve retired in 1981 as their decade was the 1970s and people who’ve gone to their concerts since 1990s have spent money on musicians who are not in prime. Incidentally while Donald Hugh Henley is Irish, he is a bad Catholic & sinner if indeed he is Catholic while columnist Patrick J. Buchanan and Richard J. Santorum who are both part Irish are good Catholics.
Other people who must be disqualified from getting Social Security would be musicians Ke$ha Rose Siebert (born 1987), Katy Elizabeth Hudson (aka KatyE. Perry born 1984), Pit Bull (a/k/a Armando Cristian Ruiz), Justin Drew Bieber (born 1994), Lady Gaga (born 1986), etc. because these musicians are millionaires. Billionaire Donald J. Trump must not be allowed to get Social Security.
Social Security must be for those who need the $. People must be allowed to get Social Security @ 40, as 40 is old. Women with 4 kids must be allowed to get Social Security. The late Daniel James (DJ) White (1946who was a Vietnam War Sergeant should’ve been allowed to get Social Security for him and his wife after he was paroled in 1984 (1979 Twinkie Defense) as people were not willing to hire him. Social Security must be for people who need the money for themselves or their kids and minimum age should be 40 to collect if 1 has no handicaps and based on need. People who are rich must not be allowed to get Social Security unless they can justify why they need the $, such as if they have many kids to support, have gotten into $ problems, etc. Yes, the law allows rich people to get Social Security, but law needs to be changed. What do you think
POP,
As far as I can tell, you have yet to do a piece specifically on the 911 Conspiracy theorists.
I recently responded to an article in a local paper, which operates under the creed of being, “the best newspaper, money can’t buy,” and it really does publish all kinds of stories that one would not see in the mainstream press–most of which are interesting and based in facts. However, the article I responded to was written by a “truther,” who made the incredible case, that either George Bush deliberately schemed to cause 911, or did nothing while knowing it would happen.
I did a lot of online research and read various article about the findings of Popular Mechanics and the NIST,(National institute of standards and Technology), as well several seemingly thorough websites launched by conspiracy believers. I even read the rebuttals made by “truthers,” and the rebuttals of their rebuttals, etc. etc. But as far as I could tell, the scientific investigations done by established scientific journals and reputable structural engineers contained the most solid science, and, supported the conventional fact that Al-Qaeda was behind the attacks. However, there are a lot of fascinating claims made by “batshit looney,” truthers, and a lot of interesting analysis done by respected and knowledgeable authorities. But, like all good conspiracy theories—a bit of misinformation, some out of context statements, and loony ideas asserting the belief that no planes that actually crashed into the towers, but rather that, thousands of New Yorkers, and millions of television viewers who saw the towers come down on live television, were mislead by a clever ‘hologram” of one—apparently all goes a long way!
Anyway, it occurred to me that I would love to hear you discuss this incredible load of crap, more fantastic than any James Bond film, which would require tens of thousands of conspirators to pull off.
The arguments (both the scientific sounding ones, as well as the speculative and completely weird ones) are truly amazing, and need to be laid to rest (or at least given a sound thrashing) in the same way that you have provided rational analysis with a touch of satire, to expose so many myths and lunacies—and this one is quite possibly the mother of them all!
So, this is just a suggestion. I think it would be a fascinating study, and one made in heaven for debunkers like you. Forgive me if you already have written an article about these bizarre conspiracy theories that apparently millions of Americans are willing to believe, but which I just have not seen yet. But if you haven’t done so, the topic would be an excellent next choice.
Thanks
Thanks for the suggestion. I already have a backlog of topics at the moment, but yes, it does sound like something I should cover one of these days.
[…] one of those things that people just know because they just know: the United States was founded by and for Christians, […]
[…] another one of those things that people just know because they just know. Liberals are intolerant. Liberals control college […]