# The "No, Both Sides Don't Do This" Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 1, 2015, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990 "2015-05-01T13:18:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/61 "2015-05-04T10:04:56Z")
Some of the recent race riots(think Ferguson) show liberals do in fact go nutty over certain issues; it’s just the issues are different to the ones the Right go nutty over. Add some global warming and gender issue craziness and you have a whole lot of liberal hysteria. Some of the hysteria understandable but a whole lot of it not. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/62 "2015-05-04T13:22:53Z")
Police brutality is a nutty issue? ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/63 "2015-05-04T13:56:08Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Police brutality is a nutty issue? Note; I did not quite say that. I said in some instances of “controversial” encounters between police and minorities liberals often go apoplectic. In many instance choosing the wrong encounter to highlight. Ferguson was just one example of highlighting the wrong injustice. ---
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/64 "2015-05-04T14:21:08Z")
The confidence on display here is admirable I suppose, but I suggest keeping the arrogance under control, otherwise you end up like Jonathan Gruber: > **[Jonathan Gruber (economist)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Gruber_%28economist%29)** > > Jonathan Holmes Gruber (born September 30, 1965) is an American professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he has taught since 1992. He is also the director of the Health Care Program at the National Bureau of Economic Research, where he is a research associate. An associate editor of both the Journal of Public Economics and the Journal of Health Economics, Gruber has been heavily involved in crafting public health policy. > He has been described as a key architect ... Gruber was caught admitting that Obamacare was marketed deceptively because voters are too stupid to comprehend its beneficence. > [@](#): > > Commentator Rich Lowry [‘National Review’] said that the videos were emblematic of “the progressive mind, which values complexity over simplicity, favors indirect taxes and impositions on the American public so their costs can be hidden, and has a dim view of the average American.” And it sets up such endeavors for failure because even a dim, average American will eventually realize the delivered product doesn’t match the sales pitch. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/65 "2015-05-04T14:36:15Z")
Wouldn’t the Founding Fathers be considered radicals in today’s society? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/66 "2015-05-04T14:56:13Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I strongly disagree. The problem with threads like these is that they’re doomed by: > > 1. Massive confirmation bias, unless you can come up with some way to objectively compare the crazies. > > 2. Unbalanced anecdotes; given that the SDMB leans heavily liberal there will be more anecdotes about stupid conservatives than stupid liberals, even if they were equally stupid. > > 3. Perceived level of crazy. To a liberal, someone on the far right is going to seem more crazy than someone on the far left, and vice versa. Given that the SDMB leans liberal then the perceived level of crazy is not going to be equal. > > For example, I consider myself moderate/centrist; to me the Tea Party is no more crazy than Green Peace. I’m sure that is a controversial comparison for most Dopers. > > 1. Bias of beliefs. Both sides are willing to believe unfounded “crazy” of the other side. For example, plenty of conservatives believe that Gore took credit for inventing the internet. Likewise, plenty of liberals believe that Palin said she could see Russia from her porch. This bias makes a thread like this untenable. Well put. And this thread is, not surprisingly, going nowhere. My own sense is that there is more “crazy” on the right than on the left, but I’ll be damned if I could ever prove it, so I wouldn’t go around shouting it like it was some self-evident truth. The only thing this thread is missing is someone weighing in with the inane “reality has a liberal bias” nonsense. Where is the old “roll-eyes” smilie when you need it! ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/67 "2015-05-04T16:08:36Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The only thing this thread is missing is someone weighing in with the inane “reality has a liberal bias” nonsense. Well, if conservatism is more deeply entwined with religious issues, it’s already approaching reality with a handicap. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/68 "2015-05-04T16:20:15Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > Wouldn’t the Founding Fathers be considered radicals in today’s society? Many of them owned slaves, and even most of the ones who didn’t held white supremacist ideas, so yes. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/69 "2015-05-04T16:26:51Z")
As to the OP, I would classify it more as Texas wingnuttery than conservative wingnuttery. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/70 "2015-05-04T17:12:57Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I strongly disagree. The problem with threads like these is that they’re doomed by: > > 1. Massive confirmation bias, unless you can come up with some way to objectively compare the crazies. > > 2. Unbalanced anecdotes; given that the SDMB leans heavily liberal there will be more anecdotes about stupid conservatives than stupid liberals, even if they were equally stupid. > > 3. Perceived level of crazy. To a liberal, someone on the far right is going to seem more crazy than someone on the far left, and vice versa. Given that the SDMB leans liberal then the perceived level of crazy is not going to be equal. > > For example, I consider myself moderate/centrist; to me the Tea Party is no more crazy than Green Peace. I’m sure that is a controversial comparison for most Dopers. > > 1. Bias of beliefs. Both sides are willing to believe unfounded “crazy” of the other side. For example, plenty of conservatives believe that Gore took credit for inventing the internet. Likewise, plenty of liberals believe that Palin said she could see Russia from her porch. This bias makes a thread like this untenable. > [@John\_Mace](#): > > Well put. And this thread is, not surprisingly, going nowhere. My own sense is that there is more “crazy” on the right than on the left, but I’ll be damned if I could ever prove it, so I wouldn’t go around shouting it like it was some self-evident truth. The only thing this thread is missing is someone weighing in with the inane “reality has a liberal bias” nonsense. Where is the old “roll-eyes” smilie when you need it! ETA: Keep in mind, though, that even if we do accept an equivalence between the TP and GP, how many GP Congresscritters are there? Maybe a handful, if even that? And yet there is an entire Tea Party Caucus. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/71 "2015-05-04T20:03:07Z")
The GP is genuinely grass-roots, as the name would suggest. The TP is an artificial surface created by some captains-of-industry and nicely funded thence. Members of the GP run on their own, the TP has run in Republican primaries. The last Green I know of having been elected to office was the Mayor of Seattle for a term, but the business community did not like him at all, at all, so he got replaced with a more establishment-type dude. So, the comparison between the TP and the GP or the SWP or the CPUSA or any number of other leftwardly political parties is quite clear: business does not like leftist ideology, so they will do their best to keep the left down. (N.B.: media is a business.) ---
**Author:** ![Polerius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d78d45/32.png) [@Polerius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polerius)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/72 "2015-05-04T21:38:24Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, if conservatism is more deeply entwined with religious issues, it’s already approaching reality with a handicap. Very elegantly put. To all those who are saying “Oh, this is an unknowable issue, and everyone’s confirmation bias will lead them to believe the other side is more nutty, and so we can never know the answer to the OP”, I say bullshit! To anyone with a functioning brain, the right wing in the US has reached stratospheric levels of willful ignorance, ant-science, anti-reason, and conspiracy. I was not around during the 1960’s, but from what I’ve seen, it’s possible the left was more nutty than the right back then. Several on the radical left were more violent, blowing up people, etc. (Someone correct me if I’m mistaken) But that was then, this is now. The whole Jade Helm 15 saga, even as a standalone single data point, is enough to show how crazy the right has gotten. And also, on a more scary note, it shows how much that crazy has climbed up the ranks of the party and now even the leaders believe this shit, or at least are paying lip service to it to appease the nutty masses. ---
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2015, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/73 "2015-05-04T22:30:04Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > The whole Jade Helm 15 saga, even as a standalone single data point, is enough to show how crazy the right has gotten. Forgive me if I’m being thick, but I don’t understand the fixation on this particular issue as the defining example of right-wing craziness. The stance is anti-military. During and after the Vietnam era, I assume you would have seen a similar reaction from the left. Have you all turned into your parents? ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/74 "2015-05-05T00:11:26Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > Forgive me if I’m being thick, but I don’t understand the fixation on this particular issue as the defining example of right-wing craziness. The stance is anti-military. > > During and after the Vietnam era, I assume you would have seen a similar reaction from the left. Have you all turned into your parents? Holy crap, man, what are you smoking? The stance is most decidedly _not_ anti-military and has absolutely no relationship to the '60s anti-war left. The stance is that of crippling paranoia, that that devious bastard in the Whitehouse is going to order the army in to seize control of Texas from its rightful state government, a sort of top-down coup. Do you not understand this? Can you not grasp the difference? This is in no way whatsoever comparable to the protests of the '60s. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/75 "2015-05-05T00:14:09Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > The GP is genuinely grass-roots, as the name would suggest. The TP is an artificial surface created by some captains-of-industry and nicely funded thence. Members of the GP run on their own, the TP has run in Republican primaries. The last Green I know of having been elected to office was the Mayor of Seattle for a term, but the business community did not like him at all, at all, so he got replaced with a more establishment-type dude. > > So, the comparison between the TP and the GP or the SWP or the CPUSA or any number of other leftwardly political parties is quite clear: business does not like leftist ideology, so they will do their best to keep the left down. (N.B.: media is a business.) Green Peace, not Green Party. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/76 "2015-05-05T00:35:05Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > The Republican party’s recent policy positions are _based on ignorance_. Global warming isn’t real, abstinence only education works, weed is teh devil, cutting taxes raises additional income, punching someone in the face is superior to attempts at diplomacy, Obamacare is shattering the economy, the minimum wage should be repealed, etc. etc. I quote this because it’s similar to the basic point I was going to make. On the subject of “both sides don’t do this”, my submission is this: both sides aren’t anti-science on many major issues. **Republicans** are. Who sides with science on climate change, Democrats or Republicans? Which side has positions that vary from “it’s not settled” to “it’s the world’s greatest hoax and conspiracy”? Who sides with science on evolution? Conversely, who sides with the nutcases wanting to rewrite textbooks to represent it as a “debate”? Who sides with science on abortion, wherein science cannot and does not make a definitive determination on when “human life begins”, but by golly, Republicans know that it begins at time t=0. Except the ones like Hobby Lobby who think it begins way earlier, at around the moment that someone thinks about having sex, and that’s why contraceptives = murder. Who sided with science and who sided with the lunatics in the Terri Schiavo situation, in which medical science deemed her to be in a persistent vegetative state but Republicans all banded together and claimed that God told them she was alive and well and fully sentient (apparently just a little sleepy)? How did that turn out? How about the Young Earthers? What kindred spirit in ideology do you suppose they vote for? ---
**Author:** ![parkona\_driveway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d26b3c/32.png) [@parkona\_driveway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/parkona_driveway)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/77 "2015-05-05T00:50:00Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > Holy crap, man, what are you smoking? The stance is most decidedly _not_ anti-military and has absolutely no relationship to the '60s anti-war left. > [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > I think [the Tea Party is] a very conflicted collection of frustrated people > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > As to the OP, I would classify it more as Texas wingnuttery than conservative wingnuttery. Texas is Ron Paul libertarian territory. Ron Paul is notoriously anti-war. Ron Paul was quoted above as a prominent supporter of the Jade Helm opposition. The libertarian wing of the “right” is steadfastly critical of the scope of US worldwide military presence, and as I noted earlier, the libertarian anti-war stance is not dependent on hatred of Obama. They objected strenuously to the military deployment adventures of George W. Bush. Certainly the Jade Helm opposition also includes Republicans motivated primarily by anti-Obamaism, but it’s not a monolithic group. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/78 "2015-05-05T01:03:54Z")
> [@parkona\_driveway](#): > > Texas is Ron Paul libertarian territory. Ron Paul is notoriously anti-war. Ron Paul was quoted above as a prominent supporter of the Jade Helm opposition. The libertarian wing of the “right” is steadfastly critical of the scope of US worldwide military presence, and as I noted earlier, the libertarian anti-war stance is not dependent on hatred of Obama. They objected strenuously to the military deployment adventures of George W. Bush. > > Certainly the Jade Helm opposition also includes Republicans motivated primarily by anti-Obamaism, but it’s not a monolithic group. You’re aware that Jade Helm 15 is not an actual war, right? Does the libertarian anti-war stance go so far as to condemn military training exercises, and can you cite examples of them doing so before now? ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/79 "2015-05-05T01:29:36Z")
> [@Polerius](#): > > Very elegantly put. > > To all those who are saying “Oh, this is an unknowable issue, and everyone’s confirmation bias will lead them to believe the other side is more nutty, and so we can never know the answer to the OP”, I say bullshit! > > To anyone with a functioning brain, the right wing in the US has reached stratospheric levels of willful ignorance, ant-science, anti-reason, and conspiracy. > [@wolfpup](#): > > I quote this because it’s similar to the basic point I was going to make. On the subject of “both sides don’t do this”, my submission is this: both sides aren’t anti-science on many major issues. **Republicans** are. I think you’re exactly proving my point. Liberal crystal-lovers, anti-nuke and anti-GMO groups, Gaia worshipers, pagans, vortex seekers, astrologers, etc. are exhibiting no less willful ignorance, anti-science/reason and conspiracy than the conservatives but since they don’t normally advocate positions that you disagree with you largely forget about them. Outside of CC/AGW I might say that liberal anti-science (mostly on nukes and GMOs) are more damaging than conservative anti-science (mostly CC/AGW and evolution). ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2015, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990/80 "2015-05-05T01:44:16Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > I think you’re exactly proving my point. Liberal crystal-lovers, anti-nuke and anti-GMO groups, Gaia worshipers, pagans, vortex seekers, astrologers, etc. are exhibiting no less willful ignorance, anti-science/reason and conspiracy than the conservatives but since they don’t normally advocate positions that you disagree with you largely forget about them. Outside of CC/AGW I might say that liberal anti-science (mostly on nukes and GMOs) are more damaging than conservative anti-science (mostly CC/AGW and evolution). But how many of those lefty-nuts are in Congress? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-no-both-sides-dont-do-this-thread/718990.md?page=5)