In my opinion, not one right-wing political or economic theory adds up. Their whole system of belief seems to be one ideological fallacy, based on another ideological fallacy, plus another, and another, and another, and so on. Let’s take some examples, trickle-down economics, absolute and complete, total abysmal failure. Giving tax breaks to the wealthy and corporations, does not significantly stimulate the economy, and create benefits for low income and middle class people.

Abstinence only education, obviously works if followed, but a 2002 survey of 12,500 men and women found that 97 percent of people who were no longer virgins at age 44 had sexual intercourse for the first time before they married. The Supreme Court needs ’strict constructionist’ judges who merely follow the specified aims of the Constitution. Instead of formal war declarations, the United States Congress has begun issuing authorizations of force. Such authorizations have included the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and the recent “Authorization of the Use of Military Force” (AUMF) resolution that began the War in Iraq. Many question the legality of these authorizations of force. Those who support declarations of war argue that they keep administrations honest by forcing them to lay out their case to the American people while, at the same time, honoring the constitutional role of the United States Congress.

Libertarian John Lott wrote a book called More Guns Less Crime. The right-wing has accepted this as a canonical book in their dogma, and used Lott’s research to push gun ownership and concealed carry laws all over the country. But according to the National Research Council of the National Academies in 2004 released a thorough study of the available research on this issue, with the aim of finding whether a causal relationship existed. It didn’t find one, and it said the available research was lacking. Their report said, “In summary, the committee concludes that existing research studies and data include a wealth of descriptive information on homicide, suicide, and firearms, but because of limitation of existing data and methods, do not credibly demonstrate a causal relationship between the ownership of firearms and the causes or prevention of criminal violence or suicide.” As for concealed carry, Between 1992 and 1998, the violent crime rate in states which kept strict CCW laws fell by an average of 30%.  The violent crime rate for the states that had weak CCW laws during this same period saw their violent crime rates drop by only 15%.  Nationally, violent crime declined by 25% during that same time. These numbers show that states with stricter CCW laws have found other means to reduce their crime rates rather than simply letting more people carry hidden handguns. I don’t think the experts are in agreement on this, but some evidence has shown that murder may actually increase in areas that have a higher concentration of guns, versus areas that have less guns.

Many more right-wing fallacies, could obviously be explored and deconstructed. This is just a small smattering, of the lies and half-truth (based on nothing but belief) forwarded by the right-wing. The question, of course, that this raises is why anyone at all votes Republican. I think it has more to do with the job of marketing that the Republicans do than anything else (using values such as patriotism, machismo, greed, militarism, ‘culture of life’ and many others), because it certainly doesn’t seem to be because right-wing ideas are based on facts and evidence that verify their positions.