When I was a kid, Garanimals were fairly new on the market.  

I remember being fascinated by the freedom I would have to choose my own clothes, and to make them match.  We weren't really in a financial position for me to even consider getting new clothes, and thrift shopping wasn't cool, yet.  So I never got any.

The basic idea of the clothes is that they would have a matching animal on the tops and bottoms, and I, the young fashion plate, would be able to dud myself out in a way that would be pleasing to the other 6 year olds.  And perhaps, like in previous experiences, I would be able to attract the attention of the young ladies when we were out on the playground for our "Baby Dinos" games.  

The way to be a Conservative Jouranimalist is similar.  Instead of looking for the matching items that would make sense to reasonable people, you instead find distinctly unmatching items.  

Conservative Jouranimalism is rooted in one principle- Putting opposing ideas in one sentence makes you sound more smart.

For instance, you might see that Obama trounced Romney when it came to women voters, but instead of seeing this as a need to increase your awareness of women's issues, you would instead say something totally Jouranimalistic.  For example:

"It might seem like a crazy idea, but I'm just going to say it.  I think Todd Akin has a good shot at the 2016 nomination.  I realize that he has been beaten up by the drive by media, but he really has shown class since his loss.  

Think about it, he has national campaign experience as a result of his strong statements on women's healthcare issues, and he has developed a thick skin to shrug off the attacks on his character.  

If you put the right people in place behind him, he could have a good shot.   I'm not saying it's going to happen, but don't be surprised if you find this reposted in 2016."

They might notice that Obama won the election on a clear message about financial inequality in the US, and Romney was the perfect representation of this disparity.  

Jouranimalist says:

"I'm not totally sure on this one, yet.  I'll have to run the numbers, but I'm seeing that Romney was nearly able to win this election against a historically ethnic president, and idol of the poor and urban.  

Think about it, Romney nearly won against  a guy who had the entire media behind him, and not only that, but Sandy was extremely beneficial.  

His campaign management team was beyond bad.  If he had someone decent, like Karl Rove, he would have a great chance at taking California in the next election.

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but you might be mailing me your panties if I'm right."

To be jouranimalist, you have to take two opposing notions, and then make a completely counterintuitive leap.  

Americans don't like Romney, therefore, Romney would be a great candidate.  Make sure you use the term, "Just think about it."

Here's a good long time example of this jouranimalism that is deeply rooted in the conservative mind- tax cuts increase revenue.  

"So we have a deficit, right?  That means we need more money, right?  If you lower taxes, then you will bring more money in.  Tax cuts actually increase the amount of money the government takes in.  Think about it.  I'm not saying it's totally solid.  I'll have to run the numbers on it... (special note here.  YOu always have to use this word somewhere in the piece of jouranimalism)

And Kennedy.  "

And on religion-
"We have seen that Christianity is the most widespread religion in the US.  It is the most powerful force in many parts of the country.  Roughly 99.999% of all elected officials are Christian.  There are thousands of Christian TV and radio stations in the US.  

Christianity is under attack."

Your Email has been sent.