William a. lev 2009-05-21 05:07:46
These are BERKEKEY researchers. What else do you expect from them?
I think they misspelled “pseudoscientific”
Yes, we condone the inequality between those who work and those who
believe the world owes them a living. If there were no such inequality,
no one would work to make the world better. (Well, I won’t say “no one”
because some people work for the pleasure of working.) In
thermodynamics, inequality is the driving force that makes things happen.
I don’t believe that consensual gay s** should be punishable, so I am
glad the Supreme Court invalidated the Texas law against it. On the
other hand, I believe that the institution of marriage is between men and women.
That’s nice of them. [deleted]
What makes a liberal: a starry-eyed rose-colored-glasses idea of what
the world should be, and the belief that it can be legislated to be that
way. E.g. you can outlaw war, ban the Bomb, and even legislate poverty
out of existence. WAKE-UP CALL, SPARKY, IT JUST DON’T WORK THAT WAY.
Conservatives also have ideals about how the world should be, but they
recognize the practical obstacles that must be overcome to make it that way.
http://www.omdurman.org/oxfam.html Boycott Oxfam International until
Oxfam Solidarity stops giving second-hand aid and comfort to terrorists.
Royalty-free downloadable leaflet to deal with Oxfam Solidarity:
Golog 2009-05-27 19:03:33
But what about peer review? It is not just Berkely.
Meta-analysis integrates results across studies providing researchers
greater insight into the phenomena of interest through the use of greater
statistical power and statistical technique either not used or not
available in the original studies. Just because you do not know what it
is, does not mean it is pseudoscientific.
What about those who work and still cannot make a living? Adjusting for
inflation, the minimum wage is 2.00/hour less than in 1972. CEO’s used to
make 40 times the salary of the lowest paid worker. Now it is 400 times.
How come conservatives are so against helping the working poor, but are
happy to come to the aid of large corporations and the rich in general?
What is wrong with the concept that if a person works 40 hours a week,
they should be able to afford to live?
Ok, so you believe this. I suggest you marry someone of the opposite s**.
But if one wants to marry someone of the same s**, why should they be
denied? If you do not like it, then don’t come over for dinner. If it is a
religious argument, then I do not even want to hear it as Congress shall
make no law respecting an establishment of religion. In fact they should
make laws that allow all of us life, liberty and the persuit of
happiness. Things like “my right to punch ends at your nose” kinds of
things. Not “you can only marry within your race” kinds of things. Note
that many of same arguments made against civil rights for blacks are now
used against homosexuals.
You know, an anecdote does not a study make, but this study does describe
most of the conservatives I know, and living in Virginia, I know a lot of them 🙂
Also manufacturing a constant state of war, building bombs, the erosion of
civil rights, the degradation of the environment and mean-spirited
legislation that overwhelmingly favors the very rich also does not work.
So what does it mean to be a liberal? It means a more humble foreign
policy where we DON’T support evil dictators/regimes. It means the
elimination of laws that unneccessarily restrict freedom (like the idiot
drug laws). It means a living wage for those who work. It means citizens can get
health care without it driving them into the poor house. It means anyone can
afford to get into college. It means we try and limit pollution and
preserve the environment.
But their ideals about how the world should be scares the h*** out of me.
I do not think you think this way, but imagine a world where everything is
as Ashcroft or Falwell thinks it should be. There is a book call “A Handmaid’s Tale”
that I think would be an apt description. These are the types who now own
the Republican party, lock, stock and barrel. The old rugged-individualist
types are marginalized.
Joseph hertzli 2009-05-29 12:42:27
On 27 Jul 2003 17:58:01 GMT, Joseph Hertzlinger
Correction: IQ was mentioned once:
| Christie (1954) reported significant negative correlations ranging
| from -.20 to -.48 between IQ and scores on the F-Scale, but
| researchers since then have focused on differences in cognitive
| style rather than ability.
Translation: The results have not been replicated. They were either
fabricated in the first place or disappeared as either IQ tests grew
less culturally biased or as the left succeeded in spreading beyond
Pinto_a1 2009-06-26 22:56:07
Thomas J Wheat (firstname.lastname@example.org)
My family was lower middle class (or maybe upper lower class) but we
did not do seasonal agricultural work. Although my brother and I did
harvest onions for several seasons — as a way to make some money.
(which was before your party told us that doing such work was demeaning
and we should instead allow the government to support us).
I would like nothing better if the Republicans were successful in
bankrupting those social programs which made Hispanic communities
dependent upon government largess. And I personally would not find
Republican inequality any worse than the privileged groups of the
Democratic Party. Or are you saying it is possible to advocate privilege
based on group membership, but that such does not support inequality?
Gabrielle Rapagnetta (email@example.com)
Bitter? Possibly because I am a member of a community which was actually
making progress until federal programs, which were suppose to “save” us,
turned us into wards of the state. And the response to these failed
programs was to enact new ones.
If you are interested in doing some reading, investigate the following.
Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980
by Charles Murray
The accidental President
by Robert Sherrill
In case you are curious, I completed my formal education before
political correctness and the educational shift which replaced education
with indoctrination. And four years in the Army paid the majority of
my educational related expenses. Courtesy of the GI Bill.
My parents were quite possibly in the last Hispanic middle-lower class
generation which demanded that their children get themselves an education.
This was from a couple with very little formal education of any kind, but
who somehow recognized that education, determination, and desire would get
us further along in life than all the government programs combined.
Great Society and all other attempts at social engineering told my
community that all of our success would now be due to Democrats and some
government program, and all our failures were due to Republicans, racists,
and the refusal of our proud rich heritage to accept a subservient role in
white society. No more need for any of us to have a decent education,
desire, drive, or a will to succeed. The benevolence of government
programs would now take care of that for us. “And for you Hispanic teenage
Moms, remember, the more kids you have the more money you will receive.”
Being unmarried and pregnant was suddenly a cultural trait. And not an
indication of any personal irresponsibility.
I continue to wait for the political left to apologize for the extensive
damage they did to my community. And I would also like to hear some
intelligent discussion on how to correct this situation — without the usual
reply of adding further programs. By this time it should be fairly obvious
to all that a larger government role is not the answer. And giving favored
status to Hispanics, or any group, is equally incorrect.
Susan cohen 2009-06-27 19:26:40
This is, of course, untrue, as our party said the way you were being treated
(wages, or lack thereof; health benefits; or lack thereof….) was demeaning
& never said that the government should jsut support you.
Interesting how you OT1H insist the government isn’t responsible for
individuals when you think the Democrtas say it is, but OTOH say that the
government is responsible for individuals when you think the Democrats are
at fault for something.
And I personally would not find
Except that the so-called privileged groups” of the Democratic Party are,
even if you refuse to believe that they are working to help as many as they
can, *not* working *solely* to protect their privilege, which is exactly
what the Republicans are doing.
Or are you saying it is possible to advocate privilege
If you are saying that in order to be a Democrat, rich people have to stop
being rich, then you are a Communist. I knew Republicans were fascistic, but
I thought Republicans didn’t like Communists. Susan
Fear gan dia 2009-07-22 01:07:30
# Let’s hope they will soon find a cure for conservatism – before the right-wing maniacs destroy all of us!
# Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
Interesting how all the knee-j*** dittoheads who reacted in
predictable, foaming-at-the-mouth anger at this post, simply
confirmed its conclusion:
# Conservatives don’t feel the need to jump through complex, intellectual
# hoops in order to understand or justify some of their positions, he
# said. “They are more comfortable seeing and stating things in black and
# white in ways that would make liberals squirm,” Glaser said.
Fear gan dia ### http://goddamliberal.blogspot.com
Director, EAC Division for Leaving the Toilet Seat up.
Dump the chimp! Re-elect a Democrat in ’04.