COMMENTS: 196
Why Liberals Are Smarter than Conservatives
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.
Once again science has confirmed what we already know: liberals and conservatives think differently. Neuroscientists at NYU and UCLA conducted a simple test on college students all along the political spectrum.They were seated in front of computers and given the simple task of pressing a key every time the letter "M" flashed on the screen. Here's the hitch: every once in a while the letter "W" would flash and the subjects were told to not push a key when they saw "W."
Both groups recognized the letter "M" accurately. But when that pesky "W" popped up the conservatives just couldn't help themselves and -- DOH! -- they pushed the key! They simply could not recognize any letter not being "M." They continued to dogmatically stab away at the keyboard not seeing the letter so plainly in front of them. Everyone, of course, was hooked up to electroencephalograms, and liberals EEG's lit up like pinball machines while apprehending and considering all the subtle differences between "M" and "W." They made fewer mistakes and demonstrated a greater subtlety of mind. Conservatives, ever the partisans, just declared "W" was "M" and called it a day.
But lookout! The researchers threw a curveball by reversing the test, flashing "W's" and asking subjects to ignore the "M's." The results were exactly the same. If told"W" is the order of the day, then well, by heck. That's just what they're gonna do. It's that simple.
History has already shown that conservatives are suckers for "W." The letter has some kind of hypnotic effect on them, causing them to jab their index fingers at things -- liberals, mostly. "W" is their kind of letter, all points, aggressive, starting favorite conservative words like "War" and "Wealth" and "Welfare State." If you built a giant "W" out of steel and dropped a liberal on it, he would be impaled through his head, heart and groin. Yee-haw, it's BBQ!
Frank J. Sulloway, a researcher at UC Berkeley's Institute of Personality and Social Research told The Los Angeles Times that the results "provided an elegant demonstration that individual differences on a conservative-liberal dimension are strongly related to brain activity." The Times reports that "liberals were 4.9 times as likely as conservatives to show activity in the brain circuits that deal with conflicts, and 2.2 times as likely to score in the top half of the distribution for accuracy." Thus with one, simple experiment we have solved the mystery of how half our nation fell for the 9/11/Sadaam Hussein boondoggle. W is to M as Sadaam is to Bin Laden. While, they share some qualities (spikey, swarthy, hateful, gun lovin') they were decidedly NOT the same man. But those differences are irrelevant once your mind has been made up for you.
So now its been scientifically proven that liberals are smarter than conservatives. There's no point in gloating: conservatives don't recognize science, either. Just let them continue digging their own spider holes of fuzzy logic and dogmatic umbrage and come November '08 we can use our superior hand-eye coordination and letter-recognition skills to hit all the right letters.
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: El Hombre Malo on Sep 19, 2007 1:51 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This remind me of Woody Allen solving the dilemma of an intelligent, bright kid beign conservative by making him have a tumor in his brain, that once removed allowed him to be liberal, to his family relief. In his case, it was an intelligent comment on how for many in our camp, it seems its easier to label the opposition as "dumb" rather than taking the effort to understand and defeat their arguments. I fear the author of this article lacks the depth of perception to see that.
...or maybe he mistakes a "M" with a "W".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: aethr
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: jroth420
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: soft2u47
» "ehrm...." was very mildly put
Posted by: Leman
» RE: "ehrm...." was very mildly put
Posted by: Leman
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: sliver
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: El Hombre Malo
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: Lauren
» Indeed! Wasn't there a story on here not to long ago regarding a study recounting the evils...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: vox persona on Sep 19, 2007 1:56 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EJW on Sep 19, 2007 2:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is great
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Sep 19, 2007 2:49 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the results aren't necessarily an indicator of intelligence, but rather, the tendency to think critically and approach each new situation with an open mind. For example, Himmler, Goebbels, and some other fanatics might have been intelligent people, but maybe they wouldn't have done well on this test, relative to their IQs.
Also, could it just be an indication of dogmatic, extremist thinking? Suppose they were to separate the results into those with liberal/moderate views vs. extreme views, both left and right?
My thought has been that wing nuts tend to think emotionally and prejudicially, while liberals and moderates tend to think more rationally and logically. There is nothing rational about patriotism, religion, lust for war, and blind obedience to authority. They're all gut-level, emotional, upbringing-based things that you either have or you don't, like the love some people have for certain dog breeds or baseball teams.
That's why I often think it's futile for liberals to argue with wing nuts. They hope the facts and evidence will change their minds when, as the article suggests, the wing nuts already have their minds made up.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FredGrubbs on Sep 19, 2007 3:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Leman
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Bozwell
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Leman
» RE: Humor
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bulbman on Sep 19, 2007 3:34 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Of course!
Posted by: heid
» RE: Of course!
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: So then we're justified ...
Posted by: Leman
» RE: So then we're justified ...
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Sep 19, 2007 3:42 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for your mischievious sense of humor, fine wit and mostly for bringing a smile to my face at this early hour. I wish every day could start with such a smile...
:o)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Trainer12 on Sep 19, 2007 3:46 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
screw everyone else. They don't believe in democracy. They don't believe in "checks and balances". They violate their oath of office to "defend and protect the Consitution of the United States". They don't want to enhance the "general welfare" of all the citizens of the United States. They only want to protect their rich and powerful corporations and the ruling elite. It is time to impeach them and remove them from office.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Flat World Thinking, Reactionary, Neandertals
Posted by: Equality2941
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rocketman on Sep 19, 2007 3:49 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: igoeja on Sep 19, 2007 3:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At least two fairly extensive studies, both using the big 5 personality inventory as a measure, found that the defining quality of liberalness was openness to ideas and experience. Liberals were defined by this quality, as much as conservatives were oriented toward convention and striving for order. Although the authors did not overgeneralize, other studies point to openness as a quality of the highly intelligent, e.g., professors. Also, openness has a high degree of correlation with the Myers-Briggs test quality of intuitiveness, which is more likely found among the gifted.
When you start to look at other variables, e.g., religiosity, knowledge of current events, demographics, etc., it seems likely true that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives. One issue, since the study was done among students, is that it was range-restricted. If similar studies were done on the entire population, the results might be more equivocal.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: Equality2941
» Since You Obviously Know Nothing About IQ...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Since You Obviously Know Nothing About IQ...
Posted by: Equality2941
» Like a Blowhard with No Facts, Like WMD's in Iraq, etc.
Posted by: igoeja
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Solarpower on Sep 19, 2007 4:04 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's nice and convenient to get confirmation that we're smarter than them, we know that anyway, but they think the same thing about us ... strange eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» "I don't get it."
Posted by: ~Fiona~
» Fiona behave your self! Wait until dino and albrecht get here, then go for it!
Posted by: johngary66
» It is self-defined...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: By who's definition?
Posted by: Leman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: heid on Sep 19, 2007 4:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Suzon on Sep 19, 2007 5:01 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Could we not have had calm and quiet confidence that people on the left can handle uncertainty and ambiguity fairly well? Some people do think more deeply than others. Some others have a need to feel sure of things and therefore tend to shut out reality.
Read Janis and his theory of Groupthink.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Read Milgram and his Studies on Obdediance
Posted by: pdxstudent
» Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Suzon
» RE: Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Intellect
» ...for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BobbieP on Sep 19, 2007 5:17 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After all we are all being dosed iwth deadly radiation all the time prom our "peaceful" nuclear power plants.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 5:27 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For the sake of the world, and society, people who don't know the difference between a M, or a W, need help. We need to build the special hospitals.
Hey, I have heard Haliburten already has some contracts for some. The perfict place for people who don't know a M from a W.
Compassionate Liberalism
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: breen
» mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: dexter
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Compassionate Liberalism?
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: dlentz
» Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: johngary66
» RE: Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: dlentz
» RE: Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: dlentz
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Equality2941
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Equality2941
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maddy on Sep 19, 2007 5:27 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a college professor myself, one who is part of the "studies" camps (and, thus, those programs/departments ripe for accusations that we're brainwashing students to the left), it seems to me that the college students I've had who've described themselves as conservatives are well-skilled in "blindly pushing a button" because they seem to spend quite a bit of time "tuning out" in our classes as a point of emotional defense. In fact, I think said students take up the label conservative proudly in defense against classes that critically examine the position of the U.S. in the world, race, gender, class, sexuality, etc.
So, perhaps this is more of a pavlovian response of a particular kind of college conservative, rather than conservatives more broadly?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Just a thought
Posted by: mcstewey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Aegrus on Sep 19, 2007 5:37 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What kind of progress is it when you become more like the thing that you hate?
It is a difficult time for all Americans right now. Fragmenting through slander and prejudice further reduces progress and change, I feel.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Well said
Posted by: daw13
» RE: Counter Productive
Posted by: peacelf
» Productive
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Productive
Posted by: Aegrus
» RE: Productive
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Counter Productive
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EncinoM on Sep 19, 2007 5:47 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The few voices who argued for critical examination of the situation were labeled facists.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I am not so sure....
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drmflorida on Sep 19, 2007 6:04 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I saw a guy driving down the road with a bunch of conservative bumper stickers on his car, and one of them said "When in doubt, blame liberals". I don't think he understood the irony.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: now I feel bad
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rfields on Sep 19, 2007 6:27 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: screwjack2000 on Sep 19, 2007 6:56 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: People Love
Posted by: Ocean tides
» RE: People Love
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peacelf on Sep 19, 2007 7:01 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not that conservatives are genetically inferior intellectually; it's that their education either short-changed them on critical thought or that the peer group influenced their choices, which again falls back on a lack of critical thinking skills. Look at the conservative media.
Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are great examples of pundits who say things to elicit emotional responses, thus their success at luring working class white males into the conservative party.
The running joke that conservatives call it "from the gut" implies an emotional response means more to conservatives than a thoughtful response. (Stephen Colbert mocks this behavior every episode.) Emotional responses have little to do with statistical or intellectual substance. Emotional responses also cater to the self-serving ego.
My point is that to teach conservatives to think critically would transform them into "liberal" thinkers. Yet, many liberals and progressives have a superiority complex and refuse to engage conservatives in dialogue. Indeed, as I so often see, any "debate" becomes a head-butting game, which brings both conservative and liberal down to the same level. Liberals have difficulty engaging conservatives for some of the same reasons conservatives respond from the gut.
Most liberals lack critical thought in the area of real change. A liberal by definition may question policy and approach to governance, but they don't question the system. Liberals don't question the deeper significance of white patriarchal supremacy and power and how voting for a women or black president doesn't necessarily mean change. Women and blacks can still serve the interests of white male supremacy.
To be a change agent one must deconstruct the systematic controls that are embedded in every institution in america, from government to education to the grocery store we shop at. White male power infects it all, meaning, the only solution is to challenge that power structure, and I don't see many liberals or progressives who do that.
Most liberals vote for the lesser of two evils, thus perpetuating the white male power system. Most liberals would not consider a third party candidate or even a Democratic candidate who might more represent their values because the candidate appears unelectable. They vote for popularity rather than their own values. That is a lack of critical thinking skills and that is why nothing will change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Good post
Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Word
Posted by: pdxstudent
» here I most certainly agree with you!
Posted by: Suzon
» RE: Word
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: mcstewey
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: peacelf
» We have to teach people to "see the Matrix."
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Lauren
» RE:Progressive's knowledge is Synthetic
Posted by: Equality2941
» RE: Progressive's knowledge is Synthetic
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on Sep 19, 2007 7:35 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The test is unabashedly behaviorialistic. Where does critical thinking, or conclusions in the direction of critical thinking, come into play? This connection is precisely what underpins the author of the article's presumptuous gloating, because he assumes, as well as draws from poorly argued conclusions, that what this test is indicating is a mind-bogglingly complex phenomena we call intelligence (to say nothing of ideology or critical thinking about such topics). An open mind isn't necessarily about unproblematic, transparent thinking (as if there were such a phenomena). It's about affects too, which colour and direct our thinking as much as the much vaunted sovereign individual. How does one engage that in this kind of experiment? I say one doesn't.
It doesn't take an 8th-grade science student to point out that what is being correlated with intelligence (whatever the fuck that loaded word is supposed to mean in such a vague deployment as in this article) is an unreasonably small and particular relationship between (at most) muscle-reaction and visual perception. What the author wants to see in the results, and apparently the researchers, is a simple, even if preliminary, correlation between inoperable political identities (as if liberal or conservative, to those who perfer those terms, meant the same thing to everyone)---who's the control, a moderate?---and an even less operable notion of intelligence.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Sep 19, 2007 7:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Doggycuny on Sep 19, 2007 7:40 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Conservatives are retards - I did a test!
Posted by: rocketman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: shangrilalad on Sep 19, 2007 8:11 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you think this article is outrageous lies and propaganda, watch Fox News for ten minutes. Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week of vicious lies and propaganda.
.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ScottP on Sep 19, 2007 8:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» Wily, Wicked Weakling & Whitewasher
Posted by: Beck
» More M's
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 19, 2007 8:42 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most follow-the-leader types just buy the bull and believe everything the money machine tells them about how bad liberalism is! "gol dang libruls. wanna take all r free dums uway!" Who cares if Bush does the same thing? Fact dont matter because the whole system is based on making false assumptions and completely ignoring facts. Liberals can see this a bit better.
But there is still plenty of big money behind liberal views, and I can see that dynamic reflected in the general population. Your average liberal is smarter than your average conservative. But if that is how they see politics, then its like comparing a chimp to a baboon. The words "liberal" and "conservative" do not speak towards a persons views on power and the acquisition thereof! That's why politics is better represented by what you see on the political compass website
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'll Raise You One
Posted by: pdxstudent
» I'm in.
Posted by: Suzon
» All in.
Posted by: LMNOP
» Could It Be Though...
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: More sensible reason for why liberals are usually smarter
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: breen on Sep 19, 2007 9:57 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In my opinion...
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 9:58 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you tell me conservatives are just as smart, and liberals are evil for pointing out the difference.
You wight check the may you think. You fine upstanding conservative.
I am able to think freely. My gut reaction is that conservatism makes smart people stupid. Liberalism opens the world to all the beauties and horrors this world has to offer. That makes you want to save the beauties, and fight the horrors. Destroying the beauties, and creating horror is what conservatism is all about. That's why we protest. That is why my real name is on this comment, and I try to put a streak of fire in every one.
I made sure my employer knew that his drug testing of me was unamerican, good idea, or not did not change the reality.
A'ss holes of the world, I'm out of hiding. Every liberal, come out with me and help enlighten the world. Show the conservatives the beauty being destroyed in their name, and the horrors created in their name. Maybe, a few of them, may learn to tell a M from a W.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Open society is the cure for terrorism
Posted by: metamind
» RE: Where did this go?
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 19, 2007 10:54 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Pfff, they lack the BALLS and FUCKING BRAINS to be themselves !!!!
Posted by: SALLY EVANS
» RE: Pfff, they lack the BALLS and FUCKING BRAINS to be themselves !!!!
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bravegirl68 on Sep 19, 2007 10:58 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was an interesting study a few years ago where it tracked amygdala activity vs. the liberal and conservative brains. It made a lot of sense - we liberals get emotional about how people are treated, and the amygdala is our emotional center, as well as our memory archive.
http://tinyurl.com/2zz8np
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: sliver
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: Ocean tides
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 19, 2007 11:20 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: By the way, it's not how much you know but how you APPLY your knowledge that defines smartness.
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thelostsailor on Sep 19, 2007 11:51 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Such coincidences or interesting statistics were revealed in many factors that are ultimately reflective of a lack of education (usually and)or intelligence. Take for example the biggest Republican voter turnout occurred in regions where nearly the whole community shops at Walmart. Although I cannot rattle off the other startling stats (my mind tried to block out these scary truths).
I think this all boils down to, if I can think (if I'm smart enough or have had enough education to muster thought), then I will. If an AMerican today is not THINKING that it's government is doing much wrong to the world and to it's own citizens, then, again, there is little hope of ever seeing any thought mustered.
LAST THOUGHT:
Let's burn all the dummies for fuel, thereby killing elephants and uh...saving birds from oil with one stone!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: education, intelligence, and startling demographics, oh my!!
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: soulrebeljc on Sep 19, 2007 11:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 11:57 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is easy to speak out for the values of people who have power over you.
To speak up for liberal values you often alianate business associates, and job contacts. You don't want to jeapordize your livelyhood.
I'm tired of giving into evil. Congress does it. Your town does it, you do it.
We take a f'cken to keep from being F'cked.
Lets not let the psyco idiots get their way.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yoo have to be brave.
Posted by: gringo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: headhunter on Sep 19, 2007 1:07 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dover23 on Sep 19, 2007 1:17 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And what about anarchists? are they conservative or liberal or neither? would it have been too complicated to include them in this study? is it too scary to consider that they have the most intelligence of all?
It's been my experience that the majority of self-described liberals are much more conservative than they believe they are. Westport Connecticut comes to mind. What a joke, just like this study. Intelligent people don't need such ego stroking.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: If conservatives are so stupid...
Posted by: parmenicleitus
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Sep 19, 2007 1:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wean skemed!”
“Dawn it!”
“Sowebody get we a beer!”
And if they love “W” so much, let's add a few (hopefully these aren't in the article as I couldn't wait to share):
The following has been proof read by liberals for "W/M" or "M/W" reversals:
“Women Last”
“What are you complaining about?”
“Where’s my beer?”
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Sep 19, 2007 2:33 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The stereotype of liberals allows gray area thinking, whereas conservative stereotypes prevent any question, like religious influence, where the conservative’s beliefs aren’t open to debate, nor will they answer legitimate questions when confronted.
At least liberal (stereotypes) allow some openness, like the recent admission by many AlterNet posters that their love affair with Bill Clinton and Family is finally over.
I’ve often wondered how easy or difficult it would be to make a conversion, one from conservative to liberal or liberal to conservative.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Bosses and Black & White Thinking
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Sep 19, 2007 4:55 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The dog would bark like an angry Barry Goldwater as I approached his space, a '65 Rambler on blocks under the oak tree the dog was chained to, that also doubled as a dog house and a dog food storage facility. I considered the dog in terms of the foaming viciousness by which I was attacked as a liberal in a conservative town. A conservative dog; ready to tear my arms off for having the gall to try to make it to the Rambler to fetch him a pan of food.
Once I mastered looking him in the eye, and ignoring the sea of foam slung from those nice white teeth, along with a few aggressive maneuvers on my part, that dog would hole up under the Rambler until I was well away from that pan of food.
He wouldn't share a bit of it with other dogs, especially other breeds, particularly effeminate ones, or females (bitches; >).
And after I mastered the dominate posturing, he piped down. He even learned not to bite the hand that fed him.
I have since met not less than a few really stupid people that acted like that dog, watching the Bushy tailed network to figure out whose hand to bite, listening with glassy eyes to a few dipshits on conservative talk radio to figure out who is trying to rob their dish, and crawling under the Rambler when someone calls them on the mat for snarling.
Not all of the conservative are stupid, but most of the stupid are conservative. Once a good handler teaches them that they aren't going to get whacked over the head with an old aluminum pan full of doggy bits, they come around.
Me thinks that perhaps if we just changed the letters, perhaps self proclaimed conservatives would fair better; or better yet, to little donkeys and elephants, with monkeys and jackals as new symbols of the kind of crazy way we identify a fiscal conservative that spends money like the Rambler will always be full, with a straight face.
Any way you slice it, our old dogs need some new tricks, a muzzle, and the ability to see in color.
Confused? So am I when I have to look twice now to see a white "W" on a black background stuck on the back of a Rambler, because more and more of those white on black stickers are "M"s now.
M as in moron; me or the prez - it no longer matters, because these days I'm liking my space under the Rambler. Seems I got here by being stupid. It's safe here and I don't have to pass silly tests, I don't have to spend a lot of time barking at a guy who’s just passing me an empty pan, and I don’t have to wonder why they turned everything upside down.
***sigh***
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 19, 2007 5:30 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think you meant "look out!" You seem to be using a noun as a verb or whatever it's called.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: breakthesky on Sep 19, 2007 5:41 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It appears that more people with ADD are conservative. Don't wanna think too hard I guess, go with what SOUNDS good. :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: parmenicleitus on Sep 19, 2007 5:43 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those of you who may actually believe this stuff should stop on over at the Jim Hightower article posted today here on AlterNet. Given that most farmers, ranchers and other animal raising country-folk would be considered "conservative" by most of you (illustrated by the many derogatory comments about rural people here on AlterNet), you might be surprised that they rallied, organized and fought the NAIS largely, I'm willing to bet, without the help from on high, by so-called "liberals". Who knows, maybe I'll lose the bet...
Anyway, as I've stated elsewhere, most intelligent people I've known don't even use the narrow paradigm of "liberal/conservative" , anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MAD on Sep 19, 2007 5:52 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They very well may be all of that but they own your dumb asses, don't they?? They have allowed their corporate buddies to run amok. Anyone have a gander at interest rates lately? Yep, Bernanke & Co. have bailed out Wall Street and chipped away at your dollars. They're sneering in derision at all of you.
Let's be very clear about something. Bush, much to the delight of his buddies in Big Oil and Big Defense, has managed to entangle us in 2 wars and possibly another. What have Dems done? Bent over and taken it time and again. You've taken it over and over and over and will continue to do so when a "smarter" Democrat lubes up and puts it to you for another 8 years.
You're the idiots, not Bush. He will walk away from this Scott Free and retire in Paraguay while we're left holding the bag. So, keep reveling in your smug sense of superiority while Bush sneaks your wealth out the back door. DAMN FOOLS!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: humanity101 on Sep 19, 2007 6:24 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: igoeja on Sep 19, 2007 6:43 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., & Gosling, S. D. The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind. Invited resubmission (Political Psychology).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Conservatives and Creativity
Posted by: igoeja
» And yet, suprisingly....
Posted by: gringo
» RE: An underlying equivocation
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Addendum
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» Not So Surprisingly...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Not So Surprisingly...
Posted by: gringo
» Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: This article begs some questions
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» The Ideological Animal
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Academic Research Libral versus Conservatives
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Missing Piece on Sep 19, 2007 7:59 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortanetly the latter will always win out, because they are organized. At some point you just have to let them make life crappy for themselves and move to canada. Did you know Canada's central bank is government owned. It is not privately owned like ours and the interest goes back to the government. Don't understand, then you better watch money as debt, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
Have you ever worked for a corporation that strives for group think, you find out real quick which one you are. I found out I was a free thinker and corporations do not like free thinkers because they might speak out or not tow the line because they don't have an urge to be part of the group so the normal control mechanisms don't work.
Good luck fellow free thinkers, we are not organized and never will be, it goes against our nature. Therefore we can only hope for a real democracy, where everyone votes instead of just the well organized.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: Missing Piece
» No proof you are a free thinker...
Posted by: gringo
» The ending
Posted by: gringo
» RE: The ending
Posted by: Missing Piece
» RE: No proof you are a free thinker...
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rightisright on Sep 19, 2007 8:40 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: same sh*t, new day
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 19, 2007 11:41 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, we all know that young people are more liberal than older ones. You all know the reasons - students graduate, get jobs, buy houses, get married, and, most importantly, they start PAYING for the luberal policies from their own pocket. And this personal experience changes everything, you know. It's one thing to read about taxes in the books - it's another to actually be forced to take a big chunk of one's own money and give it the guvinmnent. Now, the question #1 is - is the group tested representative of the whole US population? Aha. Ahm. Say, a smart kid, goes to college, becomes a uber-luberal, while a dumb kid, goes to college, and is a conservative. A smart kid graduates, gets a life - and SWING, becomes a conservative. A dumb kid, bails out of college, cannot find a job, drags alone, gets government handouts - becomes a luberal. Would the testing actually catch this transformation? Nope.
Second - was the test representative of the student population? It's no secret, that conservatives tend to go to, say, somewhat dumber departments - physics, math, engineering, while the luberals tend to choose much more challenging English majors, sociology, methaphysics and fundamentals of homosexuality. Now, was this taken into account? Ahm.
Before you guys all go nuts, let me quickly give you some statistics. In 2000 presidential elections, CNN analyzed the voters by income. Not suprisingly, the more a person was earning - the more likely he was voting for Bush. Dirt poor boys - solid dems. Guys making a 100k - republicans. Kinda makes you think - if you luberals are so smart, why are you so poor?
I hope you are still there, kids. Now, here a few more quick questions for you all. For one - why were such tests given to the students? Why not the IQ test? Moreover, can there be any corelation between how much a student plays video-games - and how well he does on this test? Ahm? I mean, if an imbecile, who spends 10 hours a day playing Quake can beat a quantum mechanics major in this test - I mean, does not it prove that the test is measuring something other than intelligence?
Lastly, before you start typing your pathetic responses - here is the last question on the test. Do you think that this test should be used during employment interviews? Should it play a role in the university admission procedure? Ahm? And if you were hiring folks to work for you - how much weight would you put on the results of these tests? I know, these questions are too emotional, a real intellectual question would be - how can the luberals, who are so smart and goodhearted share this nice planet with evil dumb conservatives? Ay?
And now a question to all those free-thinking luberals questionning the status quo. Do you guys ever question the moral and economic reasons for your support of compulsory government pension system (Social Security and Medicare), government handouts (foodstamps, welfare, medicaid, "affordable housing") and the score of rules and regulations we have today? I mean, if you want to challenge authority - heck, try convincing the local government that when a man wants to fix his own house, he should not be forced at gun point to beg permission from the government.
All right, I guess I pissed you all off. Now it's my time to listen to your replies.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» There are no conservatives or liberals in DC just FAKE cons and FAKE libs.
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: This is pretty funny...
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: abstractedaway on Sep 20, 2007 12:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"- Excuse me, but are you a superior person?
- I beg your pardon?
- Oh, I'm sure you'll understand. We're making a census of all the really patriotic people - the right sort of people, you know - of course you understand what I mean - so would you mind giving me your word? - and signing here, please - that you are a superior person - that's all we need to know..."
DH Lawrence, Canvassing for the Election
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lector on Sep 20, 2007 12:00 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Robert Lightfoot
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AB on Sep 20, 2007 12:12 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not a real study.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: Intellect
» On what basis did you come to this conclusion?
Posted by: gringo
» RE: On what basis did you come to this conclusion?
Posted by: AB
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: AB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 1:20 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope this question will not exceed the limits of your self-professed highly critical and deeply original thinking...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: herbal on Sep 20, 2007 2:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Sep 20, 2007 4:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Don't be silly...
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Don't be silly...
Posted by: leafsong1
» You are too being silly
Posted by: gringo
» RE: A Nugget of Truth
Posted by: nathanusa
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sigridsmith on Sep 20, 2007 2:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dumb conservatives
Posted by: gringo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: asilsfable on Sep 20, 2007 9:20 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arrogance was supposedly the reason why people chose Bush over Gore in 2000--Al Gore even made fun of it in an opening speech on Saturday Night Live (that was pretty funny actually). But the fact of the matter is that these so-called 'dumb' people made a choice that effected the entire world. So despite our 'superiorness', we still lost.
Bringing people into the fold should be the order of the day and the main focus of progressives. Most people want clean air, safe environs and good relations with their neighbors--internationally and otherwise. The devil is in the details--how to get those things done in a way a majority of folks can agree on.
Articles like this do nothing to further that agenda. I've seen intelligence get thwarted by mere pettiness so many times it makes me nauseous. Wise up, people!
And please, Alternet: The mix is the message, right? I mean, if you only want one point of view, why have comments at all?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 9:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Essential services must be in the hands of the people, which means they must be under the control of the government.
Of course, a true critical mind would ponder some obvious questions. For one, we don't have artificial intelligence - so all services will be in the hands of the people. If we let people keep their money, and let the government stay out of this, the people will control those services - individually. Why would the government buerucrats be better guards of our interests than the people themselves? Moreover, how much control would an individual have over his own retirement and medical care - if the government forces him at gun point to surrender his means to do so? And which service are to be considered "essential"? What is the actual standard by which you judge which services are "essential"? Somehow, I doubt you have asked any of those questions. After all, American luberals are not know for their ability to ask hard questions.
Allowing individuals or corporations to control these services has the effect of legalizing extortion against the people.
So, when the government comes to my house, puts a gun to my head and takes my money - "it's for your own good, we will take care of you when you get old, when you get sick, when you get hungry" - this is not extortion. But when I buy these services out of my owne volition from the people I personaly choose, and when I can drop them the very moment I believe they are not acting in my interests - this is what you call "extortion". Ahm. Well, would you care to explain? I mean, it's not like the government has dealt well with our pension money, you know. It's all spent. Enron is an example of perfectly honest business compared to the way the feds dealt with our pension money. But then - who am I to sue in this case? There is no one. I hope this info did not overload your registers...
Law enforcement, justice and penalty, water, electricity, food, health care, help for the disadvantaged and elderly, and general redistribution of wealth for social stability, among many others are all vital governmental interests.
Hardly anyone would argue that law enforcement, justice and penalty should not be under the government control. But what about the rest? Why can't I (or even you) be allowed to care for myself when it comes to all the rest? Medical care, pensions, food - why are you so afraid of being allowed to keep your own money and having to trade with other people? Are you really that dumb that you need the government to do this for you? That's one independent thinker.
As for the "wealth distribution" by the government - I would want to know why you think this legal theft provides for society's stability? Why, tell us...
We know this despite the hundred year old corporate propaganda campaign which has so fooled the conservatives because we think for ourselves and they don't.
Don't mistake knowing something for believing in something. So far you only showed a blind belief in century's old prejudices against liberty.
Socialism is a very good idea slandered by an army of professional liars in the employ of the plutocracy. It takes an independent mind to realize that.
Yes, only a mind independent from reality would claim that socialism, a system which proved to be a horrible disaster on many levels - from individual liberty and democracy to people's welfare - is a good system. Have you ever read a book on the subject? There was more than a century of debates and 90 years of experiments - and all conclusively proved that socialism is a vile idea - why do you ignore this?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You are too being silly....
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 10:26 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But the LAT article is real....
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: yellow on Sep 23, 2007 11:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have heard, however, of IQ tests administered to liberals and conservatives and the liberals come out ahead. This is because liberals think outside the box and realize the vast complexity of the world whereas conservatism is usually all about uncritically following authority and reacting more emotionally than thoughfully. I would say that conservatives are more primal while liberals are more cerebral. I listen to progressive and right wing talk radio (as long as I can stand it!!) and find the right wing callers stupid, uninformed, racist, and inarticulate. The liberals are usually the exact opposite whether formally educated or not. Is this just a coincidence?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nathanusa on Sep 24, 2007 12:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way...I just LOVE the rules here.....
"NO PERSONAL ATACKS ON OUR WRITERS OR READERS"
that's code for "only if you agree with our left wing liberal whacko ideas will we print your comment."
Politcal correctness at it's finest....and we all know political correctness is just a form of free speech stifling.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Nathanusa
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sfo on Sep 25, 2007 8:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean, without your superior IQ's those criminals that gang stomped a kid unconscious might not have hundred dollar bills to put in their mouth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Wow, you guys are smart indeed
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: El Hombre Malo on Sep 19, 2007 1:51 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This remind me of Woody Allen solving the dilemma of an intelligent, bright kid beign conservative by making him have a tumor in his brain, that once removed allowed him to be liberal, to his family relief. In his case, it was an intelligent comment on how for many in our camp, it seems its easier to label the opposition as "dumb" rather than taking the effort to understand and defeat their arguments. I fear the author of this article lacks the depth of perception to see that.
...or maybe he mistakes a "M" with a "W".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: aethr
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: jroth420
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: MatthewSavage
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: soft2u47
» "ehrm...." was very mildly put
Posted by: Leman
» RE: "ehrm...." was very mildly put
Posted by: Leman
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: sliver
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: El Hombre Malo
» RE: ehrm....
Posted by: Lauren
» Indeed! Wasn't there a story on here not to long ago regarding a study recounting the evils...
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: vox persona on Sep 19, 2007 1:56 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EJW on Sep 19, 2007 2:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This is great
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Sep 19, 2007 2:49 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe the results aren't necessarily an indicator of intelligence, but rather, the tendency to think critically and approach each new situation with an open mind. For example, Himmler, Goebbels, and some other fanatics might have been intelligent people, but maybe they wouldn't have done well on this test, relative to their IQs.
Also, could it just be an indication of dogmatic, extremist thinking? Suppose they were to separate the results into those with liberal/moderate views vs. extreme views, both left and right?
My thought has been that wing nuts tend to think emotionally and prejudicially, while liberals and moderates tend to think more rationally and logically. There is nothing rational about patriotism, religion, lust for war, and blind obedience to authority. They're all gut-level, emotional, upbringing-based things that you either have or you don't, like the love some people have for certain dog breeds or baseball teams.
That's why I often think it's futile for liberals to argue with wing nuts. They hope the facts and evidence will change their minds when, as the article suggests, the wing nuts already have their minds made up.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: FredGrubbs on Sep 19, 2007 3:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Leman
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Bozwell
» RE: Humor
Posted by: Leman
» RE: Humor
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bulbman on Sep 19, 2007 3:34 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Of course!
Posted by: heid
» RE: Of course!
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: So then we're justified ...
Posted by: Leman
» RE: So then we're justified ...
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ~Fiona~ on Sep 19, 2007 3:42 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for your mischievious sense of humor, fine wit and mostly for bringing a smile to my face at this early hour. I wish every day could start with such a smile...
:o)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Trainer12 on Sep 19, 2007 3:46 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
screw everyone else. They don't believe in democracy. They don't believe in "checks and balances". They violate their oath of office to "defend and protect the Consitution of the United States". They don't want to enhance the "general welfare" of all the citizens of the United States. They only want to protect their rich and powerful corporations and the ruling elite. It is time to impeach them and remove them from office.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Flat World Thinking, Reactionary, Neandertals
Posted by: Equality2941
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rocketman on Sep 19, 2007 3:49 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: igoeja on Sep 19, 2007 3:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
At least two fairly extensive studies, both using the big 5 personality inventory as a measure, found that the defining quality of liberalness was openness to ideas and experience. Liberals were defined by this quality, as much as conservatives were oriented toward convention and striving for order. Although the authors did not overgeneralize, other studies point to openness as a quality of the highly intelligent, e.g., professors. Also, openness has a high degree of correlation with the Myers-Briggs test quality of intuitiveness, which is more likely found among the gifted.
When you start to look at other variables, e.g., religiosity, knowledge of current events, demographics, etc., it seems likely true that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives. One issue, since the study was done among students, is that it was range-restricted. If similar studies were done on the entire population, the results might be more equivocal.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: rocketman
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Dont' Overgeneralize, But..
Posted by: Equality2941
» Since You Obviously Know Nothing About IQ...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Since You Obviously Know Nothing About IQ...
Posted by: Equality2941
» Like a Blowhard with No Facts, Like WMD's in Iraq, etc.
Posted by: igoeja
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Solarpower on Sep 19, 2007 4:04 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's nice and convenient to get confirmation that we're smarter than them, we know that anyway, but they think the same thing about us ... strange eh?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» "I don't get it."
Posted by: ~Fiona~
» Fiona behave your self! Wait until dino and albrecht get here, then go for it!
Posted by: johngary66
» It is self-defined...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: By who's definition?
Posted by: Leman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: heid on Sep 19, 2007 4:54 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Suzon on Sep 19, 2007 5:01 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Could we not have had calm and quiet confidence that people on the left can handle uncertainty and ambiguity fairly well? Some people do think more deeply than others. Some others have a need to feel sure of things and therefore tend to shut out reality.
Read Janis and his theory of Groupthink.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Read Milgram and his Studies on Obdediance
Posted by: pdxstudent
» Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Suzon
» RE: Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Intellect
» ...for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Janis's work on Groupthink is less well-known than Milgram's on obedience and more relevant
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BobbieP on Sep 19, 2007 5:17 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
After all we are all being dosed iwth deadly radiation all the time prom our "peaceful" nuclear power plants.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 5:27 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For the sake of the world, and society, people who don't know the difference between a M, or a W, need help. We need to build the special hospitals.
Hey, I have heard Haliburten already has some contracts for some. The perfict place for people who don't know a M from a W.
Compassionate Liberalism
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: breen
» mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: dexter
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: mintally deranged conservative
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Compassionate Liberalism?
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: dlentz
» Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: johngary66
» RE: Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: dlentz
» RE: Dlentz, I hope you understand that many of us are not willing to wait for you and other Republicans
Posted by: dlentz
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Lauren
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Equality2941
» RE: The Sick
Posted by: Equality2941
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maddy on Sep 19, 2007 5:27 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a college professor myself, one who is part of the "studies" camps (and, thus, those programs/departments ripe for accusations that we're brainwashing students to the left), it seems to me that the college students I've had who've described themselves as conservatives are well-skilled in "blindly pushing a button" because they seem to spend quite a bit of time "tuning out" in our classes as a point of emotional defense. In fact, I think said students take up the label conservative proudly in defense against classes that critically examine the position of the U.S. in the world, race, gender, class, sexuality, etc.
So, perhaps this is more of a pavlovian response of a particular kind of college conservative, rather than conservatives more broadly?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Just a thought
Posted by: mcstewey
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Aegrus on Sep 19, 2007 5:37 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What kind of progress is it when you become more like the thing that you hate?
It is a difficult time for all Americans right now. Fragmenting through slander and prejudice further reduces progress and change, I feel.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Well said
Posted by: daw13
» RE: Counter Productive
Posted by: peacelf
» Productive
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Productive
Posted by: Aegrus
» RE: Productive
Posted by: leafsong1
» RE: Counter Productive
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EncinoM on Sep 19, 2007 5:47 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The few voices who argued for critical examination of the situation were labeled facists.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I am not so sure....
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drmflorida on Sep 19, 2007 6:04 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I saw a guy driving down the road with a bunch of conservative bumper stickers on his car, and one of them said "When in doubt, blame liberals". I don't think he understood the irony.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: now I feel bad
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rfields on Sep 19, 2007 6:27 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: screwjack2000 on Sep 19, 2007 6:56 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: People Love
Posted by: Ocean tides
» RE: People Love
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: peacelf on Sep 19, 2007 7:01 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is not that conservatives are genetically inferior intellectually; it's that their education either short-changed them on critical thought or that the peer group influenced their choices, which again falls back on a lack of critical thinking skills. Look at the conservative media.
Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly are great examples of pundits who say things to elicit emotional responses, thus their success at luring working class white males into the conservative party.
The running joke that conservatives call it "from the gut" implies an emotional response means more to conservatives than a thoughtful response. (Stephen Colbert mocks this behavior every episode.) Emotional responses have little to do with statistical or intellectual substance. Emotional responses also cater to the self-serving ego.
My point is that to teach conservatives to think critically would transform them into "liberal" thinkers. Yet, many liberals and progressives have a superiority complex and refuse to engage conservatives in dialogue. Indeed, as I so often see, any "debate" becomes a head-butting game, which brings both conservative and liberal down to the same level. Liberals have difficulty engaging conservatives for some of the same reasons conservatives respond from the gut.
Most liberals lack critical thought in the area of real change. A liberal by definition may question policy and approach to governance, but they don't question the system. Liberals don't question the deeper significance of white patriarchal supremacy and power and how voting for a women or black president doesn't necessarily mean change. Women and blacks can still serve the interests of white male supremacy.
To be a change agent one must deconstruct the systematic controls that are embedded in every institution in america, from government to education to the grocery store we shop at. White male power infects it all, meaning, the only solution is to challenge that power structure, and I don't see many liberals or progressives who do that.
Most liberals vote for the lesser of two evils, thus perpetuating the white male power system. Most liberals would not consider a third party candidate or even a Democratic candidate who might more represent their values because the candidate appears unelectable. They vote for popularity rather than their own values. That is a lack of critical thinking skills and that is why nothing will change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Good post
Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Word
Posted by: pdxstudent
» here I most certainly agree with you!
Posted by: Suzon
» RE: Word
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: mcstewey
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: peacelf
» We have to teach people to "see the Matrix."
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Intellect
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Lauren
» RE:Progressive's knowledge is Synthetic
Posted by: Equality2941
» RE: Progressive's knowledge is Synthetic
Posted by: peacelf
» RE: Smartness and critical thinking skills?
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on Sep 19, 2007 7:35 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The test is unabashedly behaviorialistic. Where does critical thinking, or conclusions in the direction of critical thinking, come into play? This connection is precisely what underpins the author of the article's presumptuous gloating, because he assumes, as well as draws from poorly argued conclusions, that what this test is indicating is a mind-bogglingly complex phenomena we call intelligence (to say nothing of ideology or critical thinking about such topics). An open mind isn't necessarily about unproblematic, transparent thinking (as if there were such a phenomena). It's about affects too, which colour and direct our thinking as much as the much vaunted sovereign individual. How does one engage that in this kind of experiment? I say one doesn't.
It doesn't take an 8th-grade science student to point out that what is being correlated with intelligence (whatever the fuck that loaded word is supposed to mean in such a vague deployment as in this article) is an unreasonably small and particular relationship between (at most) muscle-reaction and visual perception. What the author wants to see in the results, and apparently the researchers, is a simple, even if preliminary, correlation between inoperable political identities (as if liberal or conservative, to those who perfer those terms, meant the same thing to everyone)---who's the control, a moderate?---and an even less operable notion of intelligence.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: LMNOP on Sep 19, 2007 7:36 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Doggycuny on Sep 19, 2007 7:40 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Conservatives are retards - I did a test!
Posted by: rocketman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: shangrilalad on Sep 19, 2007 8:11 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you think this article is outrageous lies and propaganda, watch Fox News for ten minutes. Twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week of vicious lies and propaganda.
.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ScottP on Sep 19, 2007 8:24 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
» Wily, Wicked Weakling & Whitewasher
Posted by: Beck
» More M's
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Iconoclast421 on Sep 19, 2007 8:42 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most follow-the-leader types just buy the bull and believe everything the money machine tells them about how bad liberalism is! "gol dang libruls. wanna take all r free dums uway!" Who cares if Bush does the same thing? Fact dont matter because the whole system is based on making false assumptions and completely ignoring facts. Liberals can see this a bit better.
But there is still plenty of big money behind liberal views, and I can see that dynamic reflected in the general population. Your average liberal is smarter than your average conservative. But if that is how they see politics, then its like comparing a chimp to a baboon. The words "liberal" and "conservative" do not speak towards a persons views on power and the acquisition thereof! That's why politics is better represented by what you see on the political compass website
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'll Raise You One
Posted by: pdxstudent
» I'm in.
Posted by: Suzon
» All in.
Posted by: LMNOP
» Could It Be Though...
Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: More sensible reason for why liberals are usually smarter
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: breen on Sep 19, 2007 9:57 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In my opinion...
Posted by: LMNOP
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 9:58 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you tell me conservatives are just as smart, and liberals are evil for pointing out the difference.
You wight check the may you think. You fine upstanding conservative.
I am able to think freely. My gut reaction is that conservatism makes smart people stupid. Liberalism opens the world to all the beauties and horrors this world has to offer. That makes you want to save the beauties, and fight the horrors. Destroying the beauties, and creating horror is what conservatism is all about. That's why we protest. That is why my real name is on this comment, and I try to put a streak of fire in every one.
I made sure my employer knew that his drug testing of me was unamerican, good idea, or not did not change the reality.
A'ss holes of the world, I'm out of hiding. Every liberal, come out with me and help enlighten the world. Show the conservatives the beauty being destroyed in their name, and the horrors created in their name. Maybe, a few of them, may learn to tell a M from a W.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Open society is the cure for terrorism
Posted by: metamind
» RE: Where did this go?
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 19, 2007 10:54 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Pfff, they lack the BALLS and FUCKING BRAINS to be themselves !!!!
Posted by: SALLY EVANS
» RE: Pfff, they lack the BALLS and FUCKING BRAINS to be themselves !!!!
Posted by: maxpayne
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bravegirl68 on Sep 19, 2007 10:58 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There was an interesting study a few years ago where it tracked amygdala activity vs. the liberal and conservative brains. It made a lot of sense - we liberals get emotional about how people are treated, and the amygdala is our emotional center, as well as our memory archive.
http://tinyurl.com/2zz8np
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: sliver
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: Ocean tides
» RE: In my experience...
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Sep 19, 2007 11:20 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: By the way, it's not how much you know but how you APPLY your knowledge that defines smartness.
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thelostsailor on Sep 19, 2007 11:51 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Such coincidences or interesting statistics were revealed in many factors that are ultimately reflective of a lack of education (usually and)or intelligence. Take for example the biggest Republican voter turnout occurred in regions where nearly the whole community shops at Walmart. Although I cannot rattle off the other startling stats (my mind tried to block out these scary truths).
I think this all boils down to, if I can think (if I'm smart enough or have had enough education to muster thought), then I will. If an AMerican today is not THINKING that it's government is doing much wrong to the world and to it's own citizens, then, again, there is little hope of ever seeing any thought mustered.
LAST THOUGHT:
Let's burn all the dummies for fuel, thereby killing elephants and uh...saving birds from oil with one stone!!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: education, intelligence, and startling demographics, oh my!!
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: soulrebeljc on Sep 19, 2007 11:55 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mike_burns on Sep 19, 2007 11:57 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is easy to speak out for the values of people who have power over you.
To speak up for liberal values you often alianate business associates, and job contacts. You don't want to jeapordize your livelyhood.
I'm tired of giving into evil. Congress does it. Your town does it, you do it.
We take a f'cken to keep from being F'cked.
Lets not let the psyco idiots get their way.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yoo have to be brave.
Posted by: gringo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: headhunter on Sep 19, 2007 1:07 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: dover23 on Sep 19, 2007 1:17 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And what about anarchists? are they conservative or liberal or neither? would it have been too complicated to include them in this study? is it too scary to consider that they have the most intelligence of all?
It's been my experience that the majority of self-described liberals are much more conservative than they believe they are. Westport Connecticut comes to mind. What a joke, just like this study. Intelligent people don't need such ego stroking.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: If conservatives are so stupid...
Posted by: parmenicleitus
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Sep 19, 2007 1:44 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wean skemed!”
“Dawn it!”
“Sowebody get we a beer!”
And if they love “W” so much, let's add a few (hopefully these aren't in the article as I couldn't wait to share):
The following has been proof read by liberals for "W/M" or "M/W" reversals:
“Women Last”
“What are you complaining about?”
“Where’s my beer?”
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Overburdened Planet on Sep 19, 2007 2:33 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The stereotype of liberals allows gray area thinking, whereas conservative stereotypes prevent any question, like religious influence, where the conservative’s beliefs aren’t open to debate, nor will they answer legitimate questions when confronted.
At least liberal (stereotypes) allow some openness, like the recent admission by many AlterNet posters that their love affair with Bill Clinton and Family is finally over.
I’ve often wondered how easy or difficult it would be to make a conversion, one from conservative to liberal or liberal to conservative.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Bosses and Black & White Thinking
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kelly.nickell on Sep 19, 2007 4:55 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The dog would bark like an angry Barry Goldwater as I approached his space, a '65 Rambler on blocks under the oak tree the dog was chained to, that also doubled as a dog house and a dog food storage facility. I considered the dog in terms of the foaming viciousness by which I was attacked as a liberal in a conservative town. A conservative dog; ready to tear my arms off for having the gall to try to make it to the Rambler to fetch him a pan of food.
Once I mastered looking him in the eye, and ignoring the sea of foam slung from those nice white teeth, along with a few aggressive maneuvers on my part, that dog would hole up under the Rambler until I was well away from that pan of food.
He wouldn't share a bit of it with other dogs, especially other breeds, particularly effeminate ones, or females (bitches; >).
And after I mastered the dominate posturing, he piped down. He even learned not to bite the hand that fed him.
I have since met not less than a few really stupid people that acted like that dog, watching the Bushy tailed network to figure out whose hand to bite, listening with glassy eyes to a few dipshits on conservative talk radio to figure out who is trying to rob their dish, and crawling under the Rambler when someone calls them on the mat for snarling.
Not all of the conservative are stupid, but most of the stupid are conservative. Once a good handler teaches them that they aren't going to get whacked over the head with an old aluminum pan full of doggy bits, they come around.
Me thinks that perhaps if we just changed the letters, perhaps self proclaimed conservatives would fair better; or better yet, to little donkeys and elephants, with monkeys and jackals as new symbols of the kind of crazy way we identify a fiscal conservative that spends money like the Rambler will always be full, with a straight face.
Any way you slice it, our old dogs need some new tricks, a muzzle, and the ability to see in color.
Confused? So am I when I have to look twice now to see a white "W" on a black background stuck on the back of a Rambler, because more and more of those white on black stickers are "M"s now.
M as in moron; me or the prez - it no longer matters, because these days I'm liking my space under the Rambler. Seems I got here by being stupid. It's safe here and I don't have to pass silly tests, I don't have to spend a lot of time barking at a guy who’s just passing me an empty pan, and I don’t have to wonder why they turned everything upside down.
***sigh***
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 19, 2007 5:30 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think you meant "look out!" You seem to be using a noun as a verb or whatever it's called.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: breakthesky on Sep 19, 2007 5:41 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It appears that more people with ADD are conservative. Don't wanna think too hard I guess, go with what SOUNDS good. :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: parmenicleitus on Sep 19, 2007 5:43 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those of you who may actually believe this stuff should stop on over at the Jim Hightower article posted today here on AlterNet. Given that most farmers, ranchers and other animal raising country-folk would be considered "conservative" by most of you (illustrated by the many derogatory comments about rural people here on AlterNet), you might be surprised that they rallied, organized and fought the NAIS largely, I'm willing to bet, without the help from on high, by so-called "liberals". Who knows, maybe I'll lose the bet...
Anyway, as I've stated elsewhere, most intelligent people I've known don't even use the narrow paradigm of "liberal/conservative" , anyway.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: MAD on Sep 19, 2007 5:52 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They very well may be all of that but they own your dumb asses, don't they?? They have allowed their corporate buddies to run amok. Anyone have a gander at interest rates lately? Yep, Bernanke & Co. have bailed out Wall Street and chipped away at your dollars. They're sneering in derision at all of you.
Let's be very clear about something. Bush, much to the delight of his buddies in Big Oil and Big Defense, has managed to entangle us in 2 wars and possibly another. What have Dems done? Bent over and taken it time and again. You've taken it over and over and over and will continue to do so when a "smarter" Democrat lubes up and puts it to you for another 8 years.
You're the idiots, not Bush. He will walk away from this Scott Free and retire in Paraguay while we're left holding the bag. So, keep reveling in your smug sense of superiority while Bush sneaks your wealth out the back door. DAMN FOOLS!!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: humanity101 on Sep 19, 2007 6:24 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: igoeja on Sep 19, 2007 6:43 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Carney, D. R., Jost, J. T., & Gosling, S. D. The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind. Invited resubmission (Political Psychology).
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Conservatives and Creativity
Posted by: igoeja
» And yet, suprisingly....
Posted by: gringo
» RE: An underlying equivocation
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» RE: Addendum
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» Not So Surprisingly...
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Not So Surprisingly...
Posted by: gringo
» Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: This article begs some questions
Posted by: parmenicleitus
» The Ideological Animal
Posted by: igoeja
» RE: Academic Research Libral versus Conservatives
Posted by: Lauren
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Missing Piece on Sep 19, 2007 7:59 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortanetly the latter will always win out, because they are organized. At some point you just have to let them make life crappy for themselves and move to canada. Did you know Canada's central bank is government owned. It is not privately owned like ours and the interest goes back to the government. Don't understand, then you better watch money as debt, http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279
Have you ever worked for a corporation that strives for group think, you find out real quick which one you are. I found out I was a free thinker and corporations do not like free thinkers because they might speak out or not tow the line because they don't have an urge to be part of the group so the normal control mechanisms don't work.
Good luck fellow free thinkers, we are not organized and never will be, it goes against our nature. Therefore we can only hope for a real democracy, where everyone votes instead of just the well organized.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: Missing Piece
» No proof you are a free thinker...
Posted by: gringo
» The ending
Posted by: gringo
» RE: The ending
Posted by: Missing Piece
» RE: No proof you are a free thinker...
Posted by: holmesjoanna
» RE: Can you prove you are a free thinker?
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rightisright on Sep 19, 2007 8:40 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: same sh*t, new day
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 19, 2007 11:41 PM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, we all know that young people are more liberal than older ones. You all know the reasons - students graduate, get jobs, buy houses, get married, and, most importantly, they start PAYING for the luberal policies from their own pocket. And this personal experience changes everything, you know. It's one thing to read about taxes in the books - it's another to actually be forced to take a big chunk of one's own money and give it the guvinmnent. Now, the question #1 is - is the group tested representative of the whole US population? Aha. Ahm. Say, a smart kid, goes to college, becomes a uber-luberal, while a dumb kid, goes to college, and is a conservative. A smart kid graduates, gets a life - and SWING, becomes a conservative. A dumb kid, bails out of college, cannot find a job, drags alone, gets government handouts - becomes a luberal. Would the testing actually catch this transformation? Nope.
Second - was the test representative of the student population? It's no secret, that conservatives tend to go to, say, somewhat dumber departments - physics, math, engineering, while the luberals tend to choose much more challenging English majors, sociology, methaphysics and fundamentals of homosexuality. Now, was this taken into account? Ahm.
Before you guys all go nuts, let me quickly give you some statistics. In 2000 presidential elections, CNN analyzed the voters by income. Not suprisingly, the more a person was earning - the more likely he was voting for Bush. Dirt poor boys - solid dems. Guys making a 100k - republicans. Kinda makes you think - if you luberals are so smart, why are you so poor?
I hope you are still there, kids. Now, here a few more quick questions for you all. For one - why were such tests given to the students? Why not the IQ test? Moreover, can there be any corelation between how much a student plays video-games - and how well he does on this test? Ahm? I mean, if an imbecile, who spends 10 hours a day playing Quake can beat a quantum mechanics major in this test - I mean, does not it prove that the test is measuring something other than intelligence?
Lastly, before you start typing your pathetic responses - here is the last question on the test. Do you think that this test should be used during employment interviews? Should it play a role in the university admission procedure? Ahm? And if you were hiring folks to work for you - how much weight would you put on the results of these tests? I know, these questions are too emotional, a real intellectual question would be - how can the luberals, who are so smart and goodhearted share this nice planet with evil dumb conservatives? Ay?
And now a question to all those free-thinking luberals questionning the status quo. Do you guys ever question the moral and economic reasons for your support of compulsory government pension system (Social Security and Medicare), government handouts (foodstamps, welfare, medicaid, "affordable housing") and the score of rules and regulations we have today? I mean, if you want to challenge authority - heck, try convincing the local government that when a man wants to fix his own house, he should not be forced at gun point to beg permission from the government.
All right, I guess I pissed you all off. Now it's my time to listen to your replies.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» There are no conservatives or liberals in DC just FAKE cons and FAKE libs.
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: This is pretty funny...
Posted by: leafsong1
Comments are closed-
Posted by: abstractedaway on Sep 20, 2007 12:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"- Excuse me, but are you a superior person?
- I beg your pardon?
- Oh, I'm sure you'll understand. We're making a census of all the really patriotic people - the right sort of people, you know - of course you understand what I mean - so would you mind giving me your word? - and signing here, please - that you are a superior person - that's all we need to know..."
DH Lawrence, Canvassing for the Election
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lector on Sep 20, 2007 12:00 AM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Robert Lightfoot
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: AB on Sep 20, 2007 12:12 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's not a real study.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: Intellect
» On what basis did you come to this conclusion?
Posted by: gringo
» RE: On what basis did you come to this conclusion?
Posted by: AB
» RE: Common sense, please.
Posted by: AB
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 1:20 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I hope this question will not exceed the limits of your self-professed highly critical and deeply original thinking...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: herbal on Sep 20, 2007 2:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thornwolf on Sep 20, 2007 4:38 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Don't be silly...
Posted by: gringo
» RE: Don't be silly...
Posted by: leafsong1
» You are too being silly
Posted by: gringo
» RE: A Nugget of Truth
Posted by: nathanusa
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sigridsmith on Sep 20, 2007 2:59 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Dumb conservatives
Posted by: gringo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: asilsfable on Sep 20, 2007 9:20 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arrogance was supposedly the reason why people chose Bush over Gore in 2000--Al Gore even made fun of it in an opening speech on Saturday Night Live (that was pretty funny actually). But the fact of the matter is that these so-called 'dumb' people made a choice that effected the entire world. So despite our 'superiorness', we still lost.
Bringing people into the fold should be the order of the day and the main focus of progressives. Most people want clean air, safe environs and good relations with their neighbors--internationally and otherwise. The devil is in the details--how to get those things done in a way a majority of folks can agree on.
Articles like this do nothing to further that agenda. I've seen intelligence get thwarted by mere pettiness so many times it makes me nauseous. Wise up, people!
And please, Alternet: The mix is the message, right? I mean, if you only want one point of view, why have comments at all?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 9:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Essential services must be in the hands of the people, which means they must be under the control of the government.
Of course, a true critical mind would ponder some obvious questions. For one, we don't have artificial intelligence - so all services will be in the hands of the people. If we let people keep their money, and let the government stay out of this, the people will control those services - individually. Why would the government buerucrats be better guards of our interests than the people themselves? Moreover, how much control would an individual have over his own retirement and medical care - if the government forces him at gun point to surrender his means to do so? And which service are to be considered "essential"? What is the actual standard by which you judge which services are "essential"? Somehow, I doubt you have asked any of those questions. After all, American luberals are not know for their ability to ask hard questions.
Allowing individuals or corporations to control these services has the effect of legalizing extortion against the people.
So, when the government comes to my house, puts a gun to my head and takes my money - "it's for your own good, we will take care of you when you get old, when you get sick, when you get hungry" - this is not extortion. But when I buy these services out of my owne volition from the people I personaly choose, and when I can drop them the very moment I believe they are not acting in my interests - this is what you call "extortion". Ahm. Well, would you care to explain? I mean, it's not like the government has dealt well with our pension money, you know. It's all spent. Enron is an example of perfectly honest business compared to the way the feds dealt with our pension money. But then - who am I to sue in this case? There is no one. I hope this info did not overload your registers...
Law enforcement, justice and penalty, water, electricity, food, health care, help for the disadvantaged and elderly, and general redistribution of wealth for social stability, among many others are all vital governmental interests.
Hardly anyone would argue that law enforcement, justice and penalty should not be under the government control. But what about the rest? Why can't I (or even you) be allowed to care for myself when it comes to all the rest? Medical care, pensions, food - why are you so afraid of being allowed to keep your own money and having to trade with other people? Are you really that dumb that you need the government to do this for you? That's one independent thinker.
As for the "wealth distribution" by the government - I would want to know why you think this legal theft provides for society's stability? Why, tell us...
We know this despite the hundred year old corporate propaganda campaign which has so fooled the conservatives because we think for ourselves and they don't.
Don't mistake knowing something for believing in something. So far you only showed a blind belief in century's old prejudices against liberty.
Socialism is a very good idea slandered by an army of professional liars in the employ of the plutocracy. It takes an independent mind to realize that.
Yes, only a mind independent from reality would claim that socialism, a system which proved to be a horrible disaster on many levels - from individual liberty and democracy to people's welfare - is a good system. Have you ever read a book on the subject? There was more than a century of debates and 90 years of experiments - and all conclusively proved that socialism is a vile idea - why do you ignore this?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: You are too being silly....
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gringo on Sep 20, 2007 10:26 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But the LAT article is real....
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: yellow on Sep 23, 2007 11:38 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have heard, however, of IQ tests administered to liberals and conservatives and the liberals come out ahead. This is because liberals think outside the box and realize the vast complexity of the world whereas conservatism is usually all about uncritically following authority and reacting more emotionally than thoughfully. I would say that conservatives are more primal while liberals are more cerebral. I listen to progressive and right wing talk radio (as long as I can stand it!!) and find the right wing callers stupid, uninformed, racist, and inarticulate. The liberals are usually the exact opposite whether formally educated or not. Is this just a coincidence?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: nathanusa on Sep 24, 2007 12:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way...I just LOVE the rules here.....
"NO PERSONAL ATACKS ON OUR WRITERS OR READERS"
that's code for "only if you agree with our left wing liberal whacko ideas will we print your comment."
Politcal correctness at it's finest....and we all know political correctness is just a form of free speech stifling.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Nathanusa
Posted by: kelly.nickell
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sfo on Sep 25, 2007 8:20 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I mean, without your superior IQ's those criminals that gang stomped a kid unconscious might not have hundred dollar bills to put in their mouth.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Wow, you guys are smart indeed
Posted by: kelly.nickell
One Company Thinks They've Created Fast Food With a Conscience -- Are They Right?
ACORN Smear Collaborator Claims Persecution to Raise Money for Her Legal Troubles
When Will Obama Stop Trying to Work with Republicans?




