Researchers spread liberal mythology

[Stephanie]

To reassure themselves that liberals are smart, left-wing social scientists periodically conduct research that proves conservatives are Neanderthals. Their latest foray, by New York University researchers squandering $1.2 million in federal grants, concluded the usual stuff — conservatives are simpleminded, less adaptive to change, etc. — plus Ronald Reagan's brain worked like Adolf Hitler's and conservative drivers have difficulty finding their way home when faced with a detour. Their conclusions were based on research subjects' responses to reflexive tests, as if their ability to answer an either-or question correctly in a fraction of a second is predictive of their ability to think analytically.

Liberals, meanwhile, were found to be "relatively disorganized, indecisive and perhaps overly drawn to ambiguity" but "more responsive to informational complexity, ambiguity and novelty." In another context, liberals would condemn stereotypes as racist, sexist or homophobic. But when sweeping generalities reflect poorly on conservatism, well, then they must be true.

But if liberals sort facts better and are good at discarding failed ideas, explain the War on Poverty. Talk about quagmires. This one has lasted more than 40 years and consumed $11 trillion without coming close to its promise to eradicate poverty. Despite irrefutable evidence that their calcified positions are destructive if not deadly, why do liberals also cling to "progressive" policies that chain people to their government, restrict gun ownership, kill unborn children and destroy families?

These and other liberal positions are consistent with the socialist world view, and socialism has failed every time it's been tried: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, The New Deal, The Great Society, universal health care, etc. Today, the new darling of socialism, Hugo Chavez, is shuttering schools in Venezuela that refuse to use government-approved textbooks.

The dangers of socialism were manifest when economist and political philosopher Friedrich Hayek published "The Road to Serfdom" in 1944. Socialism, he wrote, exchanges individual liberty for state-dictated "fairness," which always conflicts the unalienable rights of free people. Even tentative steps toward central planning, redistribution of wealth and economic control inevitably lead to totalitarianism. "There can be no doubt that the promise of greater freedom has become one of the most effective weapons of socialist propaganda. But it only would heighten the tragedy if it should prove that what was promised to us as the Road to Freedom was in fact the High Road to Servitude."

His words are truer today than ever, yet liberals seem intellectually incapable of seeing the truth. That says a lot more about how their brains function than any contrived laboratory experiment ever will.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2007/09/22/opinion/285997.txt

 

[Larkinn]

To reassure themselves that liberals are smart, left-wing social scientists periodically conduct research that proves conservatives are Neanderthals. Their latest foray, by New York University researchers squandering $1.2 million in federal grants, concluded the usual stuff — conservatives are simpleminded, less adaptive to change, etc. — plus Ronald Reagan's brain worked like Adolf Hitler's and conservative drivers have difficulty finding their way home when faced with a detour. Their conclusions were based on research subjects' responses to reflexive tests, as if their ability to answer an either-or question correctly in a fraction of a second is predictive of their ability to think analytically.

Somehow I doubt the conclusions said that "conservatives are simple minded". By the way...disliking the results of a study doesn't make it wrong. I notice that the author doesn't even attempt to attack the methods of the study...only the conclusions.

Liberals, meanwhile, were found to be "relatively disorganized, indecisive and perhaps overly drawn to ambiguity" but "more responsive to informational complexity, ambiguity and novelty." In another context, liberals would condemn stereotypes as racist, sexist or homophobic. But when sweeping generalities reflect poorly on conservatism, well, then they must be true.

They must be true? Says who? Its a generalization from a study...that doesn't mean its irrefutable or correct.

But if liberals sort facts better and are good at discarding failed ideas, explain the War on Poverty. Talk about quagmires. This one has lasted more than 40 years and consumed $11 trillion without coming close to its promise to eradicate poverty. Despite irrefutable evidence that their calcified positions are destructive if not deadly, why do liberals also cling to "progressive" policies that chain people to their government, restrict gun ownership, kill unborn children and destroy families?

Lmfao..."Irrefutable evidence"...right.

These and other liberal positions are consistent with the socialist world view, and socialism has failed every time it's been tried: Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, The New Deal, The Great Society, universal health care, etc. Today, the new darling of socialism, Hugo Chavez, is shuttering schools in Venezuela that refuse to use government-approved textbooks.

Lmao...its not socialism. This author, despite condemning the study, does seem to be doing his/her best to legitimize its "claims" about conservatives.

His words are truer today than ever, yet liberals seem intellectually incapable of seeing the truth. That says a lot more about how their brains function than any contrived laboratory experiment ever will.
http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2007/09/22/opinion/285997.txt

A stunningly idiotic article. Congrats for posting it Stephanie...perhaps try posting something that isn't written by a retarded monkey next time.

 

[Stephanie]

Somehow I doubt the conclusions said that "conservatives are simple minded". By the way...disliking the results of a study doesn't make it wrong. I notice that the author doesn't even attempt to attack the methods of the study...only the conclusions.



They must be true? Says who? Its a generalization from a study...that doesn't mean its irrefutable or correct.



Lmao..."Irrefutable evidence"...right.





Lmao...its not socialism. This author, despite condemning the study, does seem to be doing his/her best to legitimize its "claims" about conservatives.



A stunningly idiotic article. Congrats for posting it Stephanie...perhaps try posting something that isn't written by a retarded monkey next time.

 

[Larkinn]

Instead of saying something stupid again you just posted a picture, huh? Probably a wise move.

 

[DiogenesDog]

re: "conservatives are simple minded".

but paraphrased from memory.

When asked, in a news conference this past week, about an economic issue, W responded that he wasn't elected to be an economic president. He was elected to be a tax saving president and to cut wasteful spending.

So now we may award this week's Award. (He said redundantly)

Yes! Stephie, dear . . . It is a Box of Rocks.

I do know you Larkinn.

I AM (crackin' myself up.)

 

[Stephanie]

Instead of saying something stupid again you just posted a picture, huh? Probably a wise move.

You really are a sad and hateful kinda person...

I feel for ya..

 

[Larkinn]

You really are a sad and hateful kinda person...

I feel for ya..

This from someone who does nothing but post anti-left and pro-right propaganda? Sorry but your idiocy stirs feeling of vague dislike, you are neither worthy nor important enough to stir any feelings of hate.

 

[Stephanie]

This from someone who does nothing but post anti-left and pro-right propaganda? Sorry but your idiocy stirs feeling of vague dislike, you are neither worthy nor important enough to stir any feelings of hate.

Ouch...you beat me down with all them important words of yours..

And like you are not a partisan asshole yourself..Look in a mirror..

 

[Larkinn]

Ouch...you beat me down with all them important words of yours..

And like you are not a partisan asshole yourself..Look in a mirror..

Yes, yes I did.

And I don't post propaganda, nor am I anywhere as partisan as you.

 

[Stephanie]

Yes, yes I did.

And I don't post propaganda, nor am I anywhere as partisan as you.

Hope you feel better now..

It must be hard to keep up such hateful and superior attitude..
But, I bet you work...real hard at it, don't you...

So tell me which is it... when your freinds come over to visit, do they have to bow down and kiss your ass, or just kiss your feet, before you allow them in your house.?..

 

[jillian]

Hope you feel better now..

It must be hard to keep up such hateful and superior attitude..
But, I bet you work...real hard at it, don't you...

So tell me which is it... when your freinds come over to visit, do they have to bow down and kiss your ass, or just kiss your feet?..

Er...Steffie, baby, when you post hateful stuff like that link, you really can't complain that some people find it offensive....particularly since it was intended to be self-congratulatory and offense.

For example, from your link:

Despite irrefutable evidence that their calcified positions are destructive if not deadly, why do liberals also cling to "progressive" policies that chain people to their government, restrict gun ownership, kill unborn children and destroy families?

Irrefutable proof? What a toon. Let's look at what the toon really says. He defines as "progressive" restricted gun ownership, freedom of reproductive choice, and a refusal to discriminate against gay. He says the are PROVEN to be "deadly". What a crock... a couple of gay guys getting married is "deadly". Now, he, and you, are certainly entitled to disagree with those viewpoints. But deadly?

Wanna talk about deadly? Iraq. Oppositon to stem-cell research. Now THOSE are irrefutably deadly.

Wanna try again?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

This from someone who does nothing but post anti-left and pro-right propaganda? Sorry but your idiocy stirs feeling of vague dislike, you are neither worthy nor important enough to stir any feelings of hate.

As opposed to your ALWAYS posting leftoid crap and making Liberal posts, supporting liberals and NEVER calling any liberal no matter how idiotic on anything they say here... Ohh wait, I forgot, you called Ruby, a non democrat on a religious issue....Of course you have never once questioned her calling American troops Nazi's or mass murdering terrorists.

Pot... meet Kettle.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Er...Steffie, baby, when you post hateful stuff like that link, you really can't complain that some people find it offensive....particularly since it was intended to be self-congratulatory and offense.

For example, from your link:



Irrefutable proof? What a toon. Let's look at what the toon really says. He defines as "progressive" restricted gun ownership, freedom of reproductive choice, and a refusal to discriminate against gay. He says the are PROVEN to be "deadly". What a crock... a couple of gay guys getting married is "deadly". Now, he, and you, are certainly entitled to disagree with those viewpoints. But deadly?

Wanna talk about deadly? Iraq. Oppositon to stem-cell research. Now THOSE are irrefutably deadly.

Wanna try again?

Nice dodge. As for Stem Cell research,the opposition is to USING dead babies parts for it. There is no opposition to research that does not involve harvesting dead children for said research.

Also there is NO positive proof that such research is as great as you make it out to be, in fact the GREATEST claims were mostly by guys that have since been proven to be frauds. Frauds that were heavily published and touted as great scientists even though for years no one could replicate their work. So much for that vaunted Scientific method and peer review.

 

[Larkinn]

Hope you feel better now..

Than I did before? Not really considering you don't have the ability to effect my mood at all.

It must be hard to keep up such hateful and superior attitude..
But, I bet you work...real hard at it, don't you...

Keeping up a superior attitude with you isn't hard at all. It would be difficult to not act superior to you...I would have to dumb myself down a significant amount.

So tell me which is it... when your freinds come over to visit, do they have to bow down and kiss your ass, or just kiss your feet, before you allow them in your house.?..

Most of my friends are smarter than I am.

 

[Larkinn]

As opposed to your ALWAYS posting leftoid crap and making Liberal posts, supporting liberals and NEVER calling any liberal no matter how idiotic on anything they say here... Ohh wait, I forgot, you called Ruby, a non democrat on a religious issue....Of course you have never once questioned her calling American troops Nazi's or mass murdering terrorists.

Pot... meet Kettle.

So before the standard was liberals, and now its democrats? Make up your mind, tool.

And, as I said before, she never called US troops Nazis. Don't expect me to condemn people based on your idiotic misinterpretations of them.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So before the standard was liberals, and now its democrats? Make up your mind, tool.

And, as I said before, she never called US troops Nazis. Don't expect me to condemn people based on your idiotic misinterpretations of them.

Your wrong, but lets pretend for arguments sake she never called them Nazi's.... Are you claiming she also never called them mass murderers or terrorists? Or are those claims acceptable to you? Just want to get things straight. Ohh and your word games won't work. You are a Liberal and a Democrat, just Like Maineman ( who at least is honest about it) you do not chide or oppose any Democrat on this board or that makes any statement as an elected or appointed position.

So lets get this straight, How many of us Conservative Neanderthals are you superior too? How many are you smarter than? Lets make it easier, name any that you think your NOT smarter than. We can limit it to this board.

 

[Larkinn]

Your wrong, but lets pretend for arguments sake she never called them Nazi's.... Are you claiming she also never called them mass murderers or terrorists?

Some of them are mass murderers. They certainly aren't all, however. As for the term terrorists, come up with a decent definition of terrorist and I'll condemn her using the word. But as for now I've never heard any decent definition. So far the commonly accepted definition is "people we don't like, and want to condemn fully".

Ohh and your word games won't work. You are a Liberal and a Democrat, just Like Maineman ( who at least is honest about it) you do not chide or oppose any Democrat on this board or that makes any statement as an elected or appointed position.

We weren't talking about me, we were talking about other people. Unless by me not criticizing "liberals and democrats", you were referring to my noticeable lack of criticizing myself?

So lets get this straight, How many of us Conservative Neanderthals are you superior too? How many are you smarter than? Lets make it easier, name any that you think your NOT smarter than. We can limit it to this board.

I've never said I was superior to anyone. Superiority and superior intellect are two very very different things.

 

[Stephanie]

Wanna try again?

Jilly dear..I posted it mainly to get a rise out people.
It's not that I agreed with everything in it 100%, except for the part I highlighted...So I guess my intended purpose worked...
And it isn't a hateful article...it's not any more hateful than what people say about conservatives...
Now, I wonder who has the thin skins..

 

[Larkinn]

Jilly dear..I posted it mainly to get a rise out people.
It's not that I agreed with everything in it 100%, except for the part I highlighted...So I guess my intended purpose worked...
And it isn't a hateful article...it's not any more hateful than what people say about conservatives...
Now, I wonder who has the thin skins..

So you posted it to piss people off? And you call me hateful?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Some of them are mass murderers. They certainly aren't all, however. As for the term terrorists, come up with a decent definition of terrorist and I'll condemn her using the word. But as for now I've never heard any decent definition. So far the commonly accepted definition is "people we don't like, and want to condemn fully".



We weren't talking about me, we were talking about other people. Unless by me not criticizing "liberals and democrats", you were referring to my noticeable lack of criticizing myself?



I've never said I was superior to anyone. Superiority and superior intellect are two very very different things.

So, you do not care that our Government and our troops are referred to as terrorists. As mass murderers? Thanks for that clarification.

And you can not even answer a simple question. What conservative or Conservatives on this board do you think are smarter than you? Please do me the favor of NOT pretending you don't think your smarter than all of them unless your willing to anser the question. It is a simple one after all.