Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No freedom means being able to live your life the way you want with the only restriction being you do not in any way violate the rights of others.
You don't want that.
You want to tell everyone what they "need" what the "should" do etc becuase you think you're the best person to make those decisions
That , Corky, is narcissism
I was just going with the thread title, you stupid fuck.Whenever a black kid in my neighborhood enquires if something is ok to do, I just shrug my shoulders and tell them to go axe their mother.
The number of orphans in my hood have been skyrocketing recently .
Wow, your racist fantasies are fun... tell us again how you are a progressive liberal, that never gets old.
Other than that, it was a lot of crap. Most of us talk down to people when we think we are right or we are in a position to do so.. The whole "mansplaining" debate has been part of it.
"How dare you talk down to me because I'm a woman!"
"Um, because I know a lot more about the subject matter than you do, apparently."
I was just going with the thread title, you stupid fuck.
I have never claimed to be a progressive.
Now, go away, you useless troll.
not dumbed down enough for you, right wingers? i will work on it some more.It is about equal protection of the law. Employment is at the will of either party.Our welfare clause is General not Common. Want to argue about it.only the right wing, never gets it. i even try one liners for simplicity.
You've proven that's all you know how post. It's one thing to brag about about how smart you are, quite another to disprove it on a daily basis.
I've already destroyed your argument about you trying to claim welfare is actually unemployment insurance, this thread has nothing to do with that, and your phrase is meaningless, so no.
Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is public policy and Institutional, not Individual. Eminent Domain can apply, right wingers. Want to argue about it.
When you have something that relates to the topic, let me know.
As far as I can see, the main, central aspect of "talking down to someone" is condescension. That, incidentally, also was what sparked most of the commentary. Reading how the study was actually described in the OP's article, I found nothing indicating that.
I would rather not go along with the "Lowest common denominator" approach at explaining what the study found - there are too many negative connotations in that expression. A carefully calibrated attempt at finding a "common denominator" while establishing contact to someone unknown would be more like what I see. That is, the way I look at "my" Rorschach test...
As far as I can see, the main, central aspect of "talking down to someone" is condescension. That, incidentally, also was what sparked most of the commentary. Reading how the study was actually described in the OP's article, I found nothing indicating that.
Again, I'm always dubious about these "studies" that come to a conclusion before they start collecting evidence. They have about as much credibility with me as one of these "Ghost Hunting" shows you see. 'Look, here's a cold spot! That proves this place is haunted."
"Look, here's where a politician tried to find language that resonated with his audience. That's proof they are talking down to them!"
I would rather not go along with the "Lowest common denominator" approach at explaining what the study found - there are too many negative connotations in that expression. A carefully calibrated attempt at finding a "common denominator" while establishing contact to someone unknown would be more like what I see. That is, the way I look at "my" Rorschach test...
I'd rather be a billionaire on a sunny beach with bikini-clad women at my beck and call... what's your point?
The fact that Trump got elected, shows we are at the "Lowest Common Denominator" stage of politics. We treated "picking the leader of the Free World" like "Picking the winner of American Idol".
Yeah, if we had smarter voters, we wouldn't be here.. but we are. A guy like Trump couldn't have gotten elected 50 years ago.
When a major party shit the bed and nominated someone who was completely unfit for the job (Goldwater, McGovern), you voted for the other guy, even if you thought he was a bit shifty. Today we have 45% of the electorate on either side set in their ways, ready to go to the mat for whatever mutant their party nominates, and maybe 10% in the middle that votes for whoever they'd like to have a beer with.
Couple that with an Electoral Anachronism that limits the vote to only 20% of the states being in contention, and we are at where we are at.
Ah, I see. Your Rorschach test depicts a study of political communications proving to you how voters are dumber now than during earlier, glorious times, and so communication has reached 3rd grade level and made Trump possible.
I confess, I didn't "see" that.
She’s just like Barry. Only speaks in Negro dialect when she wants to.
Winner! The way Obama addresses a large group of blacks is sickening and all his media darlings let him get away with it while his supporters are too blind to even notice it.
Not according to the study and thread topic.the right wing is simply more upfront about it, with their Reality TV guy.
dear, we argue this every day; not just on topic.Not according to the study and thread topic.the right wing is simply more upfront about it, with their Reality TV guy.
You're arguing with studies now, darling.dear, we argue this every day; not just on topic.Not according to the study and thread topic.the right wing is simply more upfront about it, with their Reality TV guy.
not studies; the right wing doesn't believe in them. i just argue with right wingers.You're arguing with studies now, darling.dear, we argue this every day; not just on topic.Not according to the study and thread topic.the right wing is simply more upfront about it, with their Reality TV guy.
Right wingers aren't studies, which is what you're arguing with.not studies; the right wing doesn't believe in them. i just argue with right wingers.You're arguing with studies now, darling.dear, we argue this every day; not just on topic.Not according to the study and thread topic.the right wing is simply more upfront about it, with their Reality TV guy.
they claim whatever they want as "gospel Truth".
No freedom means being able to live your life the way you want with the only restriction being you do not in any way violate the rights of others.
You don't want that.
You want to tell everyone what they "need" what the "should" do etc becuase you think you're the best person to make those decisions
That , Corky, is narcissism
No, that's civilization... and what we need or should do is open to discussion...
But if I'm having to walk through three security checkpoints a day because you want to compensate for a tiny dick with a gun, then really, you are the one imposing, not me.
not dumbed down enough for you, right wingers? i will work on it some more.It is about equal protection of the law. Employment is at the will of either party.Our welfare clause is General not Common. Want to argue about it.You've proven that's all you know how post. It's one thing to brag about about how smart you are, quite another to disprove it on a daily basis.
I've already destroyed your argument about you trying to claim welfare is actually unemployment insurance, this thread has nothing to do with that, and your phrase is meaningless, so no.
Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is public policy and Institutional, not Individual. Eminent Domain can apply, right wingers. Want to argue about it.
When you have something that relates to the topic, let me know.
Because poor uneducated white people in Appalachia are so smart, that’s why they don’t even need education.Funny stuff, certainly not surprising:
White liberals dumb themselves down when they speak to black people, a new study contends - The Washington Post
“White liberals may unwittingly draw on negative stereotypes, dumbing themselves down in a likely well-meaning, ‘folksy,’ but ultimately patronizing, attempt to connect with the outgroup,” argues the paper, titled “Self-Presentation in Interracial Settings: The Competence Downshift by White Liberals.”
The findings, based on what the authors stress is “preliminary evidence,” raise difficult questions about aspirations for a so-called post-racial society. The results reveal how subtle forms of discrimination may coincide with progress toward equal treatment, or what the paper identifies as “a significant reduction in the expression of explicit prejudice and endorsement of negative stereotypes.”
The psychologists further discovered that white liberals rarely admit to the goal of appearing less competent, a fact that highlights the role of implicit bias and “the covert nature of the competence downshift strategy.”
“It’s somewhat counterintuitive,” said Dupree, who is the lead author and whose research was supported by the National Science Foundation as well as by Princeton’s Joint Degree Program in Social Policy. “The idea that people who are most well intentioned toward racial minorities, the people actually showing up and wanting to forge these connections, they’re the ones who seem to be drawing on stereotypes to do so.”
Consumed with skin color. STOP LOWERING STANDARDS FOR MINORITIES. Enough already.
.
