What makes one Conservative?

If you don't find this hot, you are too conservative:
n-LESBIAN-SEX-large570.jpg

Cosmopolitan Magazine Offers Sexual Positions For Lesbians

And this would mean libs think with their dicks ?
All men do...

Wow.....that wasn't reactionary ?

:badgrin::badgrin:
 
It's not shit, it's psychology. Aren't you interested in why people are so wedded to their ideology? If you knew the dogs would always kill the cats, no matter what you did, wouldn't you keep them apart?

I used to be fairly conservative up until about 12 years ago and then had my eyes opened by someone in a position to know just what kind of shit Bush and Cheney were pulling on America with Iraq and Afghanistan. Then the Patriot Act and letting Wall Street go wild with the mortgage industry left me in shock.

So fine, 2004 and time to dump his ass. HELL NO, the idiots REELECTED HIM! Based on lies about a second attack on domestic soil by Al Queda.

I was done right then and there.

So you make your choices of ideology based on the actions of others.

How interesting.

Me. I detested Bush from the start, protested the wars before they started. And vomitted when I voted for him in 04 because of the alternative.

But that makes me no less conservative today than then.

If you voted for Bush twice, then you're the one with ideological problems based on emotion and a lack of critical thinking skills, certainly not reality. I was born n' raised by Eisenhower Republicans in the far west. I don't recognize the zombies who are in charge of the GOP now.
 
Last edited:
Something a bit more interesting than what's being posted today, although I'm using that term "conservative" loosely since nearly all here aren't conservative, they're Reactionary.


Scientists Discover the Fascinating Psychological Reason Why Conservatives AreÂ…Conservative
Right-wing ideology is tailored to a particular psychological profile.

A large body of political scientists and political psychologists now concur that liberals and conservatives disagree about politics in part because they are different people at the level of personality, psychology, and even traits like physiology and genetics.

That's a big deal. It challenges everything that we thought we knew about politics—upending the idea that we get our beliefs solely from our upbringing, from our friends and families, from our personal economic interests, and calling into question the notion that in politics, we can really change (most of us, anyway).

The occasion of this revelation is a paper by John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska and his colleagues, arguing that political conservatives have a "negativity bias," meaning that they are physiologically more attuned to negative (threatening, disgusting) stimuli in their environments.
(The paper can be read for free here.) In the process, Hibbing et al. marshal a large body of evidence, including their own experiments using eye trackers and other devices to measure the involuntary responses of political partisans to different types of images. One finding? That conservatives respond much more rapidly to threatening and aversive stimuli (for instance, images of "a very large spider on the face of a frightened person, a dazed individual with a bloody face, and an open wound with maggots in it," as one of their papers put it).

Scientists Discover the Fascinating Psychological Reason Why Conservatives Are?Conservative | Alternet

If this were truly unbiased research there would also be by the same people a study on what makes a liberal. But there never is, is there?
Oh but I'm sure there is. And just take his findings, and reverse them.

Wrong and you know it. Where is the separate individual paper on what makes a liberal by the same group? Yup no political bias in this.
 
Something a bit more interesting than what's being posted today, although I'm using that term "conservative" loosely since nearly all here aren't conservative, they're Reactionary.


Scientists Discover the Fascinating Psychological Reason Why Conservatives AreÂ…Conservative
Right-wing ideology is tailored to a particular psychological profile.

A large body of political scientists and political psychologists now concur that liberals and conservatives disagree about politics in part because they are different people at the level of personality, psychology, and even traits like physiology and genetics.

That's a big deal. It challenges everything that we thought we knew about politics—upending the idea that we get our beliefs solely from our upbringing, from our friends and families, from our personal economic interests, and calling into question the notion that in politics, we can really change (most of us, anyway).

The occasion of this revelation is a paper by John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska and his colleagues, arguing that political conservatives have a "negativity bias," meaning that they are physiologically more attuned to negative (threatening, disgusting) stimuli in their environments.
(The paper can be read for free here.) In the process, Hibbing et al. marshal a large body of evidence, including their own experiments using eye trackers and other devices to measure the involuntary responses of political partisans to different types of images. One finding? That conservatives respond much more rapidly to threatening and aversive stimuli (for instance, images of "a very large spider on the face of a frightened person, a dazed individual with a bloody face, and an open wound with maggots in it," as one of their papers put it).

Scientists Discover the Fascinating Psychological Reason Why Conservatives Are?Conservative | Alternet

This has squat to do with politics, and is pretty much junk as far as science is concerned.
Meaning you ignored it, didn't read it, but hate it. Carry on...

OK, explain to me your justification for putting it in the Politics section, I need a good laugh.
 
Belief in liberty and limited power of federal government. Respect for the Constitution of the United States and traditional family values.

...just as long as America helps kill all the Muslims, even children, in Palestine.

At least you left out the nauseating part about being a Christian.
 
I used to be fairly conservative up until about 12 years ago and then had my eyes opened by someone in a position to know just what kind of shit Bush and Cheney were pulling on America with Iraq and Afghanistan. Then the Patriot Act and letting Wall Street go wild with the mortgage industry left me in shock.

So fine, 2004 and time to dump his ass. HELL NO, the idiots REELECTED HIM! Based on lies about a second attack on domestic soil by Al Queda.

I was done right then and there.

So you make your choices of ideology based on the actions of others.

How interesting.

Me. I detested Bush from the start, protested the wars before they started. And vomitted when I voted for him in 04 because of the alternative.

But that makes me no less conservative today than then.

If you voted for Bush twice, then you're the one with ideological problems based on emotion and a lack of critical thinking skills, certainly not reality.

Another reactionary comment.

I am still a conservative despite the party.

Bush was not a conservative by any stretch.......

Sorry, you need to go after others reasoning skills to hide your own deficiencies in that area.

BTW: I'd never vote for anyone based on any such things as a "second attack". I've learned that they ALL utilize marketing to sell their horseshit.
 
Last edited:
If this were truly unbiased research there would also be by the same people a study on what makes a liberal. But there never is, is there?
Oh but I'm sure there is. And just take his findings, and reverse them.

Wrong and you know it. Where is the separate individual paper on what makes a liberal by the same group? Yup no political bias in this.

Gee, I didn't know he was supposed to study everything at the very same time, and you guys don't believe in the Fairness Doctrine, remember?
 
Meaning you ignored it, didn't read it, but hate it. Carry on...

OK, explain to me your justification for putting it in the Politics section, I need a good laugh.

Where should I have put an study that explains the basis of Political Ideology, in Photography?

If it is really a scientific paper you would have posted it in Science and Technology. Since you proved that you don't think it is actually science by posting it in Politics, the logical place for an honest poster to post it would have been the Flame Zone or Conspiracy Theories.

By they way, if you actually read the study, which is not directly linked to in your article, you might discover how stupid you are for posting this in the first place.
 
15th post
By they way, if you actually read the study, which is not directly linked to in your article, you might discover how stupid you are for posting this in the first place.
The study isn't directly linked, as in you click on a link and it opens? God you're an idiot.

As for your view on where this should be posted, God you're an idiot.
 
I know plenty of men that don't think that is hot, they prefer stuff like this.

images


Go ahead and tell me how biased and stupid I am.
Plenty? Two or three percent isn't plenty. Stop being a subjective child, if that's possible.

I live in San Francisco, I meet gay men almost every day.

Want to prove how stupid you are again?
Learn what the word "subjective" means. I didn't post the picture for faggots, liberal or conservative.
 
What makes one Conservative

Hatred, fear, and paranoia. And a need for government to legislate morality.
 
By they way, if you actually read the study, which is not directly linked to in your article, you might discover how stupid you are for posting this in the first place.
The study isn't directly linked, as in you click on a link and it opens? God you're an idiot.

As for your view on where this should be posted, God you're an idiot.

It isn't. The only link is to the publication it is in, which you cannot read unless you register, feel free to prove me wrong.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom