| Author |
Message |
    
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2690
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 11:15 am: | 
|
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_T ype1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1142722231554
OK, go nuts on this. I'm not saying it's true, but I know it is irritating. |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 1673
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 11:30 am: |
|
"Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative"
Seems like conservative babies act like grown up liberals. |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2691
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 20, 2006 - 11:31 am: |
|
I deal in science, not speculation. |
Steve R Jones
Citizen
Username: Sjthinker
Post Number: 63
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 4:45 am: |
|
Where does science show that the few should take care of the masses? Only a bleeding heart would think that |
tulip
Citizen
Username: Braveheart
Post Number: 3368
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 6:36 am: |
|
Like Christ. |
Ily
Citizen
Username: Ily
Post Number: 233
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 10:04 am: |
|
I believe Christ was more about changing people's hearts to help others, rather than government coerced wealth distribution. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1744
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 11:45 am: |
|
It isn't wealth distribution. It's called wealth re-distribution.
I don't Jesus's strategic plan was long range enough to envision that Caesar's descendants would be so little preoccupied with "res publica" and so overly engrossed in "res privis" and "privis lex." |
Ily
Citizen
Username: Ily
Post Number: 234
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 1:07 pm: |
|
http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/warriorshtm/profundusmaximus.htm
http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/warriorshtm/nitpick.htm |
3ringale
Citizen
Username: Threeringale
Post Number: 107
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 8:21 pm: |
|
The ever provocative Steve Sailer provides some annotations to the article:
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2006/03/berkeley-psychologist-whiny-kids-grow.html
Cheers |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 5208
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 21, 2006 - 10:10 pm: |
|
While the study seems kind of silly, on first impression, maybe the "data" from this group of kids supports the conclusions. And whether it would be worthwhile to study another group of kids, who knows? That having been said, I can't say that Mr. Sailer added anything intelligent to the discussion. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1771
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 11:34 am: |
|
Guy's posting above contains this selective excerpt from the report:
"Remember the whiny, insecure kid in nursery school, the one who always thought everyone was out to get him, and was always running to the teacher with complaints? Chances are he grew up to be a conservative"
But he didn't bother to copy a later passage:
"A few decades later, Block followed up with more surveys, looking again at personality, and this time at politics, too. The whiny kids tended to grow up conservative, and turned into rigid young adults who hewed closely to traditional gender roles and were uncomfortable with ambiguity."
Interesting research by Block.
|
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1772
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 11:37 am: |
|
The "traditional gender role" observation may explain the neocon obsession with abrogating abortion rights and overturning RvW.
The "rigid young adults" observation is priceless. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1780
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 1:11 pm: |
|
Rigidity, it turns out, works best only in cadavers, as in "rigor mortis." |
Always Right
Citizen
Username: Headsup
Post Number: 303
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 1:41 pm: |
|
this study is total b.s.
Like all my Republican friends, compared to libs, I'm better looking, richer, smarter, happier, more morally courageous, more spiritual, able to bench press a Harley (of which I own 2), not to mention married to a hot wife.
the study is the typical dribble of an effete, left wing weakling nerd. |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 1691
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 1:47 pm: |
|
This guy should be given credit for actually finding a conservative that lives in Berkley. |
themp
Supporter
Username: Themp
Post Number: 2695
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 4:11 pm: |
|
"My mum wrote me a letter the other day and she said, 'Son,' - she's 86 years old - she said, 'Son, please don't become a Democrat'.
And I told my mum, I called her and I said: 'Mum, you know what? I want my party back. I don't want to become a Democrat. I want my party back.'
The Republican Party that I knew, that I grew up in, a moderate party, a party that believed in fiscal discipline, a party that believed in small government, a party that had genuine conservative values. This is not a conservative leadership. This is radical leadership. I called them neo-Jacobins. They are radical. They're not conservative. They've stolen my party and I would like my party back . . ."
- Larry Wilkerson, Colin Powell's former chief aide |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5417
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 22, 2006 - 8:45 pm: |
|
Moderate republicans don't support a smaller government, and given their spending proclivities opposing what limited fiscal discipline the President's budget called for, they're not that fiscally responsible either.
If he's talking about that old blue-blooded country club set that only rallied for lower taxes, lost repeatedly and were the main reason Republicans didn't ever control Congress for a 40 year stretch, then that's another story. I don't know how old he is. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page