|
23 Mar 06 - 06:32 PM (#1701366) Subject: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: GUEST,rarelamb I'm confident i'm whiney |
|
23 Mar 06 - 07:53 PM (#1701413) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Bobert Won't load fir me but, hey, I ain't gonna whine over it... Prolly a load of crap anyway.... |
|
23 Mar 06 - 07:57 PM (#1701418) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Amos Yer link's broke, rarelamb, but, hell, I echo Bobert's sentiment. A |
|
23 Mar 06 - 08:34 PM (#1701438) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Bee-dubya-ell Let's see... Whine from conservative states is red whine, right? Much better for those fund-raiser barbecues than white whine. But I'll bet most of 'em still prefer beer anyway. |
|
23 Mar 06 - 09:11 PM (#1701442) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Alba Ah now this is another Thread with a blue clicky from the same source that has brought to the mudcat many other blue clickys today! Which now forces me to ask myself...... To click the link, or not to click to the link: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous Trolls, Or to take no action against a sea of nonsense, And by ignoring end them? Na, nope Lamb Troll you ain't cooked rare enough for me to bite Jude *My sincere apologies to William Shakespeare for crucifying, nay butchering 'Hamlet's Soliloquies'* |
|
23 Mar 06 - 09:28 PM (#1701449) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: michaelr raredimbulb, why don't you go play on some rightwing site, eh? Not too many folks going to appreciate you around here, other than Martin Gibson. |
|
23 Mar 06 - 10:58 PM (#1701502) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Ron Davies Jude-- That's truly inspired--not to mention LOL. Wonderful! |
|
24 Mar 06 - 04:31 AM (#1701538) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: GUEST,rarelamb Here is the the gist from a site even you marxists like. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5293039 |
|
24 Mar 06 - 05:07 AM (#1701549) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Wolfgang Nice study, rarelamb, thanks for it. It'll make a good study material for a class about research methodology. "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. "The confident kids turned out liberal and were still hanging loose, turning into bright, non-conforming adults with wide interests. The girls were still outgoing, but the young men tended to turn a little introspective." The wholte study can be downloaded and read from here Don't you realize, you first-react-then-don't-read-anyway posters how stupid you make leftwingers look by your gut reaction? Wolfgang |
|
24 Mar 06 - 06:38 AM (#1701582) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Alba Pass on yet another link and a cut and paste from something I did not wish to read it the first place. Now all you Leftwingers/Marxists:)...remember don't make yourselves look stupid by not opening links from known trolls. I consider myself sitting in my time out chair by the teacher.:( yeah right. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 06:46 AM (#1701588) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: beardedbruce Alba, "Pass on yet another link and a cut and paste from something I did not wish to read it the first place." Then at least have the courtesy NOT to comment on it, if you cannot be bothered to read it. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 06:56 AM (#1701596) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Alba where is your courtesy Bearded Bruce!? Don't even think about going there BB and don't ever again assume you are in a position to tell me what I CAN and CANNOT comment on. IMO calling people "stupid" lacks coutesy also. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 06:58 AM (#1701597) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Bagpuss Since political orientation seems to be strongly related to parents political orientation, I would be interested to know whether this could be a factor in the results. Perhaps children of parents from different political leanings react in predictable ways to possible differing parenting styles, and the childs personality may be more of a consequence of political stance than a determiner of it. Or maybe it is both. It would be an interesting avenue for future research. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 07:06 AM (#1701605) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Purple Foxx Research has been done which indicates that a firstborn child will adopt the social & political values of its parents,a secondborn child will react against them & subsequent children will adopt a position within these parameters. Have to confess though Bagpuss its so long since I read that,that I've forgotten the source. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 07:55 AM (#1701628) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: beardedbruce Alba, "don't ever again assume you are in a position to tell me what I CAN and CANNOT comment on. " You CAN comment on whatever you like- Some of us here believe in freedom of speech. I was commenting on your lack of common courtesy- Are you trying to tell me what I can comment on? |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:11 AM (#1701649) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Alba In answer to your question...Nope. Comment away to your hearts content I would appreciate it however if you would not use me for target practice. You have a great day now Bearded Bruce. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:30 AM (#1701662) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: beardedbruce Alba, You DID state that it was "something I did not wish to read it the first place" So, why comment?- The responsibility becomes yours. But I do stand behind your right to comment, even when you don't read the refernced article. Have a nice day. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:37 AM (#1701669) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Becca72 Let the pissing contest begin. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:48 AM (#1701686) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Wolfgang I try very hard to use the language to transport what I mean and I hate if someone tries to misunderstood me by not reading and not quoting exactly: IMO calling people "stupid" lacks coutesy also. (Alba) That's the fundamental error of misattribution of a behaviour in a special situation to the trait of a person instead of to characteristics of the situation or the state. I have not called people stupid here (as if this were their general trait) nor do I think they are. Their behaviour in one particular situation and context makes them look stupid in my eyes in this context. For me that is the same difference as between telling someone that she has asked a stupid question or argumented stupidly in one situation and that she is (in general) a stupid person. Two very different things. I tend to react quite differently to someone saying to me "You looked rather stupid yesterday in that situation" instead of "You are stupid". Purple Fox, Frank J. Sulloway is most probably the name you are looking for. I have no idea what rarelamb's intention has been when starting this thread. But the content of the link is much more complimentary at the first glance (assuming one dares or bothers to go that far) to 'liberals' than to 'conservatives'. I'd rather discuss the content of that research than make guesses about intentions. Wolfgang |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:50 AM (#1701688) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Amos Given the sample size, I'd have to say the correlation is fairly unreliable, even if whining to get your way works for greedy people all through their lives! :D (that's supposed to be ahumorous remark). A |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:55 AM (#1701696) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Alba BB I had read the actual Study by 'Block' when it was made public on the 21st so I was fully aware of what the thread title was refering to.. My conclusions on the 'study' was that it was stereotyping at best and borderline Psuedoscience at worst and definelty not representative of the Country as a whole. If you have a problem with my way of addressing a topic raised by a Guest whom I consider to be a Troll or my cyber manners on the Mudcat then I suggest that you either ignore my posts or contact the Moderator about them and complain. I will not respond to you again on this thread or on any other for that matter again. Your comments regarding this 20 year Social Study I am sure would be welcomed by others on this Thread. I apologize to those who have been privy to an exchange which perhaps should have been carried out by PM. Judi |
|
24 Mar 06 - 01:59 PM (#1701942) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: JohnInKansas "Given the sample size, I'd have to say the correlation is fairly unreliable ..." The report on the study that was conducted says fairly precisely what was correlated; and the methodology appears - to a fairly casual first reading - to be at least to good academic publication standards. Extrapolating the correlations that were reported to "validate" a particular political and/or social bias - ("Honing one's own hatchet with another's stone" as is very easy to do) - is unreliable, and in this case I'd say that there are significant limitations on any generalizing of the conclusions that were given in the report. There have been complaints about "politicising" of research in psychology, but I haven't seen a lot of deliberate unexpected bias in the few reports (similar to this one) that I've seen. Reports from authors and agencies with known deliberate bias must of course be discounted, but only the fanatics read them anyway(?). Different researchers get seemingly contradictory results; but for the most part they seem to be reporting their findings accurately enough. What appears more likely is that the ones that "suit the opinions" of whoever happens to make the decisions are getting published and distributed more prominently that those who get results supporting contrary opinions. A similar "filtering" of research appears to be happening in other medical research fields, but perhaps with a bit sharper edge to it. "You don't get continuation of grants and/or other funding if your report doesn't support the sponsor's opinions." John |
|
24 Mar 06 - 05:08 PM (#1702051) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Peace If people dignify Rarelamb's threads by posting to them, then the values he/it/she presents are considered valid enough for argument. Simple thing to do is not post. I will show how in the next post. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 05:08 PM (#1702054) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Peace |
|
24 Mar 06 - 05:47 PM (#1702085) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: GUEST,rarelamb And if people don't debate the issue then they are either afraid they are wrong or they leave the forum to the trollamb. Neither option seems very palatable. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 05:51 PM (#1702089) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: GUEST,joe clone From the beginning, empty posts have generally been deleted as wasted space, especially from the time before the forum was renovated. |
|
24 Mar 06 - 08:45 PM (#1702266) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Bobert In reply to RL's invitation to debate the isssue: What issue??? I mean let's get real here... What exactly is "the issue"??? And just as a sidebar, RL and others, if there are real issues I'd be more than happy to debate them... I was challenged several months ago by a RL allie (perhaps even RL him or herself) to debate an issue and even allowed the RL allie to pick an issue.... They picked my criticsm of the Bush administration's handling of Katrina.... So I made my arguments, never had one single high school deabating level rebuttals but I sho nuff got called names and hadf labels pinned on me... But that's really not the issue here... And I think maybe I can offer some halp to RL here with this suggestion. If yopu wnat to discuss issues ***don't*** use the "L" word in yer thread title... It has become a lightning rod word... Why? Well, that perhaps would make for an interesting thread... But, bottom line, using it in a thread title isn't going to promote dicusssion or even debate but division... But, IMO, RL knows that and uses it just to poke at folks because pokin' sho nuff is easier than having to really discuss real issues and policies and ideas... Which, I guess, takes us back to Webster's definitions... Bobert |
|
25 Mar 06 - 08:19 AM (#1702476) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: GUEST,robomatic Sounds like a classic case of bias informing the design of the experiment, hence the results. Also hilarious |
|
26 Mar 06 - 12:17 AM (#1702920) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: CarolC Tired of whiney cons? Try these... Crunchy Cons! |
|
26 Mar 06 - 12:30 AM (#1702925) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Ebbie Love that article, Carol C. If only more of us - right and left - were unafraid enough to be able to decide for ourselves. I also like the view of liberalism that shines through. That kind of conservatism I have no problems with. And it reinforces the understanding that the current crowd is not conservative. I'm curious about that couple's politics... |
|
27 Mar 06 - 05:44 AM (#1703672) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Wolfgang It is a well done longitudinal study with clear operational definitions of the variables. It is much better than many studies on that field. The data processing is straightforward and the discussion mentions potential weaknesses. A statement like by robomatic has no the slightest basis in fact. There is nothing in the study design which could have biased the results in any direction. One may not find the question interesting but if one is interested in such a question at all one would use exactly this study design. The correlations are not very high on an absolute level but still astonishingly high for such a long time between measurements of different variables. The number of participants does not make the correlations 'unreliable' as long as they are significant. A problem is the population from which the sample was taken. If this population is biased to lead to a particular result a larger sample would not help at all. The astonishing result is that at a quite young age it is possible to predict reliably better than chance from some behaviours the political orientation at a much later time in life. The study cannot say anything about the reasons for that because that was not in its scope. Interpretations along the lines of Bagpuss's thoughts are promising in my eyes for such speculations. Wolfgang |
|
31 Mar 06 - 02:21 PM (#1707711) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Don Firth What kind of wishy-washy twits are these liberals!??? They complain that George W. Bush doesn't listen to the American people. Then they find out that our president is using wire-taps so that he can listen to the American people, and they get all upset about that! Those liberals are impossible to satisfy! Don Firth |
|
31 Mar 06 - 02:26 PM (#1707716) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Peace "From the beginning, empty posts have generally been deleted as wasted space, especially from the time before the forum was renovated." The first post to this thread is about as empty as it gets! |
|
01 Apr 06 - 03:33 PM (#1708326) Subject: RE: BS: whiney conservatives confident liberals From: Wolfgang It just looks as full as the head it encounters. Wolfgang |