<Removed>

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 9:55 pm

Woodruff wrote:A long, long time ago, I was a Chuck Norris fan. But that man really is rather a nutjob, isn't he.

That really surprised me.
He's like the Uwe Boll of actors. He used to spare with Bruce Lee. . . Lee probably knocked him stupid.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:47 pm

Conservative Politics, 'Low-Effort' Thinking Linked In New Study

Conservatives and liberals don't seem to agree about much, and they might not agree about recent studies linking conservatism to low intelligence and "low-effort" thinking.

As The Huffington Post reported in February, a study published in the journal "Psychological Science" showed that children who score low on intelligence tests gravitate toward socially conservative political views in adulthood--perhaps because conservative ideologies stress "structure and order" that make it easier to understand a complicated world.

Ouch.

And now there's the new study linking conservative ideologies to "low-effort" thinking.

"People endorse conservative ideology more when they have to give a first or fast response," the study's lead author, University of Arkansas psychologist Dr. Scott Eidelman, said in a written statement released by the university.

Does the finding suggest that conservatives are lazy thinkers?

"Not quite," Dr. Eidelman told The Huffington Post in an email. "Our research shows that low-effort thought promotes political conservatism, not that political conservatives use low-effort thinking."

For the study, a team of psychologists led by Dr. Eidelman asked people about their political viewpoints in a bar and in a laboratory setting.

Bar patrons were asked about social issues before blowing into a Breathalyzer. As it turned out, the political viewpoints of patrons with high blood alcohol levels were more likely to be conservative than were those of patrons whose blood alcohol levels were low.

But it wasn't just the alcohol talking, according to the statement. When the researchers conducted similar interviews in the lab, they found that people who were asked to evaluate political ideas quickly or while distracted were more likely to express conservative viewpoints.

"Keeping people from thinking too much...or just asking them to deliberate or consider information in a cursory manner can impact people's political attitudes, and in a way that consistently promotes political conservatism," Dr. Eidelman said in the email.

The study was published online in the journal "Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin."

What do you think? Are conservatives less intelligent than liberals--or more intelligent? And is conservatism a matter of lazy thinking?

Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism

Are racists dumb? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent than liberals? A provocative new study from Brock University in Ontario suggests the answer to both questions may be a qualified yes.

The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood.

I.Q., or intelligence quotient, is a score determined by standardized tests, but whether the tests truly reveal intelligence remains a topic of hot debate among psychologists.

Dr. Gordon Hodson, a professor of psychology at the university and the study's lead author, said the finding represented evidence of a vicious cycle: People of low intelligence gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, which stress resistance to change and, in turn, prejudice, he told LiveScience.

Why might less intelligent people be drawn to conservative ideologies? Because such ideologies feature "structure and order" that make it easier to comprehend a complicated world, Dodson said. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice," he added.

Dr. Brian Nosek, a University of Virginia psychologist, echoed those sentiments.

"Reality is complicated and messy," he told The Huffington Post in an email. "Ideologies get rid of the messiness and impose a simpler solution. So, it may not be surprising that people with less cognitive capacity will be attracted to simplifying ideologies."

But Nosek said less intelligent types might be attracted to liberal "simplifying ideologies" as well as conservative ones.

In any case, the study has taken the Internet by storm, with some outspoken liberals saying that it validates their suspicions about conservatives and conservatives arguing that the research has been misinterpreted.

What do you think? Do conservatives tend to be less intelligent? Or is this just political opinion masquerading as science?

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:52 pm

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/2 ... on-is-zero
Heavily Liberal-leaning site

Best comment award: pwn3rship society

"I got 99 Bills but Jobs ain't 1"

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:41 pm

Where did bedub go?

This thread is getting awesome.

by **john9blue** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:42 pm

New Scientifically Valid Study finds that atheists are more likely to do picture dumps on online forums

by **Juan_Bottom** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:46 pm

This thread is not for flame-baiting people with youtube videos. Baiting is against the rules.
Please stay on topic.

If you have a peer-reviewed study about Republicans or conservatives, feel free to post.

by **john9blue** on Tue Sep 04, 2012 11:51 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:This thread is not for flame-baiting people with youtube videos. Baiting is against the rules.
Please stay on topic.

If you have a peer-reviewed study about Republicans or conservatives, feel free to post.

by "peer" do you mean "daily kos visitor"?

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:06 am

I feel really bad for your parents. Or I hate them. One or the other.*
They've raised a child who intentionally misrepresents facts**, feigns ignorance of science in a vain attempt to troll-bait, and can never admit when he's wrong. It's just sad. Why anyone would raise a child to be so self-interested, vain, and ignorant is beyond me. Nobody here is interested in anything that you have to say because you don't have anything to say. You don't even participate in any topics, you just troll threads and insult people.
"Oh, Kudos to this guy"
or
"this guy is a fucking idiot"
The few times that you do participate you get proven wrong quickly and throw a tantrum and then disappear for a few weeks. You're wasting everyone's time including your own and it's sad. They say that there is only one kind of education in this world, and that's self-education. Why don't you use this time that you usually spend hawking CCers and go read a book. I'd recommend one that explains what "peer-reviewed" is.
And I'm not the first one to say this, even though I'm often a target. I used to think that you had some form of "intellectual jealousy" or something, but now I don't care. I just feel sad. Or angry.

*You were home-schooled right?

*The Daily Kos Article that I linked is fact-check-able AND I said that it was a heavily liberal-leaning website. FULL DISCLOSURE.

by **BigBallinStalin** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:18 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:I feel really bad for your parents. Or I hate them. One or the other.*
They've raised a child who intentionally misrepresents facts**, feigns ignorance of science in a vain attempt to troll-bait, and can never admit when he's wrong. It's just sad. Why anyone would raise a child to be so self-interested, vain, and ignorant is beyond me. Nobody here is interested in anything that you have to say because you don't have anything to say. You don't even participate in any topics, you just troll threads and insult people.
"Oh, Kudos to this guy"
or
"this guy is a fucking idiot"
The few times that you do participate you get proven wrong quickly and throw a tantrum and then disappear for a few weeks. You're wasting everyone's time including your own and it's sad. They say that there is only one kind of education in this world, and that's self-education. Why don't you use this time that you usually spend hawking CCers and go read a book. I'd recommend one that explains what "peer-reviewed" is.
And I'm not the first one to say this, even though I'm often a target. I used to think that you had some form of "intellectual jealousy" or something, but now I don't care. I just feel sad. Or angry.

*You were home-schooled right?

*The Daily Kos Article that I linked is fact-check-able AND I said that it was a heavily liberal-leaning website. FULL DISCLOSURE.

0/10.

But kudos to your pimpdavian crusade.

by **john9blue** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:41 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:I feel really bad for your parents. Or I hate them. One or the other.*
They've raised a child who intentionally misrepresents facts**, feigns ignorance of science in a vain attempt to troll-bait, and can never admit when he's wrong. It's just sad. Why anyone would raise a child to be so self-interested, vain, and ignorant is beyond me. Nobody here is interested in anything that you have to say because you don't have anything to say. You don't even participate in any topics, you just troll threads and insult people.
"Oh, Kudos to this guy"
or
"this guy is a fucking idiot"
The few times that you do participate you get proven wrong quickly and throw a tantrum and then disappear for a few weeks. You're wasting everyone's time including your own and it's sad. They say that there is only one kind of education in this world, and that's self-education. Why don't you use this time that you usually spend hawking CCers and go read a book. I'd recommend one that explains what "peer-reviewed" is.
And I'm not the first one to say this, even though I'm often a target. I used to think that you had some form of "intellectual jealousy" or something, but now I don't care. I just feel sad. Or angry.

*You were home-schooled right?

*The Daily Kos Article that I linked is fact-check-able AND I said that it was a heavily liberal-leaning website. FULL DISCLOSURE.

wouldn't it be more logical to feel bad for ME because my parents raised me poorly?

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 7:11 pm

No, you're an adult. There comes a time when everyone has to take responsibility for their own actions. Odin and all that.

by **john9blue** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:16 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:No, you're an adult. There comes a time when everyone has to take responsibility for their own actions. Odin and all that.

i thought you didn't believe in free will?

people are products of their environment, juan. you'd be surprised how little people actually change throughout the course of their lives.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:42 pm

Stop trolling. There are rules against it.

REPUBLICANS

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:47 pm

http://www.examiner.com/article/rush-li ... b_articles

rush limbaugh wrote:Don't give me this "down with the strugg-hle" business. He wasn't "down with the strugg-hle." That's the whole point. You go back to 2008 and the Democrats were wringing their hands because he wasn't authentically black. That's the reason the Reverend Sharpton had a problem with him, and they wrote that column in the LA Times about "the magic negro." He wasn't "down with the strugg-hle." He doesn't have "slave blood."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/09/04/c ... s-cowboys/
Hank Williams JR

“We’ve got a Muslim for a President who hates cowboys, hates cowgirls, hates fishing, hates farming, loves gays, and we hate him!” Williams also mocked “queer guitar pickers” and told liberal politicians to “move to Mexico.”

lol it was actually Paul Ryan who blocked the Farmers Aid Bill. lolololol

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:50 pm

by **Juan_Bottom** on Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:17 pm

Report: House GOP has voted 55 times to push anti-women policies

by **john9blue** on Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:40 pm

you call them "anti-women" policies, i call them "pro-man" policies. doesn't my version sound better? enough with the negativity, juan.

by **john9blue** on Thu Sep 06, 2012 7:40 pm

oh and by the way, ^THAT^ is trolling. what i said earlier is NOT trolling.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:38 pm

GOP lies: Obama 'supporter' in TV commercial is a staffer for the GOP

by **BigBallinStalin** on Fri Sep 07, 2012 2:10 am

john9blue wrote:oh and by the way, ^THAT^ is trolling. what i said earlier is NOT trolling.

JB doesn't care. He's here to assert his opinions with a megaphone and pleasure in the negative reactions. You know, it's the Pimpdavian Virtues.

by **Nobunaga** on Fri Sep 07, 2012 5:44 am

Juan_Bottom wrote:GOP lies: Obama 'supporter' in TV commercial is a staffer for the GOP

... Juan, perhaps there might be some truth to these huge-font claims you are making, but linking to a site where the writer of the article doesn't refer to the Republicans so matter-of-factly as "radicals" might lend credence to your exclamations.

by **Juan_Bottom** on Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:45 pm

Well I went back and read it and I didn't see the world radical used.
But I would and do use the word Radical. I should think that most normal people who follow politics do use that word, and you know that from Clinton's speech the other day he calls them Radical too. The element of the party that's in control right now are not traditional Conservatives, they're wingnuts.