April 11, 2012
— Ace I think the answer is mostly Yes.
Before I get the the article, let me offer a couple of observations.
I noticed a while back that I liked going to conservative clubs, though I didn't really want to talk about politics. I thought that maybe there was just an inherent liking of similar things -- a factor A that results in artistic preference X and political leaning Y -- so that, on average, maybe I just shared more things with conservatives.
I tried to test this theory: I asked if people preferred the Chrysler Building or the Empire State Building. I theorized that for ages the intelligentsia have told us the Chrysler Building was more beautiful, so liberals would agree with that (they believe whatever is told to them by their tastemakers) and conservatives would incline the other way (as we're sick of the liberal tastemakers).
I also thought the Chrysler Building skews liberal (inviting, whimsical, curvy, adorned) while the Empire State Building skews conservative (imposing, stately, rectilinear, unadorned).
Two iconic buildings: a towering monument to human aspiration;
and a foul hussy specializing in Self-Degradation Scenarios
Based on my brief, trivial-survey-size test, I found that most conservatives, 7 in ten, preferred the Empire State Building.
I think there's something to that.
One legal case I think illustrates this concerned a guy who was late for a train. The train departed the station, on time. The man chased after it, hoping to catch it and jump on board on the fly.
The conductor saw him doing so, and did not order the train to slow or stop.
The man attempted to jump on the train-- and failed. He was injured. He then sued the train company -- the conductor should have slowed the train.
This struck me as bizarre. There are Rules, the guy knew what they were, and he caused a serious Problem, and now he's trying to Profit from his own Idiocy.
And yet my professor -- who was indeed liberal, but not a bad or dumb guy at all -- felt that the conductor did in fact have some kind of duty of safety to the guy, and should have ordered it slowed or halted.
This basic tension -- between the adherence to rules, order, and responsibility on one hand, and between allowances for deviations from the laws, a bit of chaos, and collective, rather than personal, responsibility -- pretty much underlies 99% of all political thought.
And it's really just a simple question: do you give the late would-be passenger a break (and slow the train for everyone else) or do you stick to the schedule?
(Something my prof didn't have an answer for: Now that you're set the rule that the train must slow, what happens when people begin showing up later and later and running for the train, knowing it must now halt? Will we craft some new rule about what time you can't expect the train to stop for you? And if so -- why should that time not simply be the train's stated time of departure? But he didn't care. He was all about the compassion, you know.)
Anyway, an article about this interesting subject.
The article isn't interesting though. I skimmed it looking for a quote, then stopped. It's kind of... nebulous, and of course it falls into the typical Liberals Are Better derangement (an odd stance to take in article that notes that The thing most in need of revising may be our reflex for self-flattery" about our political beliefs, given that they're probably hard-coded in our brains).
But the subject is interesting, so I wrote about it.
Posted by: Ace at
03:29 PM
| Comments (211)
Post contains 619 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: huerfano at April 11, 2012 03:32 PM (bAGA/)
Posted by: huerfano at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (bAGA/)
Posted by: Benito Mussolini, Noted Conservative at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: Dang at April 11, 2012 03:33 PM (Ky1+e)
From HA.
Just thought I'd get it out of the way quickly. (pep)
Posted by: Romneybots rejoice at April 11, 2012 03:35 PM (6TB1Z)
If I was the conductor, I'd leave earlier than the scheduled time.
Posted by: Tami at April 11, 2012 03:35 PM (X6akg)
And a lot of literature.
Posted by: Inspector Javert at April 11, 2012 03:36 PM (6TB1Z)
OTOH, libs love that Frank Gehry bullshit. Shows how nuanced they are or something.
Posted by: Cicero at April 11, 2012 03:36 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: ace at April 11, 2012 03:37 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: Michael at April 11, 2012 03:37 PM (Hl5ka)
Posted by: Lauren at April 11, 2012 03:38 PM (DTSMS)
Posted by: Billy Crystal at April 11, 2012 03:38 PM (7ewWb)
Oooh, I hate it when that happens.
Posted by: pep at April 11, 2012 03:38 PM (6TB1Z)
Ok, I can tell you why this is bad though. If Politics are hard wired, it's only a simple matter to begin to look at things that change that wiring and demand they be applied (or else you're not normal.)
Post-modern thinking, Yes (from a retro-modern even.) But I find it distrubing. On the other hand, if Politics is the result of considered judgment then it shouldn't be just tweeked by medicine, because it's the essence of one's being.
Libs would love if politics were simply the matter of genetics and brain chemistry. They could mandate their brain chemistry as "normal" and Conservative as "deviant" and start "treating illness." By even granting that you open the discussion.
Posted by: tsrblke at April 11, 2012 03:39 PM (SYrwI)
But I'm not, and I never was. Liberalism seemed too emotion-based, too disconnected from reality, and too un-democratic. Being a former Smart Kid the last thing I want for my country is a bunch of Smart Kids running it. I know how fucking stupid Smart Kids are.
Posted by: Trimegistus at April 11, 2012 03:39 PM (cbZmP)
>>>They're just buildings. I prefer mountains.
ah, the Even More Conservative Answer.
I like hills. In the East.
Does that make me a neo-con?
Posted by: fluffy at April 11, 2012 03:39 PM (3SvjA)
Posted by: cthulhu at April 11, 2012 03:39 PM (kaalw)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at April 11, 2012 03:40 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: eureka! at April 11, 2012 03:40 PM (LQIyD)
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at April 11, 2012 03:41 PM (3wYCm)
Posted by: Hungry Moron at April 11, 2012 03:41 PM (cnCym)
Posted by: Cicero at April 11, 2012 03:41 PM (QKKT0)
As for catching the train, conservative believe that people should take the consequences of their actions whether they are good or bad.
If you work your ass off and do good monetarily you should get those good consequences. If you lay at home on your ass you should starve to death. Yes Imus, piss on you and your "safety net".
Posted by: Vic at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: cthulhu at April 11, 2012 07:39 PM (kaalw)
fookin lib.
Posted by: eureka! at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (LQIyD)
Posted by: Darth Bawney Fwank at April 11, 2012 03:42 PM (4tnQK)
Posted by: jenny tries too hard at April 11, 2012 03:43 PM (snRY5)
Posted by: Buck O'Fama at April 11, 2012 03:44 PM (cm0rh)
Posted by: NBPP at April 11, 2012 03:44 PM (LQIyD)
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at April 11, 2012 03:44 PM (eHIJJ)
Posted by: Foaming at the mouth lib at April 11, 2012 03:45 PM (lxc0s)
Posted by: Fox mole at April 11, 2012 03:45 PM (3SvjA)
***
I'd say that is the money quote right there.
Conservatives *think* about consequences and the long term.
Loosely political liberals *feel* which really just means they decide things the way that their leaders tell them to.
Of course hard core liberals don't care about feelings or consequences - they want power and will do *anything* to attain it.
Posted by: 18-1 at April 11, 2012 03:46 PM (3aXbg)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 11, 2012 03:46 PM (eCnLg)
BUT . . . isn't it fucking obvious that liberalism is a form of brain malfunction? I mean, it's as obvious as a schizophrenic arguing with invisible voices. Their reflexive, unthinking opposition to everything, their vastly inflated self-regard coupled with brittle defensiveness and obsessive need to belong. That's got to be some kind of brain disorder.
Posted by: Trimegistus at April 11, 2012 03:46 PM (cbZmP)
Well, humans tend to be somewhat clannish in their associations. We like being around like-minded people (hence the Moron Horde, churches, Corvette clubs and stuff like that there).
There's nothing wrong with that, except in the liberal mind (an oxymoron if there ever was one). People being free to associate with whomever they wish is anathema to them. Witness their bleating about the Masters and the private club that sponsors them. All the usual suspects want them to include women. Why don't the women form their own club and exclude men? That wouldn't bother me in the least. They would be a private club and free to created their own rules as they saw fit.
It's a sad state that humans seek to control each others' actions, thoughts, and deeds. We should be free to seek out the things that make us happy. That's what the Founders thought too. They liked the idea so much they crafted a country around the whole idea of freedom from control.
Today, I'm sure they're all spinning in their graves at what is going on in the country that they swore their sacred honor to create for us.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 11, 2012 03:47 PM (d0Tfm)
Posted by: Barky O bumbles at April 11, 2012 03:47 PM (qs0mN)
The man attempted to jump on the train-- and failed. He was injured. He then sued the train company -- the conductor should have slowed the train.
----
Indeed. Slowing a train is easy and fast.
Posted by: Inertia at April 11, 2012 03:47 PM (xGZ+b)
Posted by: Dick at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (+u57l)
In Palsgraf the guy who was injured was on the platform and some scales fell on him.
Posted by: Cicero at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: jenny tries too hard at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (snRY5)
For example, conservatives are likely to like impressionist or romantic art, whereas liberals like dissected corpses and the Virgin Mary covered in dung.
Posted by: 18-1 at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (3aXbg)
Someone is liberal cause they're stupid. (But they think they are oh so smart).
You can not be liberal without being stupid. Plain and simple.
Both buildings are beautiful. So someone saying they prefer one of the other doesn't say anything. Cases can be made on both sides.
A liberal would rather say they think some post-modern bullshit is beautiful. Wait. A liberal doesn't use the word "beautiful." A liberal doesn't experience beauty. The closest a liberal gets to beauty is when someone feels sorry for them. Pity is their strongest currency.
Posted by: Irregular Joe at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (Vg4Vv)
Posted by: cicero skip at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (qs0mN)
You didn't give me a candidate that meets my principles for both form and function...
...seriousness: I prefer the Chrysler Building.
And mountains. Mountains with Chrysler Buildings on them.
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (vyS+v)
Unfortunately, our data sharing agreements include confidentiality clauses, so you will just have to take our word for it.
Posted by: The Scientists at April 11, 2012 03:48 PM (k34Gz)
Posted by: Andi Sullivan at April 11, 2012 03:49 PM (eHIJJ)
***
I'm special.
Posted by: Some Very Liberal Indigo Child at April 11, 2012 03:49 PM (3aXbg)
Posted by: Purity Republican at April 11, 2012 03:49 PM (KNvk+)
Posted by: Cicero at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (QKKT0)
Which is the goal of liberalism anyway, so nevermind.
Posted by: Methos at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (6LvlL)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: cicero skip at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (qs0mN)
I would like to read the decision in the train case, actually. A lot has to do with any RR regs concerning that situation, as well as the fact that a carrier may have special duties toward the public.
Posted by: real joe at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (w7Lv+)
Posted by: Chris M at April 11, 2012 03:51 PM (4lyMJ)
To me, the Chrysler Building is ugly and wasteful and the Empire State Building is more efficient.
I'm pretty Conservative and I'm also a utilitarian type.
Posted by: ErikW at April 11, 2012 03:52 PM (D1PMz)
Posted by: Joanie (Oven Gloves) at April 11, 2012 03:53 PM (3wYCm)
i would think an adult should realize jumping off a high cliff into the ocean might cause risk as he would know trying to jump onto a train would.
i say sue the ocean.
Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 03:54 PM (TomZ9)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 03:54 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Robert at April 11, 2012 03:54 PM (F79HU)
Different ideologies have different expectations of the world and other people. Blues expect the government to do for them and expect that others want the same. Reds expect to do for themselves and expect that others want the same. Leader v. Chief Executive. Ford v. Chevy. Etc. Etc. Etc. This dichotomy no doubt extends to aesthetics and what we expect from our entertainment but there are probably even more variables that determine that.
Posted by: AMartel at April 11, 2012 03:55 PM (1Bqk7)
Sort of like religion- we can all pat ourselves on the back for being Christian, Catholic, Jewish, athiest etc and proclaim that we chose the right religion... but for most, the religion they were born into is the one they follow.
Likewist, if you grew up in the suburbs or a rural area with Republican parents who managed to survive without government handouts, you'll probably be more inclined to think like a conservative. If you grew up in an urban area with hippie douchebag parents sucking on the public teat, you'll probably end up thinking like a liberal.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 11, 2012 03:55 PM (SY2Kh)
You can not be liberal without being stupid. Plain and simple.>>
They fall into two categories; the Elites who believe they should run everything, and those who just want to be taken care of while having no personal responsibility.
And I believe premise is that politics is hardwired based on personality;
Self-motivated, sense of Law, The need for personal responsibility
vs.
what I described above.
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 03:55 PM (vyS+v)
Mountains with Chrysler Buildings on them.
Here ya go: (take out the spaces)
http://www.iberkshires.com/images/ iberkshires/greylock500x229.JPG
Posted by: Fox mole at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (3SvjA)
Posted by: someone at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (bqjJT)
If you like a cock in your ass, you're straight. Or possibly a fag.
And if you are TV/TS, you are fabulous.
Posted by: My theory at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (Vg4Vv)
Posted by: Darth Bawney Fwank at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (4tnQK)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 03:56 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 03:57 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Dr Spank at April 11, 2012 03:57 PM (KNvk+)
Let me put it a different way.
I appreciate the artistic but it needs to be practical first, not the other way around.
Posted by: ErikW at April 11, 2012 03:57 PM (D1PMz)
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 11, 2012 03:58 PM (eCnLg)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 03:58 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 03:59 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: RonReich at April 11, 2012 03:59 PM (glDKm)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 04:00 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: John "Franswa" Kerry at April 11, 2012 04:00 PM (lxc0s)
Posted by: Trimegistus at April 11, 2012 04:00 PM (cbZmP)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (l4aoe)
a conservative, while we also like to be with like minded, we aren't so afraid to be alone, or make decisions because making our own decision leaves us with a consequence good or bad that we feel whatever the result in would be just?
does that make sense?
Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (TomZ9)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (niZvt)
I give up, what?
(see what i did there?)
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (vyS+v)
Posted by: CAC at April 11, 2012 04:01 PM (FJL4t)
Posted by: USS Diversity at April 11, 2012 04:03 PM (vpe0k)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:03 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: Y-not prefers the Chicago skyline at April 11, 2012 04:03 PM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (piMMO)
"does that make sense?"
Why yes, yes it does. Conservatives tend to be independent thinkers and if we screw up occasionally, at least we know what not to do.
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (d0Tfm)
My life and attitudes don't hinge on psychological profiles. If I like something, I like it. I don't care if some leftist in the crowd likes the same thing or not.
I love lachs. But that doesn't make me Jewish.
Posted by: Soona at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (2H0jp)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (l4aoe)
And what does the Pentagon say about the organization that resides there?
Posted by: nevergiveup at April 11, 2012 07:58 PM (eCnLg)
From a civvy standpoint, it looks like an imposing fortress that get cozier the closer you get to the middle.
Posted by: ErikW at April 11, 2012 04:04 PM (D1PMz)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at April 11, 2012 04:05 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 04:05 PM (niZvt)
Well, kinda, yeah.
What's your point?
Posted by: Sgt. York at April 11, 2012 04:05 PM (vyS+v)
Posted by: nip at April 11, 2012 04:05 PM (Is/K9)
Posted by: dogfish at April 11, 2012 04:05 PM (N2yhW)
Posted by: Y-not prefers the Chicago skyline at April 11, 2012 04:06 PM (5H6zj)
You didn't know that, did you, Ace?
You might want to look it up.
Walter P. Chrysler built his building out of his pocket, so his children could inherit it. I don't think there is any room for debate on this question.
Posted by: comatus at April 11, 2012 04:06 PM (ZOlM3)
Which one of you morons swapped out Joe Biden's brain for a half eaten cheeseburger?
http://tinyurl.com/78lh47q
Posted by: YIKES! at April 11, 2012 04:06 PM (1mF6D)
you know when shit falls apart. as with the housing crisis, etc..
rather a safer place to exist now that i think about it.
Posted by: willow at April 11, 2012 04:07 PM (TomZ9)
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 11, 2012 04:07 PM (qfooS)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:08 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: Half Eaten Cheeseburger at April 11, 2012 04:08 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:08 PM (l4aoe)
Completely O/T: Can I brag on DD#2?
Yes, you all say?
OK:
Time to brag on one of my kids againÂ….. http://t.co/oGRUIcIV
The link will take you to an amazing picture that she drew.....
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 04:08 PM (0xqzf)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:09 PM (l4aoe)
That's a bad trade. You're not going to win the pennant with that kind of deal.
Posted by: Waterhouse at April 11, 2012 04:09 PM (HfzId)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:10 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: Tammy al Thor at April 11, 2012 04:11 PM (SsG4J)
Posted by: Boulder Toilet Hobo at April 11, 2012 04:12 PM (QTHTd)
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at April 11, 2012 04:12 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 04:12 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 08:08 PM (l4aoe)
------------------------------------------
What do you think they're going to name the tower they're building on the old Trade Tower site. I'd almost bet my shriveled ole' left nut on that one.
Posted by: Soona at April 11, 2012 04:12 PM (2H0jp)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 04:13 PM (r2PLg)
"rather a safer place to exist now that i think about it."
Yup, safe but wrong, IMO. I can understand the appeal to the weak-minded, tho'.
As to the chemical dangers of hard-wiring that someone mentioned upthread, we're already seeing that in the large number of young males in school being drugged to inhibit their natural nature. The feminized society in which we live strives to make all the boys into girls.
It's for the childrens, dontchaknow...
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at April 11, 2012 04:13 PM (d0Tfm)
Posted by: Tammy al Thor at April 11, 2012 04:13 PM (SsG4J)
Posted by: tasker at April 11, 2012 04:14 PM (r2PLg)
Posted by: Boulder Toilet Hobo at April 11, 2012 04:14 PM (QTHTd)
Posted by: Boulder Toilet Hobo at April 11, 2012 04:15 PM (QTHTd)
Posted by: jenny tries too hard at April 11, 2012 04:15 PM (snRY5)
I'm not watching, but I just hit the DVR to catch the last 15 mins. That should be enough to give me the gist.
Posted by: Bilbao Guggenheim at April 11, 2012 04:15 PM (HethX)
Posted by: CAC at April 11, 2012 04:15 PM (FJL4t)
Joe Sobran said it something like this: Justice is capital, mercy is interest. You can't have the latter without the former.
Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 04:15 PM (GTbGH)
The are others. Google for one. Time Warner, Disney, etc.
Chart on my name.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 11, 2012 04:16 PM (qfooS)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:18 PM (l4aoe)
Posted by: USS Diversity at April 11, 2012 04:18 PM (vpe0k)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:19 PM (l4aoe)
1. Romney's positions are the most radically anti-women of any candidate in a generation: He supports banning all abortions, backed a so-called "personhood" amendment that could make certain forms of birth control illegal, and says he would "get rid of" federal funding for Planned Parenthood that provides preventive services like cancer screenings for millions of women.
2. Romney would repeal Obamacare. Insurance companies would once again be allowed to run up premiums, unjustifiably deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, drop patients when they get sick, discriminate against women by charging them more for coverage than men, and spend more of your premium dollars on CEO profits and bonuses instead of your actual health care.
3. Romney is a risk when it comes to foreign policy and national security. On many of these questions, he has shifted his position for political reasons, even within the same campaign. His only clear commitment is to endless wars: He has no plan to end the war in Afghanistan and would leave our troops there indefinitely. He called the President's decision to bring our troops home from Iraq by last Christmas "tragic."
4. Despite the lessons of recent history, Romney would double down on the disastrous tax policies that handed windfalls to the wealthy, but stacked the deck against the middle class. Under Romney, millionaires and billionaires would get a $250,000 tax cut, while families with kids making less than $40,000 a year would, on average, actually see their taxes go up. To the surprise of no one, Romney also opposes the Buffett Rule. He would allow millionaires to continue to take advantage of loopholes and special deals that often allow them to pay a lower tax rate than the middle class. And he supports tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.
5. Romney would end Medicare as we know it -- replacing it with a voucher scheme that would drive profits for insurance companies by forcing seniors to purchase private insurance, paying whatever costs a voucher wouldn't cover out of their own limited budgets.
Romney and his special-interest allies are going to spend the next seven months trying to deny, downplay, or hide these facts from voters. It's on us to speak the truth.
So print these out, post them on your fridge, and share them on Facebook. Send this list around to friends who are on the fence.
When and if your mother-in-law, or cousin, or best friend claims that Romney is "moderate," you need to know what to say.
You are the President's voice out there, and I can't stress enough how you will be the difference between voters hearing our message or not. The more Americans learn about Mitt Romney, the less they like him, and the less they trust him.
Sign up to join the Truth Team today -- help get the facts out every day, keep the other side honest, and make sure people know the truth about Mitt Romney's and the President's records:
Posted by: Niedermeyer's Dead Horse at April 11, 2012 04:20 PM (piMMO)
Posted by: ParanoidGirlInSeattle at April 11, 2012 04:20 PM (RZ8pf)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 04:20 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:21 PM (l4aoe)
It's just a design aesthetic that tries to show what a more advanced 'past' might look like. Computers made with steam engines and gears, zeppelins merged with sailing ships. Just a geeky mishmash of future and past.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 11, 2012 04:21 PM (qfooS)
Posted by: Boulder Toilet Hobo at April 11, 2012 04:21 PM (QTHTd)
Posted by: Voter at April 11, 2012 04:21 PM (l4aoe)
CAC - I'm not sure, but probably; I think she sketches it out with pencil first, then goes over it with a fine-tipped ink pen. She's really into "pointillism", and is somehow able to do shading with the density of the dots.
Me? I can't draw stick figures - all that talent comes from Hubs' side of the family....
I am always amazed at what she can do. (According to her FB page, this was drawn in between customers at her job.....)
Posted by: Teresa in Fort Worth, TX at April 11, 2012 04:22 PM (0xqzf)
I remember a social studies class in 8th grade ~1975.
We were asked a few questions about HOW we fought the Vietnam War and they divided us up into 2 groups based on that.
I was put into the "Anti-war" group. It was rather hilarious, especially when I was asked to discuss why I thought the B-52 bombing campaign was wrong. Everyone else thought that our bombing was unfair and we hurt to many innocents in North Vietnam.
My position was that to end the war we should have flattened Hanoi, Haiphong and every other North Vietnamese city like we did in WW2. And then pounded the rubble, mined the harbors and destroyed the RR and Power plants. I said we pissed aound 10 years with graduated responses and got a lot of people killed for no good end. I upset a couple of the shrinking violets and the teacher had a talk with me afterwards.
Posted by: rd at April 11, 2012 04:23 PM (9sUlj)
Posted by: LASue at April 11, 2012 07:33 PM (I1icO)
Nope, he just plays one online.
Posted by: mrcaniac at April 11, 2012 04:24 PM (1grxW)
Posted by: Anwyn at April 11, 2012 04:24 PM (hWxc6)
Almost all uni's are incorporated in order to enjoy the benefits of capitalism while trying to tear it down.
Don't bother; It's 'tard-logic.
Posted by: weft cut-loop [/i] [/b] at April 11, 2012 04:25 PM (qfooS)
Posted by: Walter P. Chrysler at April 11, 2012 04:25 PM (9qxEF)
Posted by: CoolCzech at April 11, 2012 04:25 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Walter P. Chrysler at April 11, 2012 04:26 PM (9qxEF)
Posted by: Hydrocarbon Liberation Front at April 11, 2012 04:28 PM (NVu2l)
Posted by: Cicero at April 11, 2012 04:29 PM (QKKT0)
Posted by: Waterhouse at April 11, 2012 04:32 PM (HfzId)
Posted by: Knute Gringrich at April 11, 2012 04:34 PM (KWdVT)
So, the act of mercy lead directly to the death of two other innocent people.
Posted by: toby928© at April 11, 2012 04:35 PM (GTbGH)
While I'm sure temperment plays a hefty role in synthesising one's political outlook, cultural norms can't be overstated. Was everyone in communist bloc nations innately inclined to join the hive? Unlikely. And alot of culturally"conservative" preferences in our political era are rooted in traditions independent of temperment. What's exactly conservative about watching golf or liberal about driving a Subaru?
Posted by: tad blatherton at April 11, 2012 04:36 PM (HueOF)
Posted by: Konnie at April 11, 2012 04:40 PM (HrKs9)
Posted by: The Political Hat at April 11, 2012 04:50 PM (ZPDzz)
Posted by: dripping venom at April 11, 2012 04:51 PM (zZJJp)
This comment nails it on the head: "this basic tension -- between the adherence to rules, order, and responsibility on one hand, and between allowances for deviations from the laws, a bit of chaos, and collective, rather than personal, responsibility -- pretty much underlies 99% of all political thought..."
I come from a family of lawyers: grandfather (one of the most successful lawyers in US history, father, brothers, uncle, cousins, etc. I have my degree in a different, more challenging law: physics.
It always humors me when, in discussions during bar room philosophy, when I hold a conservative point of view, that is, laws cannot be broken, that they have such a hard time comprehending this.
Most lawyers do.
Posted by: JDubya at April 11, 2012 04:52 PM (xZ3v3)
Posted by: Matt at April 11, 2012 04:54 PM (PhJSy)
Posted by: dripping venom at April 11, 2012 04:57 PM (zZJJp)
Posted by: Otis Criblecoblis at April 11, 2012 05:03 PM (IlZPo)
Posted by: The Chap, etc. at April 11, 2012 05:13 PM (fscec)
Posted by: A Mindful Webwinker at April 11, 2012 05:29 PM (lBpVP)
I'm sure the high speed train to nowhere will have a policy of stopping for stragglers and endangered species. Also baby ducks. And it won't affect the schedule because it's high speed. And going nowhere.
Posted by: Frankly at April 11, 2012 05:45 PM (d6XkO)
Posted by: Lokki at April 11, 2012 06:00 PM (a5F9g)
Posted by: sexypig at April 11, 2012 06:07 PM (61Uqr)
Posted by: Rodney G. Graves at April 11, 2012 06:09 PM (mKMj1)
Posted by: M. Atta at April 11, 2012 06:26 PM (YLiyE)
As a conservative (small c) I naturally tend to think my viewpoint is "correct," but I'm not so hide-bound that I won't examine a question or an issue from all angles, and if new evidence proves me wrong, I will admit it and take the new viewpoint as correct (until it's proven incorrect down the road).
But the people in my life who are liberal seem incapable of this kind of thinking. And I'm talking about intelligent people, folks who have PhDs in the sciences (biology, chemistry, and so forth)--not just OWS dummies.
They will moan about high prices, about being out of work, about how bad the world is becoming...but every single one of them is bound and determined to vote for Obama this November. It is utterly unthinkable otherwise.
It's as if their ability to examine their political philosophy has simply been shut off. They cannot relate their votes for Dems to what happens in the real world.
Of course, our Media doesn't help at all. But still, the lack of critical thinking is really puzzling.
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at April 11, 2012 06:45 PM (i0App)
Posted by: steevy at April 11, 2012 06:46 PM (7W3wI)
Posted by: Tortillapete at April 11, 2012 07:06 PM (OcgY4)
Ace,
We go back a long ways, not that you have any reason to know this. But I've read thousands of your posts and can't for the life of me remember the last time I didn't agree with you point by point, right down the line. I guess we just both share the same basic right-wing political perspective with a potty mouth.
But reading what you had to say in the great Empire State Building vs Chrysler Building controversy I must protest. First, with its Machine Age ornamentation the Chrysler Building is far more inspiring and, well, beautiful. Now the Emprire State Building may not be as bad as, say, the banal Seagram's Building, but it's still visually dull. Liberals, historically, have loved the Modernist Movement--its esoteric art, atonal music, writing for writing's sake novels, and sterile architecture. I suggest everyone who hasn't read Tom Wolfe's 'From Bauhaus to Our House.' The first (of many) times I read it I experienced one of the top 5 epiphanies of my life.
Posted by: Ron Mitchell at April 11, 2012 07:18 PM (JXIqT)
The Train example outlines it perfectly. If you change it to a carpool of 2 people, then waiting/stopping for the late guy is normal - expected even.
This actually explains what is wrong with society right now - too many have forgotten the basic rules and when someone does enforce them, the enforcer is the dick.
Posted by: Amy Shulkusky at April 11, 2012 07:54 PM (jKunv)
Posted by: Roy at April 11, 2012 08:33 PM (EuD1c)
Posted by: Albyotto at April 11, 2012 09:35 PM (MN3HN)
Posted by: Tommy V at April 11, 2012 10:15 PM (IAT7m)
Posted by: Chip A. at April 11, 2012 10:43 PM (D1E3j)
Posted by: Society For The Preservation Of The Chrysler Building In Movies at April 12, 2012 03:34 AM (T9Koh)
Posted by: PoliticalOmnivore at April 12, 2012 03:43 AM (wvnxc)
Mussolini made the trains run on time, as they do in China. Slowing the train down for every jerkoff who thinks the world revolves around him is a sign of how progressive and caring a society we have become.
The extension ad absurdio of this is that I should be able to flag down a passing 747 in order to get on.
My plan involves arming the conductors, who will simply shoot any asshole who runs after the train insisting it stop for HIM. That way asshole doesn't sue, trains run on time.
Posted by: West at April 12, 2012 05:43 AM (1Rgee)
"And it's really just a simple question: do you give the late would-be passenger a break (and slow the train for everyone else) or do you stick to the schedule?"
Liberals have a very hard time contemplating those sorts of reactions and consequences. Particularly when this requires them to imagine people reacting differently than they would react, or more accurately, how they like to think they'd react. Really, though. why worry when you can just pass another law to forbid the "wrong" reaction? Or craft an exemption for a friend.
They also assume, of course, that they must know better how to handle any given situation than the people who are actually experiencing it. For example, how would the train operator have been expected to know that someone was running after the train, intending to jump? How slow should he be required to go? If someone still gets hurt, will he have been retroactively expected to stop? Will he figure this out and simply decide it's best to always stop? And what about the other trains trying to run on their own schedules?
But if you assume the engineer is stupid, rigid, or otherwise unable to appreciate the nuances of the situation then you can easily dismiss his selfish concerns and substitute your own imaginary compassionate response.
Posted by: GalosGann at April 12, 2012 06:02 AM (T3KlW)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2816 seconds, 339 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Velvet Ambition at April 11, 2012 03:31 PM (mFxQX)