New study links racism, prejudice and conservatism to low IQ

Deal with what? Your bluster? No need. I don't want to change your mind. That's not my work to do. I'm not a pundit or salesman. Don't be so paranoid.

To try to make my point again, the study this thread was started with. A study says...it would make sense for me to agree with this since it speaks to my own frame of mind, but I don't and no one should. A study by who? More importantly a study funded by who? (or should that be whom) Academics have to make money as well. If you think they won't cook the numbers to agree with the money men, you are very naive. I once backtracked a story about poor roads in South Dakota, another 'report says' and found, finally, that it was funded and therefore serving the growing green energy lobby eager to make a fortune in putting in light rail systems and other green but expensive projects. Would you call the green people left or right? It doesn't matter. They are partisan and not to be trusted.

 

I threw your own word back at you because that was all your post deserved. And I do not form my opinions from other random opinions. I form my own from facts posted (and this despite moen's opinion to the contrary). i.e., if you post no supported facts, I could care less what you say.

 

Supported by whom? What facts? There are no real facts, only a process with probabilities. What we call a fact is simply an educated guess that the majority agrees on. Is gravity a 'fact?' No. It is a situation noticed in the world that we gave a name so we could deal with it on our meager human level. We don't know why it works or how, but just that it happens.

 

I cry BS on this one. There's hardly a person on a political forum that hasn't heard, however briefly, of Soros unless they've covered their eyes, stuck their fingers in their ears, and screamed "Not there! Not there!" at the top of their lungs like Emery from Rose Red. As to your motivation for calling yourself a liberal, all I can say is, "Wow." Just . . . wow.

*meh* You're not interested in debate or discussion. You're just here to be an irritant and get your jollies by making others as miserable as you enjoy being. I have better things to do than waste my time with an obvious troll. I have to buy an incubator for my golden Campine eggs and finish my paper for tomorrow. You know, creative and intelligent pursuits.

 

Fact - I am married
Fact - 1 + 1 = 2
Fact - unemployment is higher now than when BO took office
Fact - 70.4% of Americans are white (see post #29)

 

And, BTW, Brian is the one Bill beat out with his 4.7M viewers versus 3.1M for Brian.

 

I haven't. This is the only forum I'm part of. To be honest, politics is a very minor interest of mine. It's all horseshit. I don't really care what Soros or any other pundit says. They are not to be trusted.

 

Soros is not a pundit. But you already know that.

 

As you say as you seem to be all wise and know what I do and don't know. You are in effect calling me a liar. Is this a personal attack? You tell me.

 

You're right of course. This time I was being lazy.

 

Blaming Obama for the unemployment numbers is like blaming the guy who made you breakfast for your hangover.

 

Typical right wing. You can't understand so you begin calling names. You consider going out and buying something a creative and intelligent pursuit? I'm going out back to have a smoke, but will make no such grandiose claims about it.

 

My only disagreement with Moen's statement is that Obama is indeed part of the unemployment figures now--or at least his administration is. After the first couple of years in office, the impact of the previous administration's policies have been reduced, particularly if the new administration has put other policies in place. And, if the new administration has not replaced the previous administration's deleterious policies whenever possible, then the question remains, "why not?" Obama has not done enough to create new jobs, especially if you accept the argument that the federal government can actually do so.

On the other hand, after the dismal post that I made on another thread about so many businesses closing, we now have three new stores opening--and I have gotten a job at one of them. I never did claim unemployment, since as an independent contractor I never did qualify for it--so my getting a job will not decrease the unemployment figures one bit. But judging by how many people I know who are also contract workers, I suspect that the unemployment figures are seriously underestimated, anyway.

 

Buying the incubator is not the "creative" aspect of my action. Bringing new lives into the world through use of the incubator is, however. Writing my paper for school is both an intelligent pursuit and a creative one. But feel free to take a few minutes off your life--you're right; it's nothing to brag about.

btw, where did I call names? Are we projecting again? LOL

Lunch is done: I promise--I'm leaving now! (At least for a little bit)

 

The only one who stated blame here was you. I merely stated the fact the it is now higher than when he took office. You added the blame.

For his lies? Certainly not for my facts.

BTW, in this case, blame is an opinion, the rates are facts.

 

You called me troll. I don't mind, but just pointed it because you righties are always complaining about it except when you do it yourselves.

 

The only reason I posted this study in the first place was to prove a point. The RW'ers here like to throw out the Arthur C. Brooks study that said Conservatives give more to charity than liberals. None of them cast the doubt on that study that they have cast on this study and there is basically no difference except that one puts them in a good light and one doesn't.

Point being, if you're going to use one study to support your position, don't just disregard the studies you don't agree with just because you don't like the results.

I rest my case.