If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR.org)   Whiny children grow up to be conservatives, according to this UC Berkeley study brought to you by NPR   (npr.org) divider line 473
    More: Unlikely  
•       •       •

8489 clicks; posted to Main » on 22 Mar 2006 at 3:54 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



473 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-03-22 05:01:12 PM
That's right, bash the source, without examining the study. Even the people behind it say that it is limited to Berkley...i.e., whiney brats in Berkley grow up to be conservative.

Regardless, sounds about right. Modern conservatives are typically socially irresponsible, have an over-bloated sense of entitlement, and are convinced that society is out to get them.

And it's also totally consistent with how friends of mine developed as they grew up. A couple of whiney tattle-tales I knew when I was younger are both avid Freepers now.
 
2006-03-22 05:01:20 PM
Headso: Elections are a crap shoot, I know of people that voted for Bush because Kerry looked like Frankenstein, and the more informed voters got their info from 5 second sound bites while a commercial was on American Idol.

If you think people voted for a better leader then the other party had, you really are out of touch with the typical American voter.


Bush won by over 3,000,000 votes.

But you tell me, why did he win? Why is it somehow not the Democrat's fault for running a crappy candidate with no platform? A guy who said he'd of given Bush the power to use force in Iraq if he had to do it again?

Clavis: If you really think that Bush is in the White House because the Republican Party has better ideas than the Democratic Party

He's in the White House because they SELL their ideas better than Democrats and take strong stances on divissive issues.

What are the Democrats position on...

- Gay marriage
- Gun control
- Taxes
- Religion in school

"Uh, we're for it, but only sort of... in some states..." Pick a stance and stop apologizing for it.
 
2006-03-22 05:02:04 PM
tarrant84 [TotalFark]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't liberals the ones crying that the government isn't doing enough for them?


You are corrected.

Conservatives are crying now too. Real ones anyways, there's a huge nanny state government that is totally ineffective at doing anything, they have given themselves an exceedingly large latitude when it comes to getting rid of your privacy, managing your morality, and spending your kids money.

While liberals are discontent with the services being delivered, conservatives are discontent both with the inefficiency of the delivery of services and some of the services themselves. When it comes to things like the 3000 taxpayer-bought homes for storm victims sitting empty for more than 6 months, and things like that, demanding effective use of government resources transcends simplistic labels.

What bugs me most is the 'neo-conservatives.' Idiots who use phrases like 'big-government conservative.' WTF is that? I'm a conservative, but I want to have a large, invasive, unsustainably-spending government? For the last 6 years, the self-styled 'conservative' party has shown itself to be fanatic spenders, to the point that they demonize real conservatives like Bruce Bartlett.

Right now we have porous borders, weak national security, pathetic emergency response capabilities, an overstretched military engaged in multiple nation-building exercises, open ports, incoherent foreign policy, profligate spending, rising trade deficits, rising budget deficits, weak CAFE standards that increase foreign oil consumption, and an increasing share of our country is owned by China. If you think it's only liberals who are concerned about things like this, I can fix the problem right now, as a bleeding heart liberal who believes in a cornucopia of government services to ensure that all people have equal oppurtunity (not equal ends), I want port security, I want tariffs on goods from countries that use slave labor or fail to float their currency, I want a foreign policy that clearly enumerates that we will not support dictators with nuclear weapons, that we will reduce our foreign oil consumption both through exploitation of local resources and reduction in overall consumption, that there ought to be a balanced budget ammendment, that the oath our men and women in uniform take to defend the constitution is sacred, and should never be confused with an oath to just do whatever the hell the people feel like sending them off to do.

Conservatism is about less government. Liberalism is about more liberty. In 99% of cases, these two things get along just fine, when people try to mislabel people or things as being 'conservative' or 'liberal' just because too many people are too stupid realize that people are complex, and politics can't be summed up by one word, we all lose. We end up with two parties, neither of which represent anything. Instead of a free and open debate of worthy conclusions reached by logic, as is the case with both liberalism and conservativism, we get sound byte wars, people calling eachother unpatriotic, accusations that people who lost limbs in combat don't care about national security because they aren't grouped under the same label as the accusers. If we wanted to have a real liberal v. conservative debate in this country, nothing could make me more happy, but to boil it down to X party is whiny, or Y party is unpatriotic doesn't serve any of us well, and we should be able to do better than that.
 
2006-03-22 05:02:31 PM
cranched: Liberals want the government to tell you what to do.

Yes, it is liberals who want to use the government to regulate your private life through government. Examples of the liberal government life controlling agenda would be the pro-life movement, adding an amendment to the US Constitution prohibiting the right of gay people to marry, putting religion into your child's school day through the government, prohibiting your right to die if terminally ill if you so choose, government censorship of what you can see and hear on TV and elsewhere...

Both sides tend to want to use the government as a Nanny State institution. The different sides just have different pet projects.
 
2006-03-22 05:02:42 PM
What a coincedance that Prof. Jack Block, who has donated over $40,000 in the last 4 years to the democratic party and other left-wing political organizations, has found out that all conservatives are whining crybabies!!

I am shocked....shocked I tell you!!


http://www.fecinfo.com/cgi-win/indexhtml.exe?MBF=NAME

(enter "block" into search field to find over 95 seperate contributions over the last 4 years)
 
2006-03-22 05:03:19 PM
tarrant84: But you tell me, why did he win? Why is it somehow not the Democrat's fault for running a crappy candidate with no platform? A guy who said he'd of given Bush the power to use force in Iraq if he had to do it again?

I think the authority to use force was contingent on serious relevations about WMDs/terrorists going on in Iraq.

If you were paying any attention in early 2003, you would have been scratching your head saying "Well it's great we got inspectors in... but where is everything? I guess we should give them time, but if they don't find anything... no war, I guess."

All the while, Bush was amassing troops in the region. He betrayed the trust of those who voted for him by most certainly not using war as a last resort.
 
2006-03-22 05:03:20 PM
whidbey: The key words are "later campaigned against."

Yeah, which only made him look like either a flip-flopper or a hypocrite, neither of which is desirable. Plus he had little to no charisma, which is vital for winning US elections. Why can't you motherfarkers bring back Bill Clinton? Amend the Constitution or something, seriously.
 
2006-03-22 05:03:23 PM
So let's follow the line of reasoning for this article and companion thread:

1. Berkeley does a study
2. Toronto Star publishes said study, and states that whiney kids become conservatives
3. NPR article says study is worthless
4. People who did not RTFA immediatly spout that NPR is full of shiat and say that it is nothing more than a liberal spank-fest.

Conclusion: The people that are saying NPR is wrong, are essentially saying that the study is in fact right, since they are disagreeing with the NPR article, which disagrees with the study.
 
2006-03-22 05:03:36 PM
tarrant84: But you tell me, why did he win?

It was a close election and Kerry didn't pass muster. We know that.

Not to mention that pesky gay marriage initiative which brought the cavedwellers out to the voting booth...
 
2006-03-22 05:03:46 PM
Programmer Cat
Please, that's nothing. You can just as easily say:

Nobody needs society. Society needs everybody.


You'd still be just as wrong.

Everybody needs society.

If you don't believe me, then remove all social contact. That includes work and grocery shopping - you shouldn't need to work for anyone, you shouldn't need other people's stuff, and no one should work for you.

See how long that lasts.
 
2006-03-22 05:04:09 PM
Churnin Urn of Burnin Funk With love?

Ooohhh I get to do a proof:

"Love"(by the above criteria) = Buttsecks

Buttsecks = Evil

Money = Evil^(.5)

Buttsecks = Money^(2)!

The more you "Love" people, the more money you have!

Proof: Halliburton is gay! I knew it!
 
2006-03-22 05:04:25 PM
bbcrackmonkey: Why can't you motherfarkers bring back Bill Clinton?

I'm no fan of Clinton, either. I really don't see the difference between Bush OR Clinton give or take the liking of a few social programs here and there...
 
2006-03-22 05:04:27 PM
bbcrackmonkey: The guy you picked to run had voted for every piece of controversial Bush legislation he later campaigned against.

What Whidbey said.

And Kerry has already explained very well why he "later campaigned against" some of those legislations. Unfortunately, Fox-watching conservatives during campaign season were able to spin that into "flip-flopping", and kerry's downfall was he didn't know how to fight dirty and effectively enough to counter these dumbed-down accusations.

Kerry's a great politician, but a horrible campaigner.
 
2006-03-22 05:04:29 PM
craig328: I feel honored, honored I say, to have borne witness to the rare and elusive bi-directional double-flaming thread hammer move with the half-sarcastic talk-to-the-hand dismount...ninja-style.

You sir, are a wordsmith almost without equal. Bravo


I have been a canyoneer fan for a while now due to those kinds of posts, keep an eye out for him in other threads and watch him poor cold water on many a flamewars...
 
2006-03-22 05:05:05 PM
submitter either did not RTFA or conveniently ignored aspects of it that didn't fit his/her prejudices.

The NPR commentary not only questions the validity of the study, it points out (rightly) that rigid, authoritarian asshats can be found on the Left as well as the Right.

It's refreshing to see a news outlet using common sense and refuting the "There is only Blue and Red. There is no Purple" paradigm that has taken control of so much of U.S. politics.
 
2006-03-22 05:05:10 PM
tarrant84

Even with a 34% approval rating they cower before Bush and the Repblicans, and keep doing everything the same way. Send out emails, take no strong stances on anything, feign outrage, maybe make a few phone calls.

How are they supposed to stand up to terrorists when they can't even stand up to Republicans?


Well, the Democrats are effectively powerless with the exception of the evil filibuster. The only thing they can do is posture. Unfortunately the party has failed to take a consistent position on the issues that people care about, namely the economy and the war. Hell, they'd probably end up pretty well off if they took the position that we've already succeeded in Iraq so now is the time to let the Iraqis sort things out. Bush and the Republicans would be forced to defend the notion that we need to stay in the Middle East for perpetuity and the assumption that the Iraqi people are incompetant. Unfortunately, they'd rather duck and cover than take a serious position.
 
2006-03-22 05:05:31 PM
The Homer Tax
Is "obverse" a word?

Its a perfectly cromulant word.

No, actually obverse is a word.
 
2006-03-22 05:05:31 PM
elchip

Senator Frist's dissection of all those poor kittens and his amazement with their tiny beating hearts allowed him to become a world class doctor. So good, that he declared Terri Schiavo "non-vegetative" via video-tape. Please give credit where credit is due.
 
2006-03-22 05:05:34 PM
Whiny children grow up to be conservatives

I think they forgot to publish the rest of the study. Whiny children grown up to be conservatives... with successful careers who take care of themselves. Kids that don't whine become liberals who develop their whining skills later in life. They learn to whine about anything they can, whether it be what store others shop at, what car other people drive, what private businesses people can smoke at, or what religion people are. The list is endless.
 
2006-03-22 05:06:36 PM
tarrant84
How are they supposed to stand up to terrorists when they can't even stand up to Republicans?

Since the scientific community has not been successful at "getting the word out" about evolution -- since creationists have successfully swayed public opinion to accept that "God did it" -- we really should just tell the scientists to "Man up, Nancy" and make creationism the official origin-story of American science and culture.

Makes sense, right?

Just because, over the last 10 years, the Republicans have figured out effective strategies for changing public opinion and winning elections, doesn't mean they have anything legitimate to offer the nation ideologically.

They've just hired the best people: Karl Rove, Frank Luntz, etc. People who can turn "estate tax" into "death tax" and convince voters (again, with help from Rush and Sean and Coulter) that their poor farmer buddies are being hurt by it, and thus have voters help out their rich buddies while believing they're helping themselves.

Does that mean Americans are stupid? No, it means PEOPLE are stupid. It's just that Americans are the only ones that vote in American elections.

When Bush goes on TV year after year and accuses dissenters of being pro-terrorist, anti-America and anti-troops -- when he poisons the well of political discourse -- it isn't the Democrats' faults that they can't steer the conversation back to reality.

The Republican conservatives have a vertically-integrated media empire that the liberals can only dream of. Messages go directly from the White House to the ears of red-state radio listeners, where they are accepted as THE TRUTH.

And that's the Democrats' fault?
 
2006-03-22 05:06:59 PM
Sir Charles: Well, a liberal would be far more likely to have an abortion than a conservative, so....

While I would not be too surprised if it were true, care to cite the study you got that little fact from? In my limited anecdotal experience I've seen that anti-abortion stances quickly disappear when one or one's daughter becomes pregnant. It's another "YOU should be stopped from doing this, but not ME" scenario that seems to be the hallmark of modern big government nanny state "conservatives".
 
2006-03-22 05:07:05 PM
While every generalization has its exceptions, I find the following tend to hold true:

(1) Ultra-liberal individuals generally don't have a deep grasp of the problems presented, and tend to be too idealistic for their own good. They also do a poor job of articulating their position, typically because they are either single-issue types or their beliefs lack internal consistency.
(2) Ultra-conservatives don't give a damn about facts that don't agree with their preconceived notions, and tend to be poorly informed on anything other than their daily talking points. They also tend to resort to rhetoric and sheer volume over logic.
(3) Self-described libertarians normally don't care about what's practical or realistic, and refuse to learn from history.

/Not a troll, just my observations
//Most don't fall into these categories, but we tend to notice those who do
///In the interest of full disclosure, I generally loathe conservatives because they seem much less logical, especially when we're talking about the religious right
////Slashy, slashy, slash, slash
 
2006-03-22 05:07:21 PM
firefly212 for President in 2008 imo.
 
2006-03-22 05:07:28 PM
elchip

I agree completely, Frist should have been rational in the matter and simply kidnapped hobos for medical expirimentation.
 
2006-03-22 05:07:46 PM
tarrant84: Pick a stance and stop apologizing for it.

Seriously, you go into conservative blogs or message-boards it is nothing but reinforcement with news stories to back up their previously held stances. You go into liberal blogs or progressive ones and you read endlessly about keeping an open mind and not judging and high-minded philisophical debates about where the party should go.
 
2006-03-22 05:07:55 PM
whidbey: Not to mention that pesky gay marriage initiative which brought the cavedwellers out to the voting booth...

So to simplify it... the majority of America does not approve of gay marriage and will not vote for candidates who support it.

Maybe the Democrats should drop the issue, because it's not helping them win elections.

elchip: All the while, Bush was amassing troops in the region. He betrayed the trust of those who voted for him by most certainly not using war as a last resort.

No one is saying Bush is doing a good job.

The problem is the Democrats haven't done anything which shows they'd do a better job. Their platform is STILL "We're not Bush." I think it was Clinton (a great president) who said beating an incumbent is a two part issue-- you have to show why he needs to be fired AND why you are the man to replace him.

The Dems just aren't doing the second part.
 
2006-03-22 05:08:08 PM
bmasso
I was trying to be a little bit nice and kudos to skimming the findings. I thought it pretty logical that an orderly sort of person would probably have been a kid that liked things to be in an orderly way and got upset when that didn't work out. I also thought it was probably a mistake for the person conducting the study to make the leap from conservative behavior to conservative politics but like you said, it's Berkley.
 
2006-03-22 05:08:24 PM
mindbuzz: Senator Frist's dissection of all those poor kittens and his amazement with their tiny beating hearts allowed him to become a world class doctor. So good, that he declared Terri Schiavo "non-vegetative" via video-tape. Please give credit where credit is due.

You forgot to mention that it was a composite of meaningful-looking moments taken by her batshiat crazy parents from many hours of footage.

That makes his talents all the more amazing.
 
2006-03-22 05:09:30 PM
tarrant84: Bush won by over 3,000,000 votes.

But you tell me, why did he win? Why is it somehow not the Democrat's fault for running a crappy candidate with no platform? A guy who said he'd of given Bush the power to use force in Iraq if he had to do it again?


You misunderstand, I have no love for the democrats, I think they are just as corrupt and dishonest as the republicans and given the same power they would abuse it all the same.

My issue is with the American voter, go out to a public place and ask 100 people who the secretary of defense is and then comeback here and tell me the voters really looked at the issues at hand and voted on them intelligently.
 
2006-03-22 05:09:49 PM
tarrant84: No one is saying Bush is doing a good job.

The problem is the Democrats haven't done anything which shows they'd do a better job. Their platform is STILL "We're not Bush." I think it was Clinton (a great president) who said beating an incumbent is a two part issue-- you have to show why he needs to be fired AND why you are the man to replace him.

The Dems just aren't doing the second part.


The Republicans didn't unveil the Contract with America until mid-September, 1994.

Just wait.

And hope it doesn't include socialized health care, which they mistakenly think most Americans support.
 
2006-03-22 05:10:17 PM
LocalCynic: Bush and the Republicans would be forced to defend the notion that we need to stay in the Middle East for perpetuity and the assumption that the Iraqi people are incompetant. Unfortunately, they'd rather duck and cover than take a serious position.

Look at Feingold! They hung him out to dry for trying to censure the President-- something the Congress should be doing. That is why they don't excite me. All talk, no balls... and that is why Republicans keep winning.

Clavis: And that's the Democrats' fault?

Yes! For not doing the same damn thing!
 
2006-03-22 05:10:52 PM
tarrant84: Maybe the Democrats should drop the issue, because it's not helping them win elections.

I wouldn't. It's still an important issue no matter what. Maybe if Kerry/Edwards had taken an actual stand favoring it instead of being wishywashy farks about it...

Can't help it if America's homophobic. That's their problem. I vote enlightened, not pragmatic.
 
2006-03-22 05:11:11 PM
Clavis

The Republican conservatives have a vertically-integrated media empire that the liberals can only dream of. Messages go directly from the White House to the ears of red-state radio listeners, where they are accepted as THE TRUTH.

Right, everyone in the 'Red States' takes everything the white house says at 100% face value. That explains Bush's skyrocketing approval rating, right?
 
2006-03-22 05:13:01 PM
Clavis

Just because, over the last 10 years, the Republicans have figured out effective strategies for changing public opinion and winning elections, doesn't mean they have anything legitimate to offer the nation ideologically.

They've just hired the best people: Karl Rove, Frank Luntz, etc. People who can turn "estate tax" into "death tax" and convince voters (again, with help from Rush and Sean and Coulter) that their poor farmer buddies are being hurt by it, and thus have voters help out their rich buddies while believing they're helping themselves.


You can't really blame the Republicans for mastering propaganda techniques. But you do have to wonder why people keep coming back to a political party that has no interest in their values. We shouldn't have to pick between "the lesser of two evils."
 
2006-03-22 05:13:40 PM
Oh c'mon, the UC study can be discredited with one link:

Democratic Underground

Liberals can be just as whiney as conservatives and just as conformist. Negative personality traits aren't confined to one side of the political divide.
 
2006-03-22 05:13:47 PM
tarrant84
Democrats are a big tent party and part of that is that's it's hard to get one message out. I think that's a good thing. I want a government with a lot of opinions in it and not a simple party line.

Feminist, union workers, minorities, environmentalists, homosexuals, peace activists, pot heads, and run of the mill liberals etc. are a pretty diverse group and a lot of them vote blue.
 
2006-03-22 05:13:48 PM
Unfortunately, the Democrat's biggest weakness is that they can't get together to take a stand on most subjects. Htey lack a platform, if you will.

On teh other hand, my (and I think many Democrat's) biggest criticism of Republicans is that they get together too well and rally behind a single posisition on every subject.

While the Republican method is good for getting things done, it's not so good for encouraging debate and finding creative and enduring solutions to problems. Unfortunately, the Democrat's methods aren't much good for it, either, because they have no leader who will finally make a decision.

My solution: Re-elect Bill.
 
2006-03-22 05:14:10 PM

Here's the original story from the Toronto Star. Check out this line:

Block admits in his paper that liberal Berkeley is not representative of the whole country. But within his sample, he says, the results hold.


The problem is that the sample covers only 95 kids in one of the most left-leaning areas of the country, with the results very, VERY vulnerable to subjective interpretation.

The Toronto article also mentions another way for conservatives to interpret the results:

Even if they really did tend to be insecure complainers as kids, they might simply have recognized that the world is a scary, unfair place.

Their grown-up conclusion that the safest thing is to stick to tradition could well be the right one. As for their "rigidity," maybe that's just moral certainty.

The grown-up liberal men, on the other hand, with their introspection and recognition of complexity in the world, could be seen as self-indulgent and ineffectual.


This is a junk study. I don't need a a half-assed paper to tell me which groups of peole to despise. I prefer to get to know people on an individual basis; then I despise them.
 
2006-03-22 05:14:13 PM
tarrant84: Bush won by over 3,000,000 votes.

Bush did not win. Kerry won, but Diebold stole the election.
 
2006-03-22 05:15:31 PM
The study is legit. Received it on one of my APA listservs earlier today.
 
2006-03-22 05:15:40 PM
Based on personal observation, I would say that this poll is 100% accurate. It all starts at the dinner table with Conservatvie Dad biatching about the Government stealing his money in the form of taxes. And it just goes downhill from there.
 
2006-03-22 05:16:58 PM
As soon as I read "...NPR..." I thought, hmmm, National Propaganda Radio.

/Could it be worse?
//Yeah, it could be on AM.
///Or that HD radio. But not Satellite. Cost them too much.
 
2006-03-22 05:17:21 PM
LocalCynic

We shouldn't have to pick between "the lesser of two evils."

In the immortal words of Krang: "Go ahead, throw your vote away."
 
2006-03-22 05:17:28 PM
The unlikely tag proves this legitimate. STFU
 
2006-03-22 05:17:31 PM
lilplatinum
Right, everyone in the 'Red States' takes everything the white house says at 100% face value.

I'm sure it's less than 100%. But it's sure a hell of a lot higher than 0%. Or is your sarcasm intended to imply that the Bush team doesn't use spin and PR tactics to keep themselves on top?

When I hear callers call in to C-SPAN and talk about the "mainstream media [having a] liberal bias" and "activist judges who want to redefine marriage" -- when they literally use the talking points, word for word -- it's difficult not to assume that the deliberate efforts made by right-wing spin doctors are working perfectly.

You can mock the idea all you like, but (for example) the whole concept of "wedge issues", by definition, involves getting a message out there and getting lots and lots of people to buy your spin so that they'll hit the voting booths come Election Day where they wouldn't have before.

That explains Bush's skyrocketing approval rating, right?

It explains how he got re-elected. Bush's incompetence and the incompetence of his team are why his approval rating sucks so bad.
 
2006-03-22 05:17:41 PM
milk_plus: Feminist, union workers, minorities, environmentalists, homosexuals, peace activists, pot heads, and run of the mill liberals etc. are a pretty diverse group and a lot of them vote blue.

And turn off the rest of America.

Clavis

Also, it's kind of ironic that this thread is supposed to be how conservatives are whiny children, but where you are whining that "It's not OUR fault we can't win elections! It's, uh, everyone else's fault! Wah!" Man up nancy, stop whining and go win.

Arnold T Pants: Bush did not win. Kerry won, but Diebold stole the election.

home.no.net

Wah wah, you lost, you lost fair and square... that was that. Kerry never stood a chance.
 
2006-03-22 05:18:06 PM
HAHAHA! THE SHRUB CULTIST ARE WHINEY BABIES!

NEENER! NEENER! NEENER!

/Laughs
 
2006-03-22 05:20:25 PM
tarrant84

Look at Feingold! They hung him out to dry for trying to censure the President-- something the Congress should be doing. That is why they don't excite me. All talk, no balls... and that is why Republicans keep winning.

You're preaching to the choir. It's election-year politics in action. The sad thing is that what agenda the Democrats have presented - their science and technology proposals, for instance - are never talked about. Even more sad is that most people are quite aware of the GOP agenda, yet the Republicans seem totally unable to get their capstone projects (e.g. ANWR, welfare reform) passed without resorting to procedural trickery.
 
2006-03-22 05:20:41 PM
tarrant84: And turn off the rest of America.

They need a good shaking up. And your implication that they are the majority is kind of laughable.
 
2006-03-22 05:21:25 PM
That's right, attack the messenger.
 
Displayed 50 of 473 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report