<p>LOL~ Democrats are much more the recycle, hybrid vehicle types, at least where I live. The people who drive the gashog beastmobiles invariably have (or had) a “W” sticker and a “God Bless America” sticker, whereas the Priuses have anti-war and Kerry bumper stickers!</p>
<p>
<br>
Obviously you never listen to Air America.</p>
<p>When was the last time a liberal speaker had someone throw a pie or other food item in their face (which has become a common practice of liberals lately)? Or, for that matter when was the last time a liberal was rudely interrupted and unable to complete their speech because of all the heckling coming from the crowd of conservatives - another favorite activity of liberals. Yup, liberals are very tolerant of other’s views.</p>
<p>Its a stupid, stupid study but keep in mind it is done over 20 years and thus it would be very costly and difficult to do a proper one. My question is why do it at all, though, as it is so obviously flawed - oh, and who pays for it? as I can hardly believe UC B would pay the bills for this crap…</p>
<p>Kluge-</p>
<p>I think I have a far better understanding of science than you do of statistics. To gather any relevant information about a population, you must have a significant sample. For a population that size of the U.S., you better be looking at a sample in the range of at least a 1000 from across the board. Even at that size, the likelihood of error will be high. A sample of 95 will generate nothing of any value. This is the law of statisitics. Which, by the way, many scientific principles of observation rely upon.</p>
<p>This is why so many people don’t pay attention to polls anymore. The work behind them is shipshod at best.</p>
<p>As I understand this study, it suggests that some children, that it calls whiny (a scientific term?), grow up to be what the scientist suggest is conservative. </p>
<p>As I understand the liberals on this board that just dont get it that is, they are constantly asking what conservative means, from which I deduce they just dont get it as they are so often fond of saying–they want to better understand their rhetorically perceived “enemy” as their bayonettes are afixed to thier cubical chairs and they want to get things started.</p>
<p>The Problem:
Conservatism should not be simply a matter of political-party affiliation (as it so often seems to be for self-described liberals on this board and as they prefer it to be for conservativesliberal is synonymous with Democrat for pretty much all here but for the exception that proves the rule, *mini<a href=“I%20believe%20he%20delights%20in%20the%20barbed%20contrast%20he%20offers%20to%20his%20tepid%20fellow%20travelers”>/i</a>.</p>
<p>Conservatism, for me, means valuing or conserving that which has civil-value. First and foremost those things that make us human by definition variously referred to as civilization: </p>
<p>1)personal etiquette and responsibility (individualism), </p>
<p>2) family (structuralism), </p>
<p>3) faith (any proscriptive faith, socialism), </p>
<p>4) civil order (social hierarchy balanced with equity, republicanism), </p>
<p>5) culture (cultus, in the first instance refers to the civility afforded humankind in the religious traditions of humankind: the arts, philosophy, pedagogy, craft, athletics = aristocracy.</p>
<p>The rub, of course, exists in filling-out these personal and societal isms.</p>
<p>–Does the perpetual sustaining of a portion of society through fiscal welfare et al aid in developing the traits in #1? To what degree?</p>
<p>–Does the break-up of the traditional family (devaluation of marriage) take out the girders that support #3, #4, and #5?
…will things like abortion and gay marriage further denigrate the raison deter of the institution of marriage (children) or will they adjust marriage to changing societal circumstances?</p>
<p>–Does the lapse and marginalizing of faith in the West undercut #4 and #5?</p>
<p>Whereas, #4 seems to be holding, from my point of view, #5 seems to have taken a real hit-- a body-blow really.</p>
<p>Alas, people on this board prefer cardboard cut-outs and straw-men. We are all supposed to have certain viewsjust to keep it simple. We dont. Youll have to think a little harder. </p>
<p>Sorry CGM, Kluge et al.</p>
<p>Yeah…yeah and sheesh…sheesh just won’t suffice.</p>
<p>I really hate the assumption that my views are so wimpy that they are a perfect mirror of the current administration. Maybe y’all lack spines and minds of your own, but I can disagree with the current administration and call myself conservative. Bush is not the epitome of conservatism - many “old fashioned” conservatives feel abandoned. Is John Kerry’s every action a perfect reflection of you? Or are you making up a straw man because you just don’t like intelligent, rational, educated conservatives and like to make believe we don’t exist?</p>
<p>
See above. My beliefs are NOT vissitudes of the current political office-holder. I’ve said it many times, but it bears repeating because y’all are too dense to get it. </p>
<p>I’m all for states’ rights; town rights. Ideally, most gov’t should occur on the local levels - much easier to change; much harder for corporate lobbyists to influence. </p>
<p>I want a strong national defense system. </p>
<p>I’m all for education but believe that the state/local level is the place for that. </p>
<p>I am morally opposed to abortion and think that the NARAL philosophy is sickening. I’m opposed to many of the modern changes in marriage laws, such as no-fault divorce and making adultery legal. </p>
<p>As a conservative/libertarian, I’m all for gay marriage - IMO, they are asking for the most conservative thing in the book: commit to one person, forever, and take care of that person in a stable family unit. Yay! As a conservative/libertarian, I am (marginally) pro-choice - but really think that things have gone too far. We’ve fashioned ourselves a mode of birth control - the most barbaric imaginable. </p>
<p>Most of all, though, I’m a judicial conservative. I hate - to the bottom of my soul - what liberals have done with the Constitution. Last summer, a bunch of semi-informed CCers thought that the conservatives had handed down the Kelo opinion. Little did they realize that the “flexible” interpretation of the Constitution from the liberals resulted in the decision that allows a state to take a person’s home and give it to a big corporation. Moving further back in time, the liberal Court has removed any semblance of Fourth Amendment protections - any strict constructionist worth his salt gives much greater protection to people. Power has been centralised in the federal gov’t, which has the effect of removing power from individuals, making it more difficult to change one’s conditions, and handing power to corporations, who are the only ones with resources to lobby. Brought to you by the “nice” side of the aisle!</p>
<p>aries, if the federal government passes mandates to the states and cities/towns, you don’t feel it is their responsibility to fund them?</p>
<p>I find this baffling. Property taxes alone cannot possibly continue to fund these un, or underfunded mandates, like NCLB (not to mention Sped and ELL).</p>
<p>What I find is that most of my conservative friends are much more apt to be fearful…of terror. of people different than them, of people of different religions, different sexual mores… They have a “them versus us” outlook and that’s why they tend to cling to “security” and authority figures to protect them from "others’ outside their comfort zone. “Those gays…those terrorists…those of other religions”, that will potentially harm their protected society and all things they hold dear. That would seem to fit with “whiny” frightened children complaining to the teacher who in that case serves as “the authority figure”. They don’t like that someone was making waves or being different…it’s not RIGHT OR NORMAL in their world. No room for inclusion for those different from them.
This is NOT a scientific study at all, just anecdotal views from my long life on planet earth.</p>
<p>Um… maybe I don’t agree with those federal mandates, Allmusic. I don’t agree with everything that a conservative administration does; I don’t disagree with everything a liberal administration does. </p>
<p>I don’t know where the federal gov’t gets off making nationwide mandates; missed the part of the Constitution where they were allowed to do it. State-wide mandates are fine. </p>
<p>Frankly, I find y’all baffling. You make up straw men about how conservatives “do” think or “should” think, then get all upset when we don’t fall into line. Guess what - we’re not all brainwashed!</p>
<p>Aries, no straw man here. But there are legitimate questions about fiscal conservatism, defense, big government, etc. that seem to fall along former party lines.</p>
<p>lauras50,
That’s an interesting observation, although I must say that I don’t find the same thing. Political alignment probably looks slightly different depending on how provincial a town is, how educated a person is, religious affiliation, special interest groups, etc.</p>
<p>Personally, I think the major political divide pertains to something as simple as big government vs. small government. After that, most other issues fall easily to one side or the other.</p>
<p>um, so where are conservatives and liberals on the big government/small government divide nowadays</p>
<p>I think fear is used to blur all other issues, and it works, because many people are just concerned about themselves, and thier lives, and fear, while not concerned so much with others around them</p>
<p>Democrats ~ usually more liberal ~ bigger government
Republicans ~ usually more conservative ~ smaller government</p>
<p>Yeah, pretty general, I know, but essentially true.</p>
<p>By ‘smaller government’, I mean more local government control and less federal government intervention, fewer government programs, etc.</p>
<p>Don’t you think that everybody ultimately ‘votes with their wallets’? From our school board issues, to local government decisions to national elections, people tend to vote for that which benefits them the most. Even if people seem to vote for the benefit of other groups, they are doing so because they believe that it will improve the world in which they live. Nobody would support initiatives that would hurt them or their families, no matter who else would benefit. I don’t think fear influences votes, but rather that it is human nature to make your world the best you can. Folks on opposite sides just have different ways of going about it. </p>
<p>Just my 2 cents. :)</p>
<p>i agree w/ lkf.
in regard to the article, i offer this.</p>
<p>conservatives often take the view that “the world is just” (as in, it’s ok the way it is, preserve the status quo, etc.)</p>
<p>liberals think things need to change (progressivism)</p>
<p>since liberals are the ones that want to change things, wouldn’t they be the “whiny” ones?</p>
<p>BTW, I wonder what political affiliation all of the protestors and whiners in L.A. have?</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p><btw, i=“” wonder=“” what=“” political=“” affiliation=“” all=“” of=“” the=“” protestors=“” and=“” whiners=“” in=“” l.a.=“” have?=“”></btw,></p>
<p>Considering that they are waving the Mexican flag, I’d have to say their political allegiance is to Mexico.</p>
<p>frankly, i dont understand either party… how can a party want small/local govt but think it’s okay to barge right into a woman’s womb? how can a party say that a woman’s rights are being violated if a man gives a woman a compliment at work, but when the head of the free world allows/most likely encourages a young woman to give him a blow job in the White House that’s okay? we will never be an educated citizenry if we rely on 60 sec soundbites for our info… or if we only listen to one side of the argument. the point of having all voices heard, i naively thought, was to have the best info available to make the best decisions for our country & the world… we can’t really be that far apart. p.s. i drive a prius w/ a God Bless America sticker… i guess i just dont fit in!</p>
<p>Okay, someone has a problem with not making adultry a criminal offense? Um, what would you do, stone people, scarlet A, and what is adultary anyway? </p>
<p>And I guess its bad when my family carries the Irish flag during the ST Patricks day parade, </p>
<p>And bigger government usually means $$$$$$$$ and gee, we have that now, so how does the line up with conservatives ideals</p>
<p>And of course fear influences votes, read the polls from the last election, people voted not to educate,not to free people, not for civil rights, not for health care, too many voted out of fear of being blownup, fear is prevelant in this country, at the expense of people and caring for your fellow humans, why else would education, health care, veterans benefits, the environment, if people cared about others, those would be funded more,not less, instead, we have a HUGE deficit to pay for a war to “protect” those in fear, yeah, Montana needs that big a anti terrorism budget cause that’s such a stratetic place, uhhun</p>
<p>
Anybody else find this humerous?</p>
<p>klc, I am ROFL</p>
<p>They do, its true of the people I know, so what? If you read my post, it was people me,myself, I know, didn’t say all conservatives in the world</p>
<p>So I know some very narrowminded conservatives…I do, that is true…and this is humerous because I know some conservatives, or that they are narrowminded, or that it was ME that said it?</p>