Political Roundtable Part X

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[Wizardspride]

I believe it.....
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/brain-difference-democrats-republicans


First, in the American Journal of Political Science, a team of researchers including Peter Hatemi of Penn State University and Rose McDermott of Brown University studied the relationship between our deep-seated tendencies to experience fear—tendencies that vary from person to person, partly for reasons that seem rooted in our genes—and our political beliefs. What they found is that people who have more fearful disposition also tend to be more politically conservative, and less tolerant of immigrants and people of races different from their own. As McDermott carefully emphasizes, that does not mean that every conservative has a high fear disposition. "It's not that conservative people are more fearful, it's that fearful people are more conservative," as she puts it.

[tontoz]

For those bashing Nate, you just completely dismiss the now 5k Podesta emails completely supporting Nate's statements?

Clinton herself confirmed they were authentic with the Lincoln comment. Sincerely asking, is this a cover your ears situation due to you despising (understandably) Trump or you simply think they're all Russian forgeries and not as Wikileaks stated last night (the DNC is leaking like the Titanic)?

Seems to me you want it both ways, all leaks against Clinton aren't to be recognized as they originate from Wikileaks (an organization once loved by left/leaning types for their Guantanamo and Iraq leaks). Now leaks seemingly hurt their client, so it's a Russian conspiracy and not to be trusted.

Raw data, posted to a simple searchable database where citizens can judge the data independent is far more appealing than biased media picking/choosing what to support.

The dynamic of Reddit/Wikileaks is very interesting to watch.....there is a dynamic there that works. Obviously in its infancy but it's an electronic engagement with politics I haven't seen in my lifetime. Normal citizens doing some pretty amazing coordination in their due diligence of the leaks.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[popper]

He has an apocalyptic, conspiratorial view of the world that is fueled by racism. He's built a tower of absurd and infuriating rationalizations for the sensibility of racism upon what actually just boils down to the negative emotional response of fear that he experiences when he is confronted by differences.

Or, he's stating the facts which lead inexorably to the conclusion that for the D elite and MSM, the ends justify the means. We are for all intents and purposes a banana republic with corrupted govt. institutions (IRS, Justice, FBI, etc.) and a belief that it's better to become a nation of men and not of laws if it means your preferred candidate wins. I deplore Trump but Hillary and Obama are the much more dangerous alternatives. We will get what we deserve and it's not going to be pretty.

Even if you' were right about every one of your paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts, do you really think corruption is new? My guess is the only thing that's changed is technology. For all you know, corruption is currently a lot less than it has been all throughout US history.

I know I'm not going to be able to change your views Ruz. You call obvious facts paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts. Perhaps you thought the same thing when I and others pointed out that the president was lying when he informed the country that they could keep their doctor and health plan under the ACA. It's ok that you can't or won't accept the "ends justify the means" nature of the modern day D elite but don't expect well informed citizens to ignore the obvious.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[montestewart]

He has an apocalyptic, conspiratorial view of the world that is fueled by racism. He's built a tower of absurd and infuriating rationalizations for the sensibility of racism upon what actually just boils down to the negative emotional response of fear that he experiences when he is confronted by differences.

Or, he's stating the facts which lead inexorably to the conclusion that for the D elite and MSM, the ends justify the means. We are for all intents and purposes a banana republic with corrupted govt. institutions (IRS, Justice, FBI, etc.) and a belief that it's better to become a nation of men and not of laws if it means your preferred candidate wins. I deplore Trump but Hillary and Obama are the much more dangerous alternatives. We will get what we deserve and it's not going to be pretty.

Even if you' were right about every one of your paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts, do you really think corruption is new? My guess is the only thing that's changed is technology. For all you know, corruption is currently a lot less than it has been all throughout US history.

Agreed about corruption being well entrenched in U.S. politics and government, and not the exclusive domain of either party. The FBI was essentially a cult of personality answerable to no one for nearly 50 years under Hoover, and the IRS and DOJ have long and storied histories as tools for partisan or otherwise unconstitutional vendettas. Is more or less measured as a % of GDP?

"Paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts" is kind of harsh language, even for the hot and heavy round table. Hope we don't descend into name calling. I haven't the slightest idea why some people think Trump represents a drastic improvement in the honesty department, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Wikileaks out of hand. They likely released them too late to make an impact on this election, but they deserve a valid look.

[tontoz]

Trump is crazy af, even moreso than I thought, but that doesn't make Hillary any less corrupt/evil. She reminds me a bit of Dick Chaney, presentable in public but behind close doors....

[Induveca]

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/in-the-democratic-echo-chamber-inconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/

[montestewart]

https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/in-the-democratic-echo-chamber-inconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/

It seems to some degree a generational thing, some people just don't get how easily some data can be accessed. It's like when Sarbanes Oxley first went into effect and many people working at publicly traded companies were blindsided by the fact that all their personal emails sent on their work email systems were now a matter of semi-public record.

[Ruzious]

Or, he's stating the facts which lead inexorably to the conclusion that for the D elite and MSM, the ends justify the means. We are for all intents and purposes a banana republic with corrupted govt. institutions (IRS, Justice, FBI, etc.) and a belief that it's better to become a nation of men and not of laws if it means your preferred candidate wins. I deplore Trump but Hillary and Obama are the much more dangerous alternatives. We will get what we deserve and it's not going to be pretty.

Even if you' were right about every one of your paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts, do you really think corruption is new? My guess is the only thing that's changed is technology. For all you know, corruption is currently a lot less than it has been all throughout US history.

Agreed about corruption being well entrenched in U.S. politics and government, and not the exclusive domain of either party. The FBI was essentially a cult of personality answerable to no one for nearly 50 years under Hoover, and the IRS and DOJ have long and storied histories as tools for partisan or otherwise unconstitutional vendettas. Is more or less measured as a % of GDP?

"Paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts" is kind of harsh language, even for the hot and heavy round table. Hope we don't descend into name calling. I haven't the slightest idea why some people think Trump represents a drastic improvement in the honesty department, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Wikileaks out of hand. They likely released them too late to make an impact on this election, but they deserve a valid look.

Well, we won't have good candidates for all political offices because we have witch hunts that people are far far far too eager to participate in, and it sure doesn't seem like that's gonna change in our lifetime. Everyone has a skeleton in their closet. Pathetic is the nicest way I came up to describe the witch hunts to find the skeletons.

[Induveca]

Even if you' were right about every one of your paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts, do you really think corruption is new? My guess is the only thing that's changed is technology. For all you know, corruption is currently a lot less than it has been all throughout US history.

Agreed about corruption being well entrenched in U.S. politics and government, and not the exclusive domain of either party. The FBI was essentially a cult of personality answerable to no one for nearly 50 years under Hoover, and the IRS and DOJ have long and storied histories as tools for partisan or otherwise unconstitutional vendettas. Is more or less measured as a % of GDP?

"Paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts" is kind of harsh language, even for the hot and heavy round table. Hope we don't descend into name calling. I haven't the slightest idea why some people think Trump represents a drastic improvement in the honesty department, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Wikileaks out of hand. They likely released them too late to make an impact on this election, but they deserve a valid look.

Well, we won't have good candidates for all political offices because we have witch hunts that people are far far far too eager to participate in, and it sure doesn't seem like that's gonna change in our lifetime. Everyone has a skeleton in their closet. Pathetic is the nicest way I came up to describe the witch hunts to find the skeletons.

The general public analyzing tens of thousands of leaked emails revealing entrenched corruption/hidden government machinations isn't a "witch hunt". That's called data analysis. What the freedom of information act was supposed to promise us (in theory).

If anything what Clinton/Wikileaks is doing Re: Russia is a witch hunt.

Witch hunt
1.1informal A campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views

[Wizardspride]

Agreed about corruption being well entrenched in U.S. politics and government, and not the exclusive domain of either party. The FBI was essentially a cult of personality answerable to no one for nearly 50 years under Hoover, and the IRS and DOJ have long and storied histories as tools for partisan or otherwise unconstitutional vendettas. Is more or less measured as a % of GDP?

"Paranoid fantasies and pathetic witch hunts" is kind of harsh language, even for the hot and heavy round table. Hope we don't descend into name calling. I haven't the slightest idea why some people think Trump represents a drastic improvement in the honesty department, but I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the Wikileaks out of hand. They likely released them too late to make an impact on this election, but they deserve a valid look.

Well, we won't have good candidates for all political offices because we have witch hunts that people are far far far too eager to participate in, and it sure doesn't seem like that's gonna change in our lifetime. Everyone has a skeleton in their closet. Pathetic is the nicest way I came up to describe the witch hunts to find the skeletons.

The general public analyzing tens of thousands of leaked emails revealing entrenched corruption/hidden government machinations isn't a "witch hunt". That's called data analysis. What the freedom of information act was supposed to promise us (in theory).

If anything what Clinton/Wikileaks is doing Re: Russia is a witch hunt.

Witch hunt
1.1informal A campaign directed against a person or group holding unorthodox or unpopular views

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Hillary could be corrupt/compromised AND Russia is playing a part in the leak.

[Dat2U]

I believe it.....
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/brain-difference-democrats-republicans


First, in the American Journal of Political Science, a team of researchers including Peter Hatemi of Penn State University and Rose McDermott of Brown University studied the relationship between our deep-seated tendencies to experience fear—tendencies that vary from person to person, partly for reasons that seem rooted in our genes—and our political beliefs. What they found is that people who have more fearful disposition also tend to be more politically conservative, and less tolerant of immigrants and people of races different from their own. As McDermott carefully emphasizes, that does not mean that every conservative has a high fear disposition. "It's not that conservative people are more fearful, it's that fearful people are more conservative," as she puts it.

Fear corrupts the mind. It allows thoughts to seep in that challenge our moral compass and inevitably leads to a decay of our own morality. We can no longer distinguish right or wrong, because we open up ourselves to any & all perverted ideas that are born of fear.

[Ruzious]

Indy, fyi, when you post, this is what I see:

Induveca, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

[Induveca]

Indy, fyi, when you post, this is what I see:

Induveca, who is currently on your ignore list, made this post.

I'm responding to the conversation, not you directly. Apologies if my refusal to fall in line has offended you so much, I suspect you'd block Nate as well if it were possible to block moderators (hmm how do I know this....)

[I_Like_Dirt]

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Hillary could be corrupt/compromised AND Russia is playing a part in the leak.

Of course they aren't mutually exclusive, but one is a witch hunt and one is more of a type of espionage than a witch hunt.

[dckingsfan]

I believe it.....
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/brain-difference-democrats-republicans


First, in the American Journal of Political Science, a team of researchers including Peter Hatemi of Penn State University and Rose McDermott of Brown University studied the relationship between our deep-seated tendencies to experience fear—tendencies that vary from person to person, partly for reasons that seem rooted in our genes—and our political beliefs. What they found is that people who have more fearful disposition also tend to be more politically conservative, and less tolerant of immigrants and people of races different from their own. As McDermott carefully emphasizes, that does not mean that every conservative has a high fear disposition. "It's not that conservative people are more fearful, it's that fearful people are more conservative," as she puts it.

Fear corrupts the mind. It allows thoughts to seep in that challenge our moral compass and inevitably leads to a decay of our own morality. We can no longer distinguish right or wrong, because we open up ourselves to any & all perverted ideas that are born of fear.

Younger people are also less fearful than older people - that is why they are willing to take more risks.

To some degree the less fearful you are the more risks you are willing to take. Some people will go bungee jumping others won't.

You can be fearful that you are bankrupting a system and not take as many risks either.

This article equates a lack of fear as a good thing and taking risks as a good thing. I would say it is a really bad thing when you are on a freeway. Or if you would open the boarders with no controls.

What they miss is the study is that without fear - you most likely would be dead.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[JWizmentality]

Watch on YouTube

When this election is over I need someone to do a Trump surrogate greatest hits. From my little pony, to taco trucks, to "I slay b*itch".

These are the times I really miss Jon Stewart. Conservatives are in throw sh*t against the wall mode and watching Bullsh*t Mountain crumble and burn wouldv'e been far more enjoyable with him around.