OT: political leanings are half genetic

[Bob]

On May 29, 1:40 am, Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Paul Myron Hobson wrote:
>
> > From the article:
> > ,------|Quote|
> > |
> > |"Whether you prefer Rush Limbaugh or Keith
> > |Olbermann has to do with your genes and your
> > |psychology, according to a new study.
> > |
> > |People who are more conscientious and prefer
> > |order, structure and closure in their lives
> > |tend to be more conservative, whereas creative
> > |people who are open to new experiences tend to
> > |be more politically liberal, says John Jost,
> > |a psychologist at New York University..."
> > `------|Unquote|
>
> > It took a PhD to figure that out? Geez, anyone could have told you that.
>
> Conservatives? Conscientious? On what planet?
>
> I guess if you disregard murdering people, being greedy, obstructing
> fair play, being mean, being unforgiving, and a few other little
> things like that, then the American Right could be characterized as
> conscientious. But not unless.
>
> How many conscientious objectors are right wingers, for instance?
>
> I wonder if this is another instance of political conservatives trying
> to destroy the meaning of a word in order to deny its use to their
> rivals. See "values", "liberal", "terrorism", "support", "defense",
> etc., for examples.
>
> Chalo

I'm pretty certain I'm a bit more to the right of the political
spectrum than Chalo is but darned if I can recall murdering anyone,
being greedy, obstructing fair play, being mean, etcetera.
The Left has managed to destroy the meaning of the word "liberal" with
virtually no help from the Right.

Regards,
Bob Hunt

 

[Random Waftings Of Bunker Blasts]

Sounds like a good reason to sterilize conservatives.

--

Buy my book about school bullying here:

http://www.lulu.com/content/112781 (recommended)
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?isbn=1411626559
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1411626559

 

[Tim McNamara]

I'm still waiting for the left wing media to reveal why Rush Limbaugh
was in Haiti with two other men and a big bottle of fraudulently
obtained Viagra.

 

[Tim McNamara]

In article <[email protected]>,
Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

> On May 29, 1:40 am, Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Paul Myron Hobson wrote:
> >
> > > From the article:
> > > ,------|Quote|
> > > |
> > > |"Whether you prefer Rush Limbaugh or Keith Olbermann has to do
> > > |with your genes and your psychology, according to a new study.
> > > |
> > > |People who are more conscientious and prefer order, structure
> > > |and closure in their lives tend to be more conservative, whereas
> > > |creative people who are open to new experiences tend to be more
> > > |politically liberal, says John Jost, a psychologist at New York
> > > |University..."
> > > `------|Unquote|
> >
> > > It took a PhD to figure that out? Geez, anyone could have told
> > > you that.
> >
> > Conservatives? Conscientious? On what planet?
> >
> > I guess if you disregard murdering people, being greedy,
> > obstructing fair play, being mean, being unforgiving, and a few
> > other little things like that, then the American Right could be
> > characterized as conscientious. But not unless.
> >
> > How many conscientious objectors are right wingers, for instance?
> >
> > I wonder if this is another instance of political conservatives
> > trying to destroy the meaning of a word in order to deny its use to
> > their rivals. See "values", "liberal", "terrorism", "support",
> > "defense", etc., for examples.
> >
> > Chalo
>
> I'm pretty certain I'm a bit more to the right of the political
> spectrum than Chalo is but darned if I can recall murdering anyone,
> being greedy, obstructing fair play, being mean, etcetera. The Left
> has managed to destroy the meaning of the word "liberal" with
> virtually no help from the Right.

And sadly the Right has managed to destroy conservatism all on their
own.

 

[A Muzi]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> I'm still waiting for the left wing media to reveal why Rush Limbaugh
> was in Haiti with two other men and a big bottle of fraudulently
> obtained Viagra.
The same Haiti where the Kennedy family trust runs the long distance
telephone monopoly?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

 

[[email protected]]

did Straus go down on the Lusitania?
did Rush swim?
haiti has a phone service?
did they read the synopsis?
is this inevitable?
are we doomed?

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
"[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes:
> did Straus go down on the Lusitania?
> did Rush swim?
> haiti has a phone service?
> did they read the synopsis?
> is this inevitable?
> are we doomed?

Are Liberal governments more likely
to install bike facilities?


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On May 29, 10:23 pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
> did Straus go down on the Lusitania?

More importantly, did the Lusitania enjoy it?


> did Rush swim?
> haiti has a phone service?
> did they read the synopsis?
> is this inevitable?
> are we doomed?

 

[Bill Sornson]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> I'm still waiting for the left wing media to reveal why Rush Limbaugh
> was in Haiti with two other men and a big bottle of fraudulently
> obtained Viagra.

Why don't you get illegally searched just for who you are and get back to
us? (Nice editing, BTW.)

 

[Bill Sornson]

Random Waftings Of Bunker Blasts wrote:

> Sounds like a good reason to sterilize conservatives.

POTW. You should be so proud...

 

[still me]

On Tue, 29 May 2007 18:01:24 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
<[email protected]> wrote:


>But the rest?

Apparently you don't listen to enough jerk radio. Oh, I mean "talk"
radio.

>How can it be that after six years of Republican control of
>Congress and the Executive Branch that there is some sort of cabal
>that is keeping people who have committed these "crimes" from
>prosecution.

That's why they had to fire those attny generals!

>Where do you get this stuff?

See above ;-)

>
>>But a middle-aged gay man who flirted (only, and only after being enticed)
>>with late-teenage pages? HIM they drum out.
>
>This is so rude on your part. Blaming teenagers for Foley s
>transgressions.

It appears his rabid neo-con support has caused him to lose all sense
of reality.

 

[Bill Sornson]

still me wrote:
> On Tue, 29 May 2007 18:01:24 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
> <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> But a middle-aged gay man who flirted (only, and only after being
>>> enticed) with late-teenage pages? HIM they drum out.
>>
>> This is so rude on your part. Blaming teenagers for Foley s
>> transgressions.
>
> It appears his rabid neo-con support has caused him to lose all sense
> of reality.

Apparently neither of you can read with comprehension. (Hint: nowhere did
I blame teenagers; Flogger assumed that's who enticed Foley. Dem operatives
did that.)

Put it this way: if the situation were reversed and Republicans were piling
on a middle-aged gay Democrat, they'd be labeled homophobes and bigots and
by now that same congressperson would be serving on some prestigious
committee. (The Dems have a proven record of doing just that...only with a
/true/ pedophile guilty of ACTUALLY HAVING SEX WITH A 12-YEAR-OLD GIRL, not
harmless flirting via e-mail with young men.)

Sorry if the FACTS upset your delicate nonsensibilities...

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Tue, 29 May 2007 21:24:57 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Tim McNamara wrote:
>> I'm still waiting for the left wing media to reveal why Rush Limbaugh
>> was in Haiti with two other men and a big bottle of fraudulently
>> obtained Viagra.
>
>Why don't you get illegally searched just for who you are and get back to
>us?

You really are some kind of paranoid nut if you think that the US
government is routinely doing illegal things to conservatives.



--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Tue, 29 May 2007 22:20:58 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>still me wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 May 2007 18:01:24 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> But a middle-aged gay man who flirted (only, and only after being
>>>> enticed) with late-teenage pages? HIM they drum out.
>>>
>>> This is so rude on your part. Blaming teenagers for Foley s
>>> transgressions.
>>
>> It appears his rabid neo-con support has caused him to lose all sense
>> of reality.
>
>Apparently neither of you can read with comprehension. (Hint: nowhere did
>I blame teenagers; Flogger assumed that's who enticed Foley. Dem operatives
>did that.)

Democratic operatives used teen aged boys to make Mark Foley
proposition them and then resign? You are really, really paraonid.

>
>Put it this way: if the situation were reversed and Republicans were piling
>on a middle-aged gay Democrat, they'd be labeled homophobes and bigots and
>by now that same congressperson would be serving on some prestigious
>committee. (The Dems have a proven record of doing just that...only with a
>/true/ pedophile guilty of ACTUALLY HAVING SEX WITH A 12-YEAR-OLD GIRL, not
>harmless flirting via e-mail with young men.)

Details please.

>
>Sorry if the FACTS upset your delicate nonsensibilities...

Where do you get your facts?
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[[email protected]]

On May 29, 11:28 pm, [email protected] (Tom Keats) wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > did Straus go down on the Lusitania?
> > did Rush swim?
> > haiti has a phone service?
> > did they read the synopsis?
> > is this inevitable?
> > are we doomed?
>
> Are Liberal governments more likely
> to install bike facilities?
>
> cheers,
> Tom
>
> --
> Nothing is safe from me.
> Above address is just a spam midden.
> I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

 

[[email protected]]

> Are Liberal governments more likely
> to install bike facilities?

In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
A stately pleasure-dome decree:
Where Alph, the sacred river, ran
Through caverns measureless to man
Down to a sunless sea.

band i guess?

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 30 May 2007 11:25:20 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Your media is still liberal in the extreme.

Nonsense. Our mass media is, in general, supportive of big business
itnerests and the status quo in American society.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Bill Sornson]

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Tue, 29 May 2007 08:58:50 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> conservatives
>>> SHOULD be more conscientious! I mean, it's time to indict/arrest
>>> Sandy Berglar for stealing classified documents from the National
>>> Archives; Valerie Plame for lying to Congress just weeks ago (memo
>>> shows she did recommend her lying hubby for ***** after all);
>>> William Jefferson (D LA) for
>>> taking huge bribes on tape and hiding almost $100K in his freezer;
>>> Diane Feinstein for funneling MILLIONS to her husband's defense
>>> contracting business while serving on the Appropriations Committee,
>>> etc etc etc etc.
>>
>> Do you really believe all of this?
>>
>> William Jefferson is in trouble and the FBI and federal prosecutors
>> will probably get him, so that's good.
>>
>> But the rest?
>>
>> Try to think logically for a moment. Ask yourself, how is this stuff
>> possible? How can it be that after six years of Republican control
>> of Congress and the Executive Branch that there is some sort of cabal
>> that is keeping people who have committed these "crimes" from
>> prosecution. Is it Soros bribing government officials? Is it
>> "die-hard liberals" controlling various parts of the executive
>> branch? Is it hard-core left-left wing people getting on grand
>> juries and protecting these people from indictments? Is it that
>> guys like the head of the CIA are really so partisan or cowered by
>> some vast liberal conspiracy so as to lie about Plame? Is it the
>> "liberal media" exerting some sort of hypnotic control over US
>> attorneys and district attorneys and the public as a whole?
>>
>> Where do you get this stuff?
>>
>>> But a middle-aged gay man who flirted (only, and only after being
>>> enticed) with late-teenage pages? HIM they drum out.
>>
>> This is so rude on your part. Blaming teenagers for Foley s
>> transgressions.
>
> Conservatives are not really into government like liberals are.
> Conservatives mainly just want to make some money and live the good
> life. But liberals truly want to govern. Therein lies your
> explanation.

Flogittodeathlinson's so cute. I plonked him many months ago, but he still
replies to my posts as if I'll read it first-hand. Once or twice, okay, but
he's been doing it repeatedly ever since. (Blocked him because he's a liar
and a libeler.)

Short explanation why government hasn't cracked down on corrupt Dems: when
Bush became President (controversy, FL, SCOTUS, etc.), he didn't "clean
house" the way Presidents normally do. He left many Clinton appointees in
place, and not just in hi-vis positions like head of CIA. Part of his
attempt to unite and not divide, one supposes. (Terribly misguided, of
course.) But because of the rabid, irrational hatred of him due to that
disputed election, a "shadow government" started and continues to undermine
him at every opportunity. (Liars Plame and Wilson to name just two.) Leak
classified secrets to the NYT? No big deal. Rinse and repeat. And with a
more-than-willing accomplice in the mainstream media magnifying any
perceived transgression by the Right and completely ignoring and burying
those by the Left, the public is left with distorted, biased misinformation.
(AKA "Blog Food".)

Ask yourself this: why has there been NO attention to Diane Feinstein's
unethical and almost definitely illegal funneling of millions of dollars to
her husband's defense contracting concerns while serving on the
Appropriations Committee? Can anyone honestly say the same would be the
case if a leading /Republican/ senator did that?

Rinse and Repeat. It's all quite transparent.

And no, Flog Man, I won't see your pathetic, whiny reply (at least not
directly) so please don't address it to me. TYVM. LOL

BS (and how)

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Wed, 30 May 2007 10:41:25 -0700, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Short explanation why government hasn't cracked down on corrupt Dems: when
>Bush became President (controversy, FL, SCOTUS, etc.), he didn't "clean
>house" the way Presidents normally do. He left many Clinton appointees in
>place, and not just in hi-vis positions like head of CIA. Part of his
>attempt to unite and not divide, one supposes. (Terribly misguided, of
>course.) But because of the rabid, irrational hatred of him due to that
>disputed election, a "shadow government" started and continues to undermine
>him at every opportunity.

Is this your own theory or did you read/hear it somewhere?

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

On May 30, 12:41 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:

<snipped>

- on Sornson's Hero, George Walker Bush -

> Short explanation why government hasn't cracked down on corrupt Dems: when
> Bush became President (controversy, FL, SCOTUS, etc.), he didn't "clean
> house" the way Presidents normally do. He left many Clinton appointees in
> place, and not just in hi-vis positions like head of CIA. Part of his
> attempt to unite and not divide, one supposes.


Is it really possible to be this f*****g stoooooopid, is is Sornson
making a joke????