[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

What makes you smile? - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:49pm
 
The Human Condition - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:44pm
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - ladron - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:26pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:22pm
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:03pm
 
July 2024 Photo Theme - Summer - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:02pm
 
Gardeners Photos - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 6:22pm
 
Song of the Day - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 6:15pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Steely_D - Jul 20, 2024 - 5:39pm
 
Banksy! - R_P - Jul 20, 2024 - 5:16pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - oldviolin - Jul 20, 2024 - 5:05pm
 
Republican Party - thisbody - Jul 20, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Jul 20, 2024 - 1:43pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - Isabeau - Jul 20, 2024 - 12:38pm
 
Project 2025 - Isabeau - Jul 20, 2024 - 11:45am
 
NYTimes Connections - n4ku - Jul 20, 2024 - 11:04am
 
NY Times Strands - ptooey - Jul 20, 2024 - 10:58am
 
Wordle - daily game - ptooey - Jul 20, 2024 - 10:55am
 
RightWingNutZ - rgio - Jul 20, 2024 - 10:39am
 
Trump - islander - Jul 20, 2024 - 8:46am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jul 20, 2024 - 7:32am
 
COVID-19 - Isabeau - Jul 20, 2024 - 6:40am
 
Climate Change - Isabeau - Jul 20, 2024 - 6:39am
 
Gotta Get Your Drink On - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 8:42pm
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 8:40pm
 
favorite love songs - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 7:38pm
 
2024 Elections! - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:40pm
 
The Republican Convention - Red_Dragon - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:37pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2024 - 4:50pm
 
Russia - R_P - Jul 19, 2024 - 2:49pm
 
The Obituary Page - GeneP59 - Jul 19, 2024 - 12:00pm
 
Israel - R_P - Jul 19, 2024 - 9:49am
 
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy - sunybuny - Jul 19, 2024 - 7:02am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - hialtidude - Jul 19, 2024 - 6:58am
 
Europe - thisbody - Jul 18, 2024 - 10:59pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:43pm
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:40pm
 
Living in America - black321 - Jul 18, 2024 - 8:14pm
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2024 - 10:28am
 
Jon Stewart interview - Steely_D - Jul 18, 2024 - 7:36am
 
kurtster's quiet vinyl - kurtster - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:45pm
 
What the hell OV? - oldviolin - Jul 17, 2024 - 2:04pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - Steely_D - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:51am
 
Best Song Comments. - q4Fry - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:32am
 
Rhetorical questions - sunybuny - Jul 17, 2024 - 7:29am
 
Musky Mythology - Red_Dragon - Jul 17, 2024 - 5:47am
 
What questions would you like to answer for the world? - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2024 - 5:43pm
 
Democratic Party - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 4:48pm
 
Race in America - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:53pm
 
Live Music - skyguy - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:44pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Jul 16, 2024 - 3:43pm
 
New Music - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 2:26pm
 
Gimmie 5 Kurt! - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 12:30pm
 
China - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 12:05pm
 
Acoustic Guitar - thisbody - Jul 16, 2024 - 11:08am
 
Bear! - Beaker - Jul 16, 2024 - 6:43am
 
Favorite Quotes - Isabeau - Jul 15, 2024 - 3:43pm
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - Isabeau - Jul 15, 2024 - 12:25pm
 
The Truth About (Modern) Popular Music - Proclivities - Jul 15, 2024 - 8:18am
 
Please don't ban me, but: Taylor Swift... - sunybuny - Jul 15, 2024 - 4:55am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Jul 14, 2024 - 12:52pm
 
Media Bias - Beaker - Jul 14, 2024 - 9:46am
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Jul 14, 2024 - 7:51am
 
AH! There's an elephant in the room! - Red_Dragon - Jul 13, 2024 - 3:42pm
 
Outstanding Covers - DaveInSaoMiguel - Jul 13, 2024 - 12:49pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jul 13, 2024 - 10:34am
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2024 - 10:23am
 
RP on Mac Just Stopped Working - tourtelot - Jul 12, 2024 - 9:35pm
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - Manbird - Jul 12, 2024 - 2:51pm
 
Tech & Science - Manbird - Jul 12, 2024 - 2:46pm
 
Classic TV Curiosities - Proclivities - Jul 12, 2024 - 12:50pm
 
Ukraine - R_P - Jul 12, 2024 - 10:48am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Jul 12, 2024 - 7:05am
 
Regarding Birds - Jiggz - Jul 12, 2024 - 1:41am
 
Strange signs, marquees, billboards, etc. - thisbody - Jul 11, 2024 - 10:36pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » RightWingNutZ Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 158, 159, 160 ... 170, 171, 172  Next
Post to this Topic
hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:55am

 romeotuma wrote:


Indeed, sweetie...  you know I love you...

A perplexing yet persistent empirical finding is that individuals assess probabilities in words and in numbers nearly equivalently, and theorists have called for future research to search for factors that cause differences. This study uses an accounting context in which individuals are commonly motivated to reach preferred (rather than accurate) conclusions. Within this context, I predict new differences between verbal and numerical probability assessments, as follows: first, individuals will justify an optimistic verbal assessment (e.g., somewhat possible) by retaining the option of re-defining it, in case of negative outcomes, as though the phrase really means something different, and, for that matter, means more things. This re-definition will maintain some connection to the original meaning of the phrase, but de-emphasized relative to the new meaning. Second, based on this behavior, I also predict individuals' verbal probability assessments to be (1) more biased and yet (2) perceived as more justifiable than their numerical assessments. I find supportive evidence in an experiment designed to test the hypotheses. This study contributes to motivated reasoning and probability assessment theories (1) with new evidence of how individuals can word-smith in multiple attributes of a phrase to justify reaching a preferred conclusion, and (2) with new, reliable differences between verbal and numerical probability assessments. This study has important theoretical and practical implications relevant to organizational contexts in which people assess the likelihoods of uncertainties in words or numbers, and with motivations to reach a preferred conclusion.

 
Karl Rove is the master.

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:53am

 romeotuma wrote:

 it's just lazy, and warrants little attention...

then again, many people also believe in fairies and other supernatural forces, even though their prayers are never answered...  talk about motivated reasoning...


 

Hey dude,

I know fairies exist.

I made lots of money off my teeth as a kid.

{#War}


hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:52am

 jadewahoo wrote:
 kurtster wrote:

But we live in a global community now ...

...Time has come today...


So lets begin by dismantling this whole outmoded construct of sovereign national boundaries and take relevant steps towards the unification of all peoples as citizens of Earth.

 
A great idea but I don't think most of the world is ready for this kind of thinking. Look at the immigration debate.


jadewahoo

jadewahoo Avatar

Location: Puerto Viejo, Costa Rica
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:52am

 ptooey wrote:

Wasn't Washington born in Virginia?  I mean, not technically the USA yet, but still...
 Sometimes one doesn't need an emoticon to point to the tongue planted firmly in the cheek...


jadewahoo

jadewahoo Avatar

Location: Puerto Viejo, Costa Rica
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:50am

 kurtster wrote:

But we live in a global community now ...

...Time has come today...


So lets begin by dismantling this whole outmoded construct of sovereign national boundaries and take relevant steps towards the unification of all peoples as citizens of Earth.


hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:49am

 romeotuma wrote:

It's all moot, because Obama was born in Hawaii, which is a bonafide state in the USA...  people who claim otherwise are just using motivated reasoning as a rationalization to completely dismiss the president in one fell swoop... that way, they don't have to actually examine the meat and potatoes of the real issues...  it's just lazy, and warrants little attention...

then again, many people also believe in fairies and other supernatural forces, even though their prayers are never answered...  talk about motivated reasoning...


 
Good article, eh?

ptooey

ptooey Avatar

Location: right behind you. no, over there.
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:47am

 jadewahoo wrote:
You do realize, don't you (and this can be verified with just a bit of searching the internet), that George Washington was not born in the United States of America? Yet he turned out to be a pretty good president, by all accounts.

 
Wasn't Washington born in Virginia?  I mean, not technically the USA yet, but still...

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:47am

 hippiechick wrote:

The reason for this is obvious, to prevent split loyalties to another country.
 
But we live in a global community now ...

...Time has come today...

kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:45am

 jadewahoo wrote:
 kurtster wrote:


We know cows are a documented measurable source of methane. 

The question of where Obama took his first breath is irrelevant  with open, undefended borders.  When you don't defend your sovereignty, what else matters ?

At this point in time we might as well ammend the Constitution to allow Arnold to run for President.  I would vote for him, in a heart beat.

You do realize, don't you (and this can be verified with just a bit of searching the internet), that George Washington was not born in the United States of America? Yet he turned out to be a pretty good president, by all accounts.

 
...
...water runs up the spout
... let it all hang out !

{#Mrgreen}

hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:43am

 jadewahoo wrote:
 kurtster wrote:


We know cows are a documented measurable source of methane. 

The question of where Obama took his first breath is irrelevant  with open, undefended borders.  When you don't defend your sovereignty, what else matters ?

At this point in time we might as well ammend the Constitution to allow Arnold to run for President.  I would vote for him, in a heart beat.

You do realize, don't you (and this can be verified with just a bit of searching the internet), that George Washington was not born in the United States of America? Yet he turned out to be a pretty good president, by all accounts.

 
The reason for this is obvious, to prevent split loyalties to another country.

jadewahoo

jadewahoo Avatar

Location: Puerto Viejo, Costa Rica
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:40am

 kurtster wrote:


We know cows are a documented measurable source of methane. 

The question of where Obama took his first breath is irrelevant  with open, undefended borders.  When you don't defend your sovereignty, what else matters ?

At this point in time we might as well ammend the Constitution to allow Arnold to run for President.  I would vote for him, in a heart beat.

You do realize, don't you (and this can be verified with just a bit of searching the internet), that George Washington was not born in the United States of America? Yet he turned out to be a pretty good president, by all accounts.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:32am

 romeotuma wrote:

Perhaps elephant farts are the true cause of climate change...  do you think Obama was born in the USA?  Or are you motivated to reason otherwise?

 

We know cows are a documented measurable source of methane. 

The question of where Obama took his first breath is irrelevant  with open, undefended borders.  When you don't defend your sovereignty, what else matters ?

At this point in time we might as well ammend the Constitution to allow Arnold to run for President.  I would vote for him, in a heart beat.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 9:22am

 hippiechick wrote:
An interesting take on peoples beliefs:

 


Lies of Mass Destruction

...

Obama's opponents also need to find evidence that their reading of him back in November was correct. They therefore seize on "confirmation" that he wants to, for instance, redistribute the wealth, as in his “spread the wealth around” remark to Joe the Plumber—finding such confirmation in the claims that health-care reform will do just that, redistributing health care from those who have it now to the 46 million currently uninsured. Similarly, they seize on anything that confirms the “socialist” label that got pinned on Obama during the campaign, or the pro-abortion label—anything to comfort themselves that they made the right choice last November.

There are legitimate, fact-based reasons to oppose health-care reform. But some of the loudest opposition is the result of confirmatory bias, cognitive dissonance, and other examples of mental processes that have gone off the rails.

...

 

So ...  what she's saying is forgive the poor souls for they know not what they want ?  You just can't believe what you hear with your own ears ?  I take it as she believes that the majority of the citizens opposing Obama are just plain whacked as opposed to a smaller minority who just don't get it. 

With the present make up of registered voters (as of 2007) being :
37% I
33% D
27% R

The numbers just don't add up to only one point of view explaining the growing distrust of Obama and his agenda.  With the right only composing 27% of the vote, the current support polls are evenly split and with disapproval numbers at roughly 50%, the make up of the 23% must come from elsewhere, and that is assuming 100% of the right disapproves of Obama.

So lets not give a blanket dismissal to the majority of those that are opposed to the present plans on the table are misinformed or misguided.  Perhaps they have verified their sources and don't like what they see.  Perhaps we have a divide between the sheep and the informed.


hippiechick

hippiechick Avatar

Location: topsy turvy land
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 8:07am

An interesting take on peoples beliefs:

 


Lies of Mass Destruction

The same skewed thinking that supports a Saddam-9/11 link explains the power of health-care myths.

Aug 25, 2009

Not being a complete idiot (contrary to the assertion of many readers I've been hearing from), I was not exactly surprised at the e-mails I got in response to my story analyzing why the myths about health-care reform—even the totally loony ones, like death panels—have gained such traction. One retired military officer called me "nothing more than an 'Obama Zombie' that has lost touch with reality," while a housewife sweetly suggested that I sign up for "socialistic medicine" and die, the sooner the better. (My kids get upset when people wish me dead, but hey, they'll survive.) But now I think I understand people who believe the health-care lies—and the Obama-was-born-in-Kenya lie—even better than when I wrote that piece.

Some people form and cling to false beliefs about health-care reform (or Obama's citizenship) despite overwhelming evidence thanks to a mental phenomenon called motivated reasoning, says sociologist Steven Hoffman, visiting assistant professor at the University at Buffalo. "Rather than search rationally for information that either confirms or disconfirms a particular belief," he says, "people actually seek out information that confirms what they already believe." And God knows, in the Internet age there is no dearth of sources to confirm even the most ludicrous claims (my favorite being that the moon landings were faked). "For the most part," says Hoffman, "people completely ignore contrary information" and are able to "develop elaborate rationalizations based on faulty information."

His conclusions arise from a study he and six colleagues conducted. They were looking at the well-known phenomenon of Americans believing that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Some people, mostly liberals, have blamed that on false information and innuendo spread by the Bush administration and its GOP allies (by former members of the Bush White House, too, as recently as this past March). (As Dick Cheney said in June, suspicion of a link "turned out not to be true.") But the researchers think another force is at work. In a paper to be published in the September issue of the journal Sociological Inquiry(you have to subscribe to the journal to read the full paper, but the authors kindly posted it on their Web site here), they argue that some Americans believe the Saddam-9/11 link because it "made sense of the administration's decision to go to war against Iraq . . . he fact of the war led to a search for a justification for it, which led them to infer the existence of ties between Iraq and 9/11," they write.

For their study, the scientists whittled down surveys filled out by 246 voters, of whom 73 percent believed in a Saddam-9/11 link, to 49 believers who were willing to be interviewed at length in October 2004. Even after the 49 were shown newspaper articles reporting that the 9/11 Commission had not found any evidence linking Saddam and 9/11, and quoting President Bush himself denying it, 48 stuck to their guns: yup, Saddam Hussein, directly or indirectly, brought down the Twin Towers.

When the scientists asked the participants why they believed in the link, they offered many justifications. Five argued that Saddam supported terrorism generally, or that evidence of a link to 9/11 might yet emerge. These counterarguments are not entirely illogical. But almost everyone else offered some version of "I don't know; I don't know anything"—that is, outright confusion over the conflict between what they believed and what the facts showed—or switched subjects to the invasion of Iraq. As one put it, when asked about his Saddam-9/11 belief, "There is no doubt in my mind that if we did not deal with Saddam Hussein when we did, it was just a matter of time when we would have to deal with him." In other words, holding fast to the Saddam-9/11 belief helped people make sense of the decision to go to war against Iraq.

"We refer to this as 'inferred justification,'" says Hoffman. Inferred justification is a sort of backward chain of reasoning. You start with something you believe strongly (the invasion of Iraq was the right move) and work backward to find support for it (Saddam was behind 9/11). "For these voters," says Hoffman, "the sheer fact that we were engaged in war led to a post-hoc search for a justification for that war."

For an explanation of this behavior, look no further than the psychological theory of cognitive dissonance. This theory holds that when people are presented with information that contradicts preexisting beliefs, they try to relieve the cognitive tension one way or another. They process and respond to information defensively, for instance: their belief challenged by fact, they ignore the latter. They also accept and seek out confirming information but ignore, discredit the source of, or argue against contrary information, studies have shown.

Which brings us back to health-care reform—in particular, the apoplexy at town-hall meetings and the effectiveness of the lies being spread about health-care reform proposals. First of all, let's remember that 59,934,814 voters cast their ballot for John McCain, so we can assume that tens of millions of Americans believe the wrong guy is in the White House. To justify that belief, they need to find evidence that he's leading the country astray. What better evidence of that than to seize on the misinformation about Obama's health-care reform ideas and believe that he wants to insure illegal aliens, for example, and give the Feds electronic access to doctors' bank accounts?

Obama's opponents also need to find evidence that their reading of him back in November was correct. They therefore seize on "confirmation" that he wants to, for instance, redistribute the wealth, as in his “spread the wealth around” remark to Joe the Plumber—finding such confirmation in the claims that health-care reform will do just that, redistributing health care from those who have it now to the 46 million currently uninsured. Similarly, they seize on anything that confirms the “socialist” label that got pinned on Obama during the campaign, or the pro-abortion label—anything to comfort themselves that they made the right choice last November.

There are legitimate, fact-based reasons to oppose health-care reform. But some of the loudest opposition is the result of confirmatory bias, cognitive dissonance, and other examples of mental processes that have gone off the rails.

< Omniture > < type="text/javascript">
<!—

var nw_page_name = "nw - article - 213625 - Lies of Mass Destruction";
var nw_section = "health";
var nw_subsection = "health - voices - sharon begley";
var nw_content_type = "article";
var nw_source = "newsweek.com";
var nw_search_result_count = "0";
var nw_content_id = "213625";
var nw_headline = "Lies of Mass Destruction";
var nw_author = "sharon begley";
var nw_page_num = "print format";
var nw_application = "gutenberg";
var nw_hierarchy = "health|voices - sharon begley|articles";
var nw_pub_date = "Tuesday August 25, 2009";
—>
<> Find this article at
http://www.newsweek.com/id/213625

© 2009


ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 7:31am

 bokey wrote:

Yeah, he was so old he couldn't even figure out how to use the caps lock.
 


bokey

bokey Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 7:23am

 WideRange wrote:
yOU ARE ALL NUTZ - kENNEDY WAS RELIC OF TIMES PAST.

 
Yeah, he was so old he couldn't even figure out how to use the caps lock.

WideRange

WideRange Avatar



Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 7:15am

yOU ARE ALL NUTZ - kENNEDY WAS RELIC OF TIMES PAST.
bokey

bokey Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 7:02am

 kurtster wrote:

The Viet Nam War was is why 18 year olds got the vote.   They were old enough to be drafted,  fight and die, therefore they got the right to vote and drink.   It was a national tide that swept the nation.   I remember.   We were gonna get the right to vote, even if we had to burn down the country to get it.   The war brought about change, not Kennedy.  

The drinking age has since rissen to 21 again, maybe we should do the same with the voting age.   The war is over and there is no draft.   {#Whistle}

.
Edit:  I don't need a history book to tell me that, I lived it.   Is that how the new revisionist history books explain how 18 year olds got the right to vote, because of only Kennedy ?

 
As it should be . I turned 18 the last semester of high school, and I  REALLY did not need to have the legal right to buy beer at that time, especially since back then you couldn't get a DWI unless you were involved in an accident or were a smartass with the cop.

 Of course, I would have gotten my beer anyway, it just would have been harder.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 6:34am

 pjcle wrote:
 

Jimmy Carter won the Nobel Peace Price, and is our most respected leader internationally, who also started building homes for people in America.  He's a marvelous human being.  T Kennedy is why people between the ages of 18 and 21 can now vote, he's why women have sports in schools (Title 9) and a million other things.  He's contributed greatly to making our country better and better.  I could list numerous accomplishments we would most likely agree are all great. 

I have never heard of Strom Thurman doing anything good for anyone but himself.  Same with Tom Delay.  If they have done anything good for their country, please inform me.
 
The Viet Nam War was is why 18 year olds got the vote.  They were old enough to be drafted, fight and die, therefore they got the right to vote and drink.  It was a national tide that swept the nation.  I remember.  We were gonna get the right to vote, even if we had to burn down the country to get it.  The war brought about change, not Kennedy. 

The drinking age has since rissen to 21 again, maybe we should do the same with the voting age.  The war is over and there is no draft.  {#Whistle}

.
Edit:  I don't need a history book to tell me that, I lived it.  Is that how the new revisionist history books explain how 18 year olds got the right to vote, because of only Kennedy ?
samiyam

samiyam Avatar

Location: Moving North


Posted: Aug 26, 2009 - 5:14am

 pjcle wrote:


Do they come with green eggs and ham?

 
Yes they do... How did you know?

Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 158, 159, 160 ... 170, 171, 172  Next