Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-25-2007, 02:55 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,158,628 times
Reputation: 3696

Advertisements

I read this and decided to undertake a personal project for my own sole reasons. In addition, I would hope that folks could add thoughtful commentary and maybe a few links from why Liberals behave or believe as they do from a psychological perspective. Someone once said, "Trying to get Liberals to agree on anything is like trying to herd angry cats". I take this to be from their more individualistic perspective and less authoritarian than contemporary conservatives.

Anyway, here is the first bit on contemporary conservatives desires to identify with masculine and authoritative type figures depicting strength and emasculating those that disagree with their positions.

Moderator cut: copyright: they have a very firm policy against reproduction
The full transcript can be found here

Glenn Greenwald - Political Blogs and Opinions - Salon

Last edited by jco; 09-26-2007 at 07:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-25-2007, 02:59 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
I read this and decided to undertake a personal project for my own sole reasons. In addition, I would hope that folks could add thoughtful commentary and maybe a few links from why Liberals behave or believe as they do from a psychological perspective. Someone once said, "Trying to get Liberals to agree on anything is like trying to herd angry cats". I take this to be from their more individualistic perspective and less authoritarian than contemporary conservatives.

Anyway, here is the first bit on contemporary conservatives desires to identify with masculine and authoritative type figures depicting strength and emasculating those that disagree with their positions.

snip

The full transcript can be found here

Glenn Greenwald - Political Blogs and Opinions - Salon
Someone dislikes Ann Coulter. Now that's news.

Last edited by jco; 09-26-2007 at 07:25 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:01 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,158,628 times
Reputation: 3696
Well so much for my appeal to thoughtful discourse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:15 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Well so much for my appeal to thoughtful discourse.
How thoughtful is another slam piece on a woman who gets kicked to the curb regularly on dozens of blogs?

I find it especially ironic that the author attempts to make hay with Coulter's criticism for others' physicality, when any Google search will quickly bring up numeorus tasteless comments on Coulter's (and Malkin's) physicality and even sexual orientation from the Left.

Coulter doesn't do anything that Janeanne Garofalo, Whoopie Goldberg, or Rosie O"Donnell don't do -- to the applause and admiration of the "Progressives."

Face it. The Left just doesn't brook dissension from its world-view. That kind of diversity is not only shunned -- it is attacked, viciously and continually.

Shrug. Coulter gives them a taste of their own medicine. It's not a pleasant business.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Journey's End
10,203 posts, read 27,069,843 times
Reputation: 3946
Discourse takes thought.

Here's an article that I perused:

Recent Trends in Theoretical Psychology - Google Book Search

I'll give more thought to it, but one of the phrases that caught my attention was "problem solving."

If one sees societal issues as challenges that require problem solving one might be defined as liberal. Thus, it stands to reason that liberals, or even those radically liberal and socialist thinking, will seek to "change" the status quo.

Poverty comes to mind; socialised or universal health care stands out as a beacon of liberalism.

All social injustices are areas for problem solving and social change: liberalism.

I don't go as far as the Trotsky or Marxist theory of continual revolution, but I advocate change, and not for changes' sake, but for purposes of improving the society in which I live and with which I share common space.

I also support self reliance, self-determination and self-respect, like our dear philosopher Emerson, but not at the expense of the other. Inasmuch as we don't live alone on this planet, it seems to me better to make it better together for all of us than just for me alone. If we are concerned with the other, giving a few bucks to a hungry man/woman does not offend me, and giving a family a leg up to their own self-reliance, et al seems like money well spent.

Perhaps more later!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:22 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,170 posts, read 24,262,341 times
Reputation: 15285
Quote:
Originally Posted by ontheroad View Post
Discourse takes thought.

Here's an article that I perused:

Recent Trends in Theoretical Psychology - Google Book Search

I'll give more thought to it, but one of the phrases that caught my attention was "problem solving."

If one sees societal issues as challenges that require problem solving one might be defined as liberal. Thus, it stands to reason that liberals, or even those radically liberal and socialist thinking, will seek to "change" the status quo.

Poverty comes to mind; socialised or universal health care stands out as a beacon of liberalism.

All social injustices are areas for problem solving and social change: liberalism.

I don't go as far as the Trotsky or Marxist theory of continual revolution, but I advocate change, and not for changes' sake, but for purposes of improving the society in which I live and with which I share common space.

I also support self reliance, self-determination and self-respect, like our dear philosopher Emerson, but not at the expense of the other. Inasmuch as we don't live alone on this planet, it seems to me better to make it better together for all of us than just for me alone. If we are concerned with the other, giving a few bucks to a hungry man/woman does not offend me, and giving a family a leg up to their own self-reliance, et al seems like money well spent.

Perhaps more later!
As long as self-reliance is the goal, I'm with you 100%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:25 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,158,628 times
Reputation: 3696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
How thoughtful is another slam piece on a woman who gets kicked to the curb regularly on dozens of blogs?

I find it especially ironic that the author attempts to make hay with Coulter's criticism for others' physicality, when any Google search will quickly bring up numeorus tasteless comments on Coulter's (and Malkin's) physicality and even sexual orientation from the Left.

Coulter doesn't do anything that Janeanne Garofalo, Whoopie Goldberg, or Rosie O"Donnell don't do -- to the applause and admiration of the "Progressives."

Face it. The Left just doesn't brook dissension from its world-view. That kind of diversity is not only shunned -- it is attacked, viciously and continually.

Shrug. Coulter gives them a taste of their own medicine. It's not a pleasant business.
don't like it, then leave, go find another thread to attack. You seem to extremely enjoy watching Youtube videos of people blowing themselves up, shouldn't you be enjoying your lustful endeavors elsewhere as I asked for discourse on the topic, not what you think about the left or right.

It isn't about Coulter or Hannity or any specific personality and had you actually read the piece in its entirety instead of espousing your usual blather, you might have known that there professor.

Geeeeez louise...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 03:31 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,158,628 times
Reputation: 3696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ontheroad View Post
Discourse takes thought.

Here's an article that I perused:

Recent Trends in Theoretical Psychology - Google Book Search

I'll give more thought to it, but one of the phrases that caught my attention was "problem solving."

If one sees societal issues as challenges that require problem solving one might be defined as liberal. Thus, it stands to reason that liberals, or even those radically liberal and socialist thinking, will seek to "change" the status quo.

Poverty comes to mind; socialised or universal health care stands out as a beacon of liberalism.

All social injustices are areas for problem solving and social change: liberalism.

I don't go as far as the Trotsky or Marxist theory of continual revolution, but I advocate change, and not for changes' sake, but for purposes of improving the society in which I live and with which I share common space.

I also support self reliance, self-determination and self-respect, like our dear philosopher Emerson, but not at the expense of the other. Inasmuch as we don't live alone on this planet, it seems to me better to make it better together for all of us than just for me alone. If we are concerned with the other, giving a few bucks to a hungry man/woman does not offend me, and giving a family a leg up to their own self-reliance, et al seems like money well spent.
Well the Daoist philosophy has personally appealed to me for the very reason of balance which I think you may be eluding to. Self reliance and the enlightened humanitarian. I look forward to reading that piece.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 07:23 PM
 
11,135 posts, read 14,158,628 times
Reputation: 3696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ontheroad View Post
Discourse takes thought.

Here's an article that I perused:

Recent Trends in Theoretical Psychology - Google Book Search

I'll give more thought to it, but one of the phrases that caught my attention was "problem solving."
Excellent read, thanks for sharing that. I had to take stock in some of my own personal assertions... I can so dig it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-25-2007, 10:05 PM
 
1,011 posts, read 3,087,992 times
Reputation: 362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
How thoughtful is another slam piece on a woman who gets kicked to the curb regularly on dozens of blogs?

I find it especially ironic that the author attempts to make hay with Coulter's criticism for others' physicality, when any Google search will quickly bring up numeorus tasteless comments on Coulter's (and Malkin's) physicality and even sexual orientation from the Left.

Coulter doesn't do anything that Janeanne Garofalo, Whoopie Goldberg, or Rosie O"Donnell don't do -- to the applause and admiration of the "Progressives."

Face it. The Left just doesn't brook dissension from its world-view. That kind of diversity is not only shunned -- it is attacked, viciously and continually.

Shrug. Coulter gives them a taste of their own medicine. It's not a pleasant business.
This is laughable.

Project: Find me one credible statement that has come out of that woman's mouth. Or that she's written.

She's a caricature. She gets attacked because she is so present and so prevalent. The fact that she is given the press she has is disturbing to me - it should be disturbing to anyone with a genuine longing for intellectual honesty, no matter how your politics align.

Fox News has the monopoly on ridiculous pundits with empty rhetoric and loud voices. I mean, O'Reilly seems like a goddamn genius next to Limbaugh, Malkin, and Coutler.

I'm noticing a particularly disturbing trend in public discourse and politics - people aren't so much aligning themselves with those they share their ideas with, but rather against a certain view. People didn't vote for Kerry, they voted against Bush; I don't think you particularly like Coultergeist, but you stand by her simply because she's not a liberal/leftist/whatever.

Seems silly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:04 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top