Here's What Science Says About the Brains of Democrats and Republicans. Umm… uh… Where to begin? The typical conversation is chock full of stumbles and awkward pauses, often heralded by those pesky fillers, um and uh. It's easy to overlook these not-quite-words as unimportant, but linguists are now starting to believe they have a purpose — and may even be subject to the same kind of language trends as real words. "Younger people and women relatively use 'um' more frequently than men and older people," said Martijn Wieling, a professor at the University of Groningen who has studied the ums and uhs of Dutch speakers and Norwegians, among others.
The gender/age schism also shows up in American and British English and in German. Why um and uh should are used differently is a bit of a linguistic mystery. But research going back years suggests that these filler words are more important than they seem. The purpose of um Conversational language is often a mess. C: I remember it over aunt Matty. C: Yes, right, I'm sure. D: Um, up and down to places – C: [overlapping] m.
Why Liberals Are More Intelligent Than Conservatives. Harriet Hayes: I don’t even know what the sides are in the culture wars. Matt Albie: Well, your side hates my side because you think we think you are stupid, and my side hates your side because we think you are stupid. , Nevada Day, Part I It is difficult to define a whole school of political ideology precisely, but one may reasonably define liberalism (as opposed to conservatism) in the contemporary United States as In the modern political and economic context, this willingness usually translates into paying higher proportions of individual incomes in taxes toward the government and its social welfare programs.
Liberals usually support such social welfare programs and higher taxes to finance them, and conservatives usually oppose them. Defined as such, liberalism is evolutionarily novel. Analyses of large representative samples, from both the United States and the United Kingdom, confirm this prediction. Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology. There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.
The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience. "Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.
Controversy ahead The findings combine three hot-button topics. Brains and bias As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. A study of averages. FTC says "yes" to Facebook activity inclusion in background checks. You now have another reason to check your privacy settings. According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Social Intelligence Corp, has been given the legal thumbs up to archive seven years worth of your Facebook posts. These archives will be used by SIC (oh the applicability of the acronym) as part of their background checking service for job applicants. There are a couple sides to this argument that have been hashed out many times over. A hiring manager could say that they were glad they discovered that Johnny the master of the great resume also drank heavily every night and posted all his parties on Facebook - so they could avoid hiring him. The other side of the argument has been that if someone is functional, professional and sober at work, then why is it fair to factor in what they do outside of work when deciding if you should schedule an interview?
Random Password Generator. Roq and rol? ...look familiar? The pose that Iggy Pop struck for the cover of "The Idiot" is mimicked from the expressionist painter Erich Heckel's work: Roquairol. The album cover photo was taken by Andy Kent, bass player for "You am I". Erich Heckel was a German painter and printmaker, and a founding member of the Die Brücke (translated as "The Bridge") group which existed from 1905 to 1913. Heckel and others members of Die Brücke aimed to make a "bridge" between traditional neo-romantic German painting and modern expressionist painting.
The cover pose of "The Idiot" gives us further insight into the artistic work inside. "The Idiot" as a work of Expressionism Expressionism is an artistic movement or classification characterized by willful distortion of reality for emotional effect. One reality that is distorted for emotional effect on "The Idiot" is ambiance. Ambiance is most noticeable on impulse sounds, like the aforementioned hand clap. "The Idiot" as a Bridge. $6.6 Billion In Missing Iraqi Funds Were Probably Stolen. After the Bush administration had invaded Iraq and destroyed its infrastructure, Bush and his Republican cohorts decided to rebuild the country and pay for that rebuilding in cold, hard cash -- $100 bills packed in shrink-wrap and loaded onto pallets.
The pallets were loaded onto military planes and flown to Iraq -- with each plane holding about $2.4 billion in United States $100 bills. At least twenty plane loads were sent to Iraq. As you may have noticed, very little of Iraq has been rebuilt. And a good chunk of that money -- about 3 planeloads ($6.6 billion at least) has simply vanished into thin air. For several years now the Army and State Department officials had admitted to "shoddy" bookkeeping, but said if given enough time they could figue out where the money went. Well, it is several years later and they still have no idea what happened to that money. Now the Republicans want Americans to believe they are the party of fiscal responsibility.
Link to original post. Rewriting History: Deeply Disturbing Stupidity. A few weeks ago, an event happened that deeply disturbed me as to the present state of America. Sarah Palin was out on her bus tour, that isn't a Presidential campaign, of American historical sites. During an interview while visiting Paul Revere's house in Boston, Sarah as usual made a fool of herself and showed her ignorance of American history. She went on and on talking about Paul Revere ringing bells, firing guns, and warning the British not to take American guns. OK, I am no longer surprised when Sarah displays her ignorance and stupidity. What got to me was the actions of her supporters. Here is a computer history of the attempts. Wait a minute! It appears not. So if historical fact contradicts an utterance by Sarah Palin, that fact must be changed. George Orwell, please stand up and take a bow, your vision in your book, 1984, is coming to pass in America.
Americans are stupid, there is no longer any way to fudge over this fact. And I mean that when I say it. Financial Organization. 5 Atheist YouTube Channels We’d Like to See on TV « Opinion « AtheistConnect. Godless Girl. Liberty and Freedom. Liberty and Freedom All men are created equal, it is only men themselves who place themselves above equality. Hello! Sorry I haven’t posted much for what seems to been an age! Moved houses and still have no internet! I’ve always just come back from the london occupation site at st pauls! Posted on October 16, 2011 with 11 notes By its very essence terrorist work demands such concentrated energy for “the great moment,” such an overestimation of the significance of individual heroism, and finally, such a “hermetic” conspiracy, that – if not logically, then psychologically – it totally excludes agitational and organisational work among the masses.
Igottheyeyo:By Eric Lafforgue, via decapitateanimals. Older Page 1 of 326 Field Notes Theme. The Reason You’re Stuck (and the one best way to avoid the six ways that will keep you stuck) | zen habits. Editor’s note: This is a guest post from best-selling author and top blogger Seth Godin, author of the new book Linchpin: Are You Indispensable?. Why is it so difficult to ship? Ship as in get it out the door. Ship as in make a difference at work. Ship as in contribute your art and vision and expertise and passion to the project you’re working on. Regular readers of this blog (and of Leo’s life-changing book) have seen first hand what happens when you force the distractions out of your life and focus on what needs to be completed instead. What separates the few who ship from the masses who stumble, stall and ultimately surrender?
The resistance. Steven Pressfield first wrote about the resistance a few years ago. The resistance loves committees and it hates a mission. And so the resistance kicks in. The resistance finds excuses, it makes tasks needlessly complex (or oversimplifies so much that you fail). Why do little companies get so much more out the door than big ones? Griper Blade: The Bush Tax Cuts Failed. Period. It's a chart that's been making the rounds for a while now.
The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities graphed out the main drivers of current and projected deficits and came up with the following: TARP, bailouts, the stimulus? Ain't crap. And the economic downturn didn't really make much of a dent. The big driver of current and future deficits are the Bush era tax cuts. Although the hole blown in the deficit by the cuts dwarfs them, it pays to point out that we fought two wars -- which Bush made sure were off-budget -- while giving people who could afford to help pay for those wars a free ride. This isn't pie-in-the-sky liberal loopiness here. Actually, "the Rich" Don't "Create Jobs," We Do. You hear it again and again, variation after variation on a core message: if you tax rich people it kills jobs. You hear about "job-killing tax hikes," or that "taxing the rich hurts jobs," "taxes kill jobs," "taxes take money out of the economy, "if you tax the rich they won't be able to provide jobs.
" ... on and on it goes. So do we really depend on "the rich" to "create" jobs? Or do jobs get created when they fill a need? Here is a recent typical example, Obama Touts Job-Killing Tax Plan, written by a "senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth," Some people, in their pursuit of profit, benefit their fellow humans by creating new or better goods and services, and then by employing others. Producers and Parasites The idea that there are producers and parasites as expressed in the example above has become a core philosophy of conservatives.
So is it true? Demand Creates Jobs Taxes make absolutely no difference in the hiring equation. It’s Time to Bury the “TAXES BAD!!!” Lie Forever | Plutocrap. Lately, some of my left brethren have been shopping the President’s assertion that taxes right now are lower than they were under Saint Ronnie. While this assertion is true, it’s nothing to be proud of. We still don’t seem to get the lessons the last 100 years have offered us about slashing tax rates for the super rich. And the lessons remain the same, old economy or new one. (1.) Essential Government services are gutted. (2. . ) (3.) Since the President included a bunch of stupid tax cuts in a supposed “stimulus” package, it’s less than no wonder that what is about to happen, will happen. There is a way out of this, but it requires, at long last, a President with a spine, who wants what is best for the country, rather than for a few at the top.
On June 1, stock markets in New York and around the world declined in levels not seen since summer 2010. Now, people can parrot the fat dope addict and scream “CLASS WAR!!!” Well, they are right about success being punished. Teh (bigoted) stupid: Drug-testing welfare recipients. This is the latest socio-political meme going around Facebook, that welfare recipients should be drug tested as part of getting benefits. And, of course, it's not new. Of course, it's totally wrong in its presuppositions and presumptions. It's the financial class-based equivalent of racism, since repeated sociological studies show that drug use, by percentage, is almost equal across all socioeconomic as well as racial boundaries. In light of that, as far as how many people benefit from federal, or state, help ... Should we drug test would be financial planners as part of their System 7 licenses? Student loan recipients? You get the idea. But, in case you don't, rhetorically speaking, why stop there?
Driving on streets built with taxpayer money? As I said above, this is nothing new. But, it's not just the gullible. Why This New Facebook Meme of Drug-Testing Welfare Recipients is 100% Wrong. As I'm sure you have as well, I've recently noticed this new Facebook "chain-meme" surrounding the concept of drug testing for welfare recipients. The status update in question: Florida is the first state that will require drug testing when applying for welfare (effective July 1st)!
Some people are crying this is unconstitutional. How is this unconstitutional yet it's okay that every working person had to pass a drug test in order to support those on welfare? First of all, there are so many things wrong with this simple paragraph that I don't even know where to begin, but I'll try. As for the status update itself: 1. 2. 3. First, what is the definition of welfare under this plan or others that are similar to it? Also, when you are on unemployment, you must be constantly looking for work and providing names of people/businesses contacted, resumes sent to, basically a work search history.
So let's think about this whole drug testing thing. Really don't like your taxes being "wasted? " 1. THE FLINT SKINNY. Alinvain. John e hacker. Ivanafter5. Say it with me: dumb ideas are dumb. There is a prevalent and dangerous meme rife in society today, and though some people may find the following offensive, judgemental or unfashionable, I believe it needs to be said. Your forbearance is therefore appreciated while I do so. ;-) First, some axioms. These should be unarguable: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.Not everyone's opinions is as valid, useful or has as much merit as everyone else's in every single situation.Nobody is entitled to their own facts.You have freedom of speech, thought and association. You do not have freedom from criticism, freedom from offence or freedom from correction.
The problem happened where the first axiom (a healthy recognition that other people have different opinions) turned into the second and subsequent beliefs; that everyone's opinion is equally valid, and that contradicting someone in error is impolite, arrogant or somehow infringing on their freedoms. It's ok to judge and disregard things which demonstrably have no merit. 1938 Dating Guide For Single Women. Kevin Grandia | Rush Limbaugh Falls for Global Warming Hoax.
Limbaugh falls for Obama thesis hoax - but is in no Rush to apologize. One day of Bush tax cuts to millionaires would pay for food assistance GOP is slashing. Christian Montone: March 2010. Immutabilis Innominata.