Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
Tuuk wrote:
No, don't be a baffoon, 9-11 was not GWB's fault, and he did do the right thing. Bush was captain of the ship of state at the time of 9-11. He is responsible. As for "doing the right thing," Bush is clueless. Look at the situation in Canada, Ontario where all the liberals and NDP who were bought out by the teachers and the strikes that damaged many students year. A Conservative leader arose and cleaned up years of messes that the liberals created. Oh, right. -- * * * email sent to will *never* get to me. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
Did you go to a Jesuit College? The Jesuits excel at teaching critical
thinking and for having strong liberal arts program. "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net... Great for Berkeley. However, this report was written by 4 left-wing liberals from Berkeley's Graduate School of Education "Psychology" Program...which ranks 45th in the nation by the way. As opposed to right-wing liberals..... That must be one of the DSM-IV mental disorders that's yet to be named. :-) I don't believe the DSM is required reading at dental trade school. Really? Do you *believe* studies that show almost 3/4 of patients presenting with atypical facial pain (non-odontogenic in nature), have a specific psychiatric disorder by DSM-IV criteria? Do you *believe* in the etiological relevance of specific phobias (ie--dental phobia) to panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA)? Do you *believe* you have no idea what you're talking about? PS-I liked your "trade school" dig, however. :-) You've never read the DSM-IV or any of its predecessors. As for my "dig" at trade school, I suppose the Jesuits have been a major influence in my life. I went to college to help expand my mind and to get a liberal arts education, not to learn a trade. Different strokes, eh? -- * * * email sent to will *never* get to me. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net... Great for Berkeley. However, this report was written by 4 left-wing liberals from Berkeley's Graduate School of Education "Psychology" Program...which ranks 45th in the nation by the way. As opposed to right-wing liberals..... That must be one of the DSM-IV mental disorders that's yet to be named. :-) I don't believe the DSM is required reading at dental trade school. Really? Do you *believe* studies that show almost 3/4 of patients presenting with atypical facial pain (non-odontogenic in nature), have a specific psychiatric disorder by DSM-IV criteria? Do you *believe* in the etiological relevance of specific phobias (ie--dental phobia) to panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA)? Do you *believe* you have no idea what you're talking about? PS-I liked your "trade school" dig, however. :-) You've never read the DSM-IV or any of its predecessors. Dentists are many times the front-line agents in the recognition of anxiety, eating, personality, and especially substance-related disorders. *Of course* we've been instructed in the recognition of disorders defined by the DSM-IV criteria. As an aside...my favorite disorder is NPD...because it's sooooo easy and sooooo much fun to push the buttons of a Narcissist. As for my "dig" at trade school, I suppose the Jesuits have been a major influence in my life. I went to college to help expand my mind and to get a liberal arts education, not to learn a trade. Different strokes, eh? I went to college to prepare me with the skills that would allow me to obtain a meaningful, well-paying job immediately upon graduation. I use my *own time* to expand my mind and get a liberal arts education...'cause you don't need to spend money on a formal education to achieve either of those. As for your "different strokes" comment...you've obviously been spending too much time listening to Joycelyn Elders. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
"Bill Cole" wrote in message news:m5_Xa.50789$Oz4.14138@rwcrnsc54... Did you go to a Jesuit College? The Jesuits excel at teaching critical thinking They obviously failed with Harry. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
"JohnH" wrote in message
... On Mon, 4 Aug 2003 15:19:28 -0700, "jps" wrote: "NOYB" wrote in message rthlink.net... Stolen from the internet: Feeble retort to many man years of honest work. Figures your hero's "cure" for liberals is violence. These days it seems conservatives are finding violence to be the tool they resort to most frequently. Hurts their brains to do any of that deep thinking or have any manner of patience, it's simpler to just kick some ass and figure out what happened later. Meanwhile, 250 of our kids and countless innocents have paid for it with their lives. F'ing idiots. No more feeble than the Berkely Bull**** so many of you are so enamored with. Nice deducing there John. Compare PhDs putting man years of work into original research, compilation, theory and conclusion and compare that to a ****ing moron who thinks beating liberals up is the answer. That says more about your utter blindness than perhaps anything I've heard from you. What happened to the scientific method (perhaps you should try refuting the research and conclusions) and how could you possibly endorse people who're promoting violence? More simple answers for simple people. You're just the kind of fool those PhDs are writing about. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
Doug Kanter wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message om... " Tuuk" wrote in message ... Hey,, Somebody needs to fiscally responsibly run the country or other countries. I mean your socialist friends would spend their way into poverty and end up with nothing. If you dont like the way the country is running, just sit back in your arm chair, collect your welfare and go play bingo. Leave the big things to those who know how to do them better. If not for you, for the sake of the entire nation's survival. Really? As I recall, eight years under Clinton......fantastic economy. Reagan? Economy sucked. Bush I? Economy sucked. Bush II? Economy was driven into the ground in a hell of a hurry. Fiscal responsibility, indeed! Actually, if you look at a graph of the stock market and compare it with parties in office, it's always done significantly better during Democratic administrations. The Repubs in my PaineWebber office used to hate this chart. Their stock response to it was "Yeah...well....oh yeah?" Well, there's a very good explaination for this trend. Usually, it takes time for the economy to "turn around". Fiscally responsible policies, put in place by republicans, usually do not fully "kick in" until after their term is over. Since people are usually not patient enough, they can be swayed to vote with their wallets, and a democrat can get in when times get tough. But as things turn around, it's usually the policies of the previous administration, which are normally responsible. The other theory, is that the economy is completely independant from the effects of politics. Little or nothing a political figurehead can do, will affect the economy to any large degree. But perception often being stronger than reality for some people, they often think that politics make a bigger difference, and the political trends are merely reactionary. Dave |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
"NOYB" wrote in message rthlink.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message om... "NOYB" wrote in message k.net... "basskisser" wrote in message om... It had the whiff of parody. Psychologists dissecting the conservative brain? A press release from UC Berkeley snip UC Berkeley, eh? Not worth reading then. Where did you graduate from? Anyplace with nearly the distinction of UC Berkeley? Or DID you graduate? BSME 1993 Purdue University (I took the EIT...does that make me an "engineer"?) Uh, no, it makes you an EIT. DDS 1999 Indiana University School of Dentistry. *You* decide if Purdue's Mechanical Engineering program qualifies as "near the distinction" of Berkeley. Purdue is a fine school. I have a fellow engineer who is a Purdue grad. He also took grad classes at Berkeley. Why? better classes for his particular interests. Now, please show how Purdue is a better school than Berkeley. And Indiana U. is not even in the running! |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Harry Krause" wrote in message ... NOYB wrote: "Doug Kanter" wrote in message ... "NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net... Great for Berkeley. However, this report was written by 4 left-wing liberals from Berkeley's Graduate School of Education "Psychology" Program...which ranks 45th in the nation by the way. As opposed to right-wing liberals..... That must be one of the DSM-IV mental disorders that's yet to be named. :-) I don't believe the DSM is required reading at dental trade school. Really? Do you *believe* studies that show almost 3/4 of patients presenting with atypical facial pain (non-odontogenic in nature), have a specific psychiatric disorder by DSM-IV criteria? Do you *believe* in the etiological relevance of specific phobias (ie--dental phobia) to panic disorder with agoraphobia (PDA)? Do you *believe* you have no idea what you're talking about? PS-I liked your "trade school" dig, however. :-) You've never read the DSM-IV or any of its predecessors. Dentists are many times the front-line agents in the recognition of anxiety, eating, personality, and especially substance-related disorders. *Of course* we've been instructed in the recognition of disorders defined by the DSM-IV criteria. As an aside...my favorite disorder is NPD...because it's sooooo easy and sooooo much fun to push the buttons of a Narcissist. Mine too. But we wouldn't know any NPD candidates on this newsgroup would we? ;-) I also enjoy pushing the buttons of those with APD. The internet is full of many "socially challenged" people. Many of whom use this as their only social outlet. Typically their demeanor and attitude, is as easy as a lighthouse to spot. Dave |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
"NOYB" wrote in message rthlink.net...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message ... Jamce1 wrote: harry, i think what is being lost here is that another attack would be good for bush, ie simple minded people will always revert back to basic instincts when attacked. he makes people feel good and safe with his soundbites, wargames, and religeous good vs evil bull****. 911 was the best thing that ever happened to this administration, and he would surely be one term if it wasnt for that. I'm sure there are Bush-ites who are praying to Allah for another attack so that their "fearful leader" can try, once again, to look "presidential," instead of lookling like an idiot. That's where Dems and Republicans differ. We'd never hope for tragedy and suffering just to further our agenda. You guys, however, were caught red-handed in California trying to prolong the budget crisis. You're a bunch of sick *******s that aren't worth a piece of dried up dog poop on the bottom of some bum's sole. Oh, really? Bu****es are hoping to get re-elected JUST on tragedy. What else do they have? Economy? I guess they could hope to get re-elected on the premise that they put us back into the dark ages with the Patriot Act. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
OT The Conservative Brain
thunder wrote:
On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 13:14:50 +0000, Dave Hall wrote: The founding fathers on our constitiution recognized this tendancy, and that's why they created our system of checks and balances. That's also why we have things like "term limits". I noticed that Bill Clinton, of all people, has been making noise about removing or modifying that limit, as of late. I don't see much good to come from that. I've never understood the reasoning behind term limits. If we are doing our job as an electorate, an ineffective legislature would be gone. In a democracy, we do get the leadership we deserve. It seems to me, all term limits do is limit our choices, in the rare case we actually get an effective and honorable leader. You bring up a good point. The reason for term limits is so that no one can "monopolize" the government for longer than their term limit. This is supposedly done so that someone cannot be "corrupted" by years of accumulated political "connections", and the overwhelming tendancy toward favoratism, that these "connections" often lead to. Opponents bring up the cases where we get a (increasingly rare) politician, who becomes polpular, and his policies are effective and positive for our society. The "he's doing a great job, why should he be forced to step down" scenario. If we, the citizens, are doing our civic duty, and making responsible choices, and the system is relatively free of corruption and "dirty" tricks, in theory we would be able to remove those who are not doing a good job. The problem is that most of the people who even bother to vote, are often not the most informed people, and they decide their vote based on superficial "qualities", and the sound byte issues that are spoon fed to them. I guess what term limits really mean, is that we don't trust our own system to take care of itself, and that we need an additional "safety valve". Dave |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|