Obama, Tea Parties and the Battle for Our Brains

[midcan5]

Anyone watch John Dean last weekend on Cspan's indepth? Interesting show as it gets to the nitty gritty of politics and the Nixon presidency. I liked Nixon, he was capable, but power can screw up the best of them. See video here if you want to hear politics from an insider. The discussion on Liddy is too much. http://www.booktv.org/Program/11419/In+Depth+John+Dean.aspx

===========================

by George Lakoff

"...What makes this of general, not personal, interest is that the scientific results are especially important for understanding what has been going wrong for the Obama administration and for liberals generally, and what has been going right for conservatives. I'm going to start out with some science, and get on to the politics after brief discussions of three important New York Times' articles and what they mean scientifically."

"...This is a grand liberal mistake. The highest value in the conservative moral system is the perpetuation and strengthening of the conservative moral system itself! This is not liberal materialism. Liberals decry it as "ideology," and it is. But it is real; it has the structure of moral system, and it is physically part of the brains of both Washington conservatives and conservative populists. The conservative surge is not merely electoral. It is an idea surge. It is an attempt to spread conservatism via the spread of conservative populism. That is what the Tea Party movement is doing."


http://www.truthout.org/obama-tea-parties-and-battle-our-brains57089


"Altemeyer believes about 25 percent of the adult population in the United States is solidly authoritarian (with that group mostly composed of followers, and a small percentage of potential leaders). It is in these ranks of some 70 million that we find the core of the McCain/Palin supporters. They are people who are, in Altemeyer's words, are "so self-righteous, so ill-informed, and so dogmatic that nothing you can say or do will change their minds."" http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20081031.html


http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_origins_of_tea_party_radicalism_20100210/

http://www.powells.com/biblio/1402208413?&PID=31879

 

[Kamala Trump]

Liberals are way more authoritarian that conservatives. Liberals consider individualism a disease, and glorify the state.

 

[NOVA]

Obama, Tea Parties and the Battle for Our Brains ????

Don't fret Midcan...nor you Cypress, nor you Mott, etc....

Nobody on the right wants your pitiful brains...

 

[Good Luck]

Obama, Tea Parties and the Battle for Our Brains ????

Don't fret Midcan...nor you Cypress, nor you Mott, etc....

Nobody on the right wants your pitiful brains...

Wanting a liberal brain is like wanting a broken cell phone covered in sewer slime.

 

[Good Luck]

"They are people who are, in Altemeyer's words, are "so self-righteous, so ill-informed, and so dogmatic that nothing you can say or do will change their minds."
Well that is an accurate description, but aimed at the wrong people. Who on this planet is more self-righteous, ill-informed, and blindly dogmatic than the modern far-left liberal? Who is continually demanding more and more government control "for our own good", and defending the need for those controls on a bunch of self-righteous principles aimed at demonizing wealth, minimizing self-reliance, and anything else they disagree with? Who actually defends abortion on the principle that opponents of abortion won't vote for a bunch of wasteful government bureaucracies purportedly to care for "unwanted" children? Who is so blindly welded to their doctrine they can actually think defending the act of killing unborn children due to a predicted low standard of living for the victim is a genuine argument?

Who else comes out with these pseudo-intellectual treatises like the ones referenced above, whose only purpose is to demonize the opposition - because that is, in the end, the ONLY way they can defend their blind dogma?

 

[christiefan915]

Liberals are way more authoritarian that conservatives. Liberals consider individualism a disease, and glorify the state.

Drink up, sucka.

 

[cawacko]

Drink up, sucka.

Look at someone like Ayn Rand and her 100% belief in individualism and man as hero. Who tends to celebrate her the most?

 

[apple0154]

Anyone watch John Dean last weekend on Cspan's indepth? Interesting show as it gets to the nitty gritty of politics and the Nixon presidency. I liked Nixon, he was capable, but power can screw up the best of them. See video here if you want to hear politics from an insider. The discussion on Liddy is too much. http://www.booktv.org/Program/11419/In+Depth+John+Dean.aspx

===========================

by George Lakoff

"...What makes this of general, not personal, interest is that the scientific results are especially important for understanding what has been going wrong for the Obama administration and for liberals generally, and what has been going right for conservatives. I'm going to start out with some science, and get on to the politics after brief discussions of three important New York Times' articles and what they mean scientifically."

"...This is a grand liberal mistake. The highest value in the conservative moral system is the perpetuation and strengthening of the conservative moral system itself! This is not liberal materialism. Liberals decry it as "ideology," and it is. But it is real; it has the structure of moral system, and it is physically part of the brains of both Washington conservatives and conservative populists. The conservative surge is not merely electoral. It is an idea surge. It is an attempt to spread conservatism via the spread of conservative populism. That is what the Tea Party movement is doing."


http://www.truthout.org/obama-tea-parties-and-battle-our-brains57089


"Altemeyer believes about 25 percent of the adult population in the United States is solidly authoritarian (with that group mostly composed of followers, and a small percentage of potential leaders). It is in these ranks of some 70 million that we find the core of the McCain/Palin supporters. They are people who are, in Altemeyer's words, are "so self-righteous, so ill-informed, and so dogmatic that nothing you can say or do will change their minds."" http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20081031.html


http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_origins_of_tea_party_radicalism_20100210/

http://www.powells.com/biblio/1402208413?&PID=31879

McCain, especially, fits perfectly as an authoritarian leader. Such leaders possess most, if not all, of these traits:

* dominating
* opposes equality
* desirous of personal power
* amoral
* intimidating and bullying
* faintly hedonistic
* vengeful
* pitiless
* exploitive
* manipulative
* dishonest
* cheats to win
* highly prejudiced (racist, sexist, homophobic
* mean-spirited
* militant
* nationalistic
* tells others what they want to hear
* takes advantage of "suckers"
* specializes in creating false images to sell self
* may or may not be religious
* usually politically and economically conservative/Republican

Clearly, Sarah Palin also has some qualities typical of authoritarian leaders, not to mention almost all of the traits found among authoritarian followers. Specifically, such followers can be described as follows:

* submissive to authority
* aggressive on behalf of authority
* highly conventional in their behavior
* highly religious
* possessing moderate to little education
* trusting of untrustworthy authorities
* prejudiced (particularly against homosexuals and followers of religions other than their own)
* mean-spirited
* narrow-minded
* intolerant
* bullying
* zealous
* dogmatic
* uncritical toward chosen authority
* hypocritical
* inconsistent and contradictory
* prone to panic easily
* highly self-righteous
* moralistic
* strict disciplinarians
* severely punitive
* demanding loyalty and returning it
* possessing little self-awareness
* usually politically and economically conservative/Republican
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20081031.html

WOW!!! There's a guy who's done his homework!

Great articles, Midcan. Excellent post!

 

[christiefan915]

Look at someone like Ayn Rand and her 100% belief in individualism and man as hero. Who tends to celebrate her the most?

Ayn Rand serves Kool-Aid with the best of them!

I found her books to be turgid, humorless, cold and unemotional. By all accounts, she was the same... not somebody I'd be proud to emulate.

 

[evince]

Look at someone like Ayn Rand and her 100% belief in individualism and man as hero. Who tends to celebrate her the most?

Fuck Ayn Rand

She was a shitty writer who wrote stiff unrealisitic charactors who looked much like superheros for the stupid to imagine themselves as.

ITS A FANATASY.

Nothing she said was based in reality.

Now tell me why when a REAL human being is elected by the vast majority of American voters you people PRETEND there is something HORRIBLE about Americans having hope for their future.

You then call anyone who backed him "whorshipers" and say we see him as the "messiah" YET you all whorship some cartoon charactor created in the mind of some chick who could not write her way out of a papper bag.


Fuck Ayn Rand and the man she road in on.

 

[christiefan915]

Fuck Ayn Rand

She was a shitty writer who wrote stiff unrealisitic charactors who looked much like superheros for the stupid to imagine themselves as.

ITS A FANATASY.

Nothing she said was based in reality.

Now tell me why when a REAL human being is elected by the vast majority of American voters you people PRETEND there is something HORRIBLE about Americans having hope for their future.

You then call anyone who backed him "whorshipers" and say we see him as the "messiah" YET you all whorship some cartoon charactor created in the mind of some chick who could not write her way out of a papper bag.


Fuck Ayn Rand and the man she road in on.

"...the man she rode in on." Ha ha, good stuff!

 

[evince]

Thanks

 

[cawacko]

Ayn Rand serves Kool-Aid with the best of them!

I found her books to be turgid, humorless, cold and unemotional. By all accounts, she was the same... not somebody I'd be proud to emulate.

Now I'm confused. Asshat claims liberals think individualism is a disease and you say he's drinking kool aid. You have every right to dislike Ayn Rand's work but she is the ultimate is celebrating godless individualism and you say she's drinking koolaid as well. May I ask is there anyone you don't believe is drinking koolaid?

 

[cawacko]

Fuck Ayn Rand

She was a shitty writer who wrote stiff unrealisitic charactors who looked much like superheros for the stupid to imagine themselves as.

ITS A FANATASY.

Nothing she said was based in reality.

Now tell me why when a REAL human being is elected by the vast majority of American voters you people PRETEND there is something HORRIBLE about Americans having hope for their future.

You then call anyone who backed him "whorshipers" and say we see him as the "messiah" YET you all whorship some cartoon charactor created in the mind of some chick who could not write her way out of a papper bag.


Fuck Ayn Rand and the man she road in on.

LMAO, bitter much Desh?

We were talking about the ideals of godless individualism and you equate that to Obama? What does Obama have to do with Ayn Rand?

Yes we know you hate her Desh because she doesn't follow the ideals of the Democratic Party.

 

[evince]

She was a clown who thought she liked individualism but really whorshiped an Imaginary charactor she made up.

I find it really weird that she made her "Heros" all male.

She always had this Jesus like charactor who was SO MUCH MORE MORAL than everyone else. This GUY was the ONLY one who knew the true "path".

It fought against the idea she was trying to put acrossed. She felt that the free markets were PERFECT because why? Because they would be run by this superman of her dreams. She TALKED individualism and gave only examples of a perfect being who would run the markets for us all. She wanted a economic dictator. Her personal life was a fucking mess.

 

[cawacko]

She was a clown who thought she liked individualism but really whorshiped an Imaginary charactor she made up.

I find it really weird that she made her "Heros" all male.

She always had this Jesus like charactor who was SO MUCH MORE MORAL than everyone else. This GUY was the ONLY one who knew the true "path".

It fought against the idea she was trying to put acrossed. She felt that the free markets were PERFECT because why? Because they would be run by this superman of her dreams. She TALKED individualism and gave only examples of a perfect being who would run the markets for us all. She wanted a economic dictator. Her personal life was a fucking mess.

Who gives a shit about her personal life? How many "creative geniuses" had f'd up personal lives?

Yes she showed the power of capitalism and the power of the individual. She also wrote awesome non-fiction on markets, freedom and the evil of totalinarism (sp) and communism from which she escaped in Russia. She saw first hand what that type of environment did to the human spirit.

Edit: And yes Fountain and Atlas Shrugged were works of fiction. Glad you are able to understand that. It does show man as hero that's her whole premise. She wasn't trying to sneak something by us.

 

[christiefan915]

Now I'm confused. Asshat claims liberals think individualism is a disease and you say he's drinking kool aid. You have every right to dislike Ayn Rand's work but she is the ultimate is celebrating godless individualism and you say she's drinking koolaid as well. May I ask is there anyone you don't believe is drinking koolaid?

Asshat is just a provocateur. Half the time I can't figure out which side he's on or what he's trying to say. But when he spouts comments like the above, it sounds like something he's heard on RW talk shows because they're great at defining an entire group based on the actions of the outspoken in the group.

As far as Rand, I don't get why her novels are seen as something that an ideal political and/or economic system should be based on. Novel = fantasy, imagination and a writer's particular viewpoint. IMO it's like saying our systems should be based on the Star Trek concept of the universe; it's all fun to think about and discuss but has little applicability to the real world.

 

[evince]

Who gives a shit about her personal life? How many "creative geniuses" had f'd up personal lives?

Yes she showed the power of capitalism and the power of the individual. She also wrote awesome non-fiction on markets, freedom and the evil of totalinarism (sp) and communism from which she escaped in Russia. She saw first hand what that type of environment did to the human spirit.

Edit: And yes Fountain and Atlas Shrugged were works of fiction. Glad you are able to understand that. It does show man as hero that's her whole premise. She wasn't trying to sneak something by us.

Oh belive me I know she wasnt trying to sneak something past us. I read her of my own volition in my teens. I read a shit load then. Her books were some of the shittiest writing I had run acrossed. BORE SNORE. The people were SOOO unreal and it felt like reading Russian propagada crap. I know she was all about capitalism but man was she heavily influenced byt the crap she must have had to read in Russia. It was all soooo fake and set up.

This was my assesment at like 16 and I have never seen any reason to change my oppinion on her and her works. She stank and her works stink.

 

[NOVA]

Oh belive me I know she wasnt trying to sneak something past us. I read her of my own volition in my teens. I read a shit load then. Her books were some of the shittiest writing I had run acrossed. BORE SNORE. The people were SOOO unreal and it felt like reading Russian propagada crap. I know she was all about capitalism but man was she heavily influenced byt the crap she must have had to read in Russia. It was all soooo fake and set up.

This was my assesment at like 16 and I have never seen any reason to change my oppinion on her and her works. She stank and her works stink.

Rand's political views, reflected in both her fiction and her theoretical work, emphasize individual rights (including property rights) and laissez-faire capitalism, enforced by a constitutionally-limited government. She was a fierce opponent of all forms of collectivism and statism, including fascism, communism, socialism, and the welfare state. She considered reason to be the only means of acquiring knowledge and the most important aspect of her philosophy.
-----------------

So....Doesn't seem to be anything there that an anti-American like you would agree with, so I see your point....

Its just funny that an idiot like you, that can barely spell or create a coherent sentence herself, finds the balls to disparage a successful, admired, and published author....

You're not qualified enough to be her panty liner, fool.

 

[theMAJORITY]

Liberals are way more authoritarian that conservatives. Liberals consider individualism a disease, and glorify the state.

Your beating a dead horse by defining that to a progressive (I don't want to insult our good hearted liberals--just know there is a fine line between being nice, and being foolish enough to be taken advantage of).

The write you speak of is merly projection. Every ill name the tea party people are called---nothing but projection.