MigL

And what exactly about political reality is sane ???

" their distinguishing feature is that the subject believes something which normal people wouldn't believe" So you and others like Acme have decided what is 'normal' and sane, or worse yet, society labels a group of people as NOT 'normal' and then slowly starts taking away their rights, until they eventually get sent to gas chambers ( I apologize for the extremism to make a quick point ). Sounds like the worst kind of discrimination, that against differing thought and opinion, it could certainly never happen !! Oh, wait, yes it did ! Attacking an idea is one thing ( and perfectly legitimate, we do it here all the time ), attacking a group of people who hold the same ideas by 'labelling' them, is plain wrong and discriminatory.

I'm glad you understand, "old man in a rock n' roll band" ( you must be close to my age to remember 'Fly at Night' ) ( and maybe Canadian ?)

Acme definitely has preconceived notions about the right and conservatives ( approx. half American population ), chadn737. But he's not all bad. He likes Chilliwack after all ( the band not the city ).

Back in the old days, real men ( and women ) learned processor specific assembly. I could probably still write some Zilog Z80 code.

This will be my last comment on this matter Acme. I relise you are the OP and set the rules of engagement, and unless you get your way, you will 'take your ball and go home'. Great way to win a discussion, stifle opposing views. I didn't read your linked study because I can't even stomach its title. I find it offensive ( but hey, no law against being offensive ) and bordering on hateful against almost half the american population. It seems to me you want left wing idealogues to discuss a leftwing study that calls people with opposing views insane. And as I've stated before, I'm Canadian where even our Conservatives are more left wing than your Democrats, however, I like some conservative principles as well as some liberal principles. I especially like the one about tolerance and keeping an open mind to other people's ideas. I guess that means I don't have a 'highly compartmentalized mind'. I also have a university degree in Physics, so I don't think I can be accused of illogical thinking ( check me out on the Physics forum ). As for ethnocentrism, I am an immigrant to Canada,having been born and lived some of my childhood elsewhere. But hey, maybe your studies only apply to American Conservatives ( although other countries have been mentioned ). It seems to me , hoever,that if democrats had announced English courses, help obtaining diplomas and health checkups to Hispanics, one of the most disadvantaged demographics in the US, you would have fallen all over yourself congratulating them on a job well done. But since its Republicans doing it,they must have some ulterior motive,as if both parties don't try to court voters. I believe that's covered by double standards, hypocrisy, blindness to yourself and even some profound ethocentrism.

Correct me if I'm wrong, John, but I think republicans have raised taxes more than democrats in the last 20 yrs or so. I'm not 100% sure as I'm not american after all. Bush Sr. IIRC asked us to read his lips. Raising taxes is a necessary evil. I am canadian after all. We are overtaxed and our consrvatives are more liberal than your democrats. My problem is with borrowing. When servicing the debt becomes one of the largest expenses in the budget, higher than health care, higher than education, higher than defense and higher than social programs, then you and Acme have to explain what YOU would start cutting.

As I've often mentioned, stupidity runs rampant in all types of governments, wether republican/consrvative or democrat/liberal. It is only you that seeks to assign those labels to stupid behaviour, that one ideology is much better than the other, and that approx. half of the american population is insane and undeserving of an apinion. You're a little full of yourself, aren't you ? And you're not surprised that I don't mention cuts ? Re-read my posts as well as your own and tell me where I've mentioned cuts, or where you've asked me about cuts ? Have you simply imagined most of this discussion and not bothered to read anyone else's posts ? And while we're on the subject, scientific psycological work is a misnomer. There is very little that's scientific about psycology. And if you were a scientist you'd know why.

As I said I understand where you're coming from Phi for All and agree. And sure a household budjet is vastly different from a national economy, iNow, and its understandable that sometimes exceptions have to be made. However when you are in trouble with your spending you don't ask for a higher limit on your credit card ! The examples of nations who haven't learned this lesson are plentiful... Argentina, Greece , Portugal, Spain, Italy etc. How are thir economies doing ? The US has raised its borrowing limit to avoid defaulting My own province, Ontario, has a higher debt than California

Same policies as apply to your household. Live within your means ! Don't live large and saddle your kids with debt.

Just trying to show how silly the labels are.

People wnt to include all republicans under the same umbrella, but I think that some of today's republicans are very different than republicans of 25 or 50 yrs ago. The members of the tea party cannot be compared to Reagan or Eisenhower. But then again, so are the democrats vastly different. I wasn't alive at the time, but I've read Kennedy' inagural speech. It included the following : “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.” This sounds decidedly republican to me. Its certainly not something that Obama would say. And judging by Egypt, Syria, Ukraine, Iraq and Israel, certainly not something that Obama would do.

Sorry I took so long to get back to you Ten oz. I don't know what political conservatism is but I consider myself fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Although as someone has stated, being socially liberal is fine when it applies to yourself or others; not so much when applied to your daughter ( I don't have a daughter, just a niece, but I see his point ).

Sorry to disappoint. I don't have time, I'm at work ( don't tell my supervisor ).

What do you want me to say ? I consider myself conservative in some aspects as that makes sense and works for me, and liberal in others for much the same reasons. Would it make you happy if I said i was insane ? Does other's opinion mean that little to you ?

What ? Nobody watched 'WKRP in Cincinnati' back in the early 80s. One of the funniest TV shows ever made.

I remember a study conducted in the eighties that came to the conclision that kids were insane, by adult standards of course. It actually made a lor of sense and I presume, if the study had been done by kids on adults, they would have had similar results. This study was presented on a radio station by a Doctor ( PhD ) whose name I don't recall. He had gotten his doctorate from a man named Bubba on Santa Monica beach. The host of the radio program was Dr. Johnny Fever. The radio station was WKRP in Cincinnati.

Come on now... Isn't it the mantra of the 'labelers' that it is the 'conservatives' who are intolerant of other's ideas and who call others names.. It doesn't become progressive 'liberals' such as yourselves. We've had this discussion before, not all conservatives and their ideas are bad, and not all liberals and their ideas are good, You can't generalize about race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. Why is it OK to generalize about ideology ? Its just another personal belief.

Yet negative pressure could drive expansion, and at the very least is postulated by Guth to have driven inflation. If the universal vacuum energy 'hung up' at a false ( higher than ) zero level just after the big bang, it would have experienced violent inflation while it slowly fell to the actual zero point vacuum energy. If it never actually reached the zero point, but just drastically slowed down its descent ( much lower slope ), then it could still be driving expansion at a much reduced rate, ie. accounts for the cosmological constant. But I guess that unless we can get a handle on a realistic value for the vacuum energy, all this is just speculation,