"Lower IQ earlier in life.."

Psychological Science, "A Journal for the Association for Psychological Science" announced their association of lower intelligence quotient, racism and conservative politics.
in an article titled, "Bright Minds and Dark Attitudes -- Lower Cognitive Ability Predicts Greater Prejudice Through Right-Wing Ideology and Low Intergroup Contact."

I wonder what APS would think of people who have pigmented skin, a broad background and conservative political ideals. They'd probably give us our own drinking fountain.

Naturally, the article was picked up by the moonbat left: Moonbat one. Moonbat two.

In response, a friend sent me this email full sage observations.

Prejudice is a learned behavior, and sometimes not necessarily all that bad, either. Prejudice keeps you away from people you've learned by experience to avoid.

So, ask yourself this question: Is it because of the liberal mindset, or conservative mindset, that you and I aren't speaking German or Japanese today?

Of course with the way Obummer and crew are driving our debt, we'll all be speaking Chinese by 2016....

(Psssst... My school records indicate that they figured my IQ between 128 and 140. Karen's is similar. Would you rate either of us as 'below the curve?')

After quickly skimming the article, there was one line that caught my eye, and it had to do with 'grasping the complexities of the world' vs conservative. I submit that there are things that are baseline, that when the liberal mindset takes over and tries to 'whitewash' those principles, the society as a whole goes down the tube. Ancient Rome for example. We are getting the Roman mindset with 'bread and circuses for the masses,' and we are sliding down the same slope right for the cliff edge.

A good example of this "liberal mindset" can be found in the latest attempted backlash against Starbucks for allowing people in open carry states to 'pack openly' in their establishments. There has been no problem so far, and in fact when Starbucks came out and basically said puke off to the Brady Bunch, they actually saw an UPTICK in sales!

I'd say it's the "liberals" that have a problem with "grasping the harsh realities of the world."

SB

When I was growing up in ol' Georgia, the white, Democratic Party establishment would not us swim in the whites only pool (We were too dark). The Democratic Administrations of Kennedy and Johnson had made laws that made this illegal. Therefore the Democratic Party insisted the job was done; the South had no racism. You see, they've never been low brow or racist.

The Dreariness of Pointless Change

I wish I had a bone of hope to gnaw on….

What’s wrong with modern American liberalism and the “Democratic” Party.

A lot of people out there still think the purpose of government is to restrict/control people. Instead of a land filled with the possibilities of human life, America has become a land of "No, you can't."

The "can’t-ers" short circuit all the great prospects of life. Instead of affirming the people who soar high and open up the vista of life, they seek to cage life in little, safe packages. Mediocrity is enforced. Plainness is required.

Weirdly, this impulse to stifle is growing in intensity. Soon, all of life in the land of the formerly free will be dirty rat gray. No one will be allowed to excel, no one will be allowed to stand out.

An interesting historical footnote is that? Mr Ted Kennedy drafted much of the content of the Bush educational act popularly called "No child left behind." Teachers widely vilified the act as "No child gets ahead."

Compared to any of his brothers, the late Ted Kennedy was drab personality. Ever since his date with his secretary, and her consequent drowning at Chappaquiddick, Teddy used all of us who are still breathing. He orchestrated her death after he used her. He orchestrated the death of the vibrant American in the same spiteful sport.

It figures the alcoholic rat-gray Teddy Kennedy, running from his conscience, would draft the act which would suck the life out of American youth.

The paragon and hero of the "Democratic" Party sought this result to assure an enhancement of their power base among the helpless and plain. Its paying off very well for them.

~~~~~~~~

Under democracy, whatever the majority decides is law. The majority can change at any moment and the law changes in an instant. There is no stability, no security, no safety.

In a republic, basic rights are secured for everyone. The human rights part of law does not change and society grows on a firm foundation. In a republic, the strong are just, the weak secure and the peace preserved.

The best system would combine the strength of democracy and republic. The security of a republic, with the stability of protecting the rights of the minority, would be reinforced by the use of democracy to check the aggressions of an ambitious politician.

Yet, here in Bizarro world, the worst tyrannies call themselves "democratic republics."

The American system is failing because the People have been taught the democratic political system is all that matters. The republican ideal of equal right before the law is something to be taken away from people. They no longer care nor understand that the instability in a pure democracy will collapse the political system, destroy their wealth and make them miserable. Inevitably, the nation is headed into poverty, dictatorship and civil war.

Democide.