Why else would they put so much effort into research studies trying to convince the general public that liberals are superior?

It is the small dog that barks the most.

How can you have individualistic socalists liberals? It seems like an oxymoron, IMHO.

Of course you can look at the same data and come up with different conclusions. Try this one.

The kids' personalities were rated at the time by teachers and assistants who had known them for months.

What's their definition of "whiny kids", and whining about what? What's their definition of "confident kids", and confident about what?

More likely teachers rate kids who raise questions and don't follow rules as "whiny" and kids who blend in with the wallpaper as "confident". The "whiny" kids developed into wise law-abiding adults who are the backbone of our society. The "confident" kids developed into whiny adults. That suggests that conservatives got through their "whiny" stage when they were toddlers, and that given enough time, liberals will get through their "whiny" stage and develop into wise law-abiding adults.

Conservative didn't have so much a problems with ambiguity, but with unexplainable inconsistency. Ambiguity is where there's no clear single answer; such as what two numbers added together total 88. Unexplainable inconsistency is where a new born isn't a person under the law until it takes it's first breath, but it's murder to cause it's death in the womb, unless it's done with the mother's permission. Even with the mother's permission it's murder if the father is the abortionist (a young man is in jail for helping his girlfriend abort her pregnancy. She was never charged because she has a right to an abortion, but if it's an abortion, why is the father serving time?).

Ignorance is bliss

At least in Studyworld, all is good for the American Left.

A more important question:

How do you define "conservative" in Berkley? Are people who don't have pictures of Che Guvera and Mao hanging in their communes considered "conservative"?

Those peaple are crazy!

I'm with Proud.
There's conservatives in Berkley? Where?
Whoda thunk it?

Individualistic and introspective are just another way saying most liberals are self-centered, self-absorbed and ineffectual. Leads them to believe they are inherently smarter than the rest of the world and therefore need to dictate to them how to live their lives.

The really fun part is that the authors admit in the study that the sample was skewed, but insist that it wouldn't make a difference in the results:

"Accordingly, it is understandable that, in its entirety, the present sample as young adults is liberally oriented. However, and of course, any sample bias carries no implication whatsoever regarding analyses of individual differences conducted within the sample."

Except that it does.

When you have a huge preponderance of one cohort (liberals), and only a few of the other (conservative), you can have extreme correlations with only one or two children making the results skew way off the mean.

The one thing that nobody has been mentioning is that the study only reports computed correlations, and leaves out the initial numbers of conservative versus liberal. Therefore, looking at the makeup of the area the sample is taken from, it's fair to assume that the grown-up liberal kids make up about 90% of the sample, and conservative kids make up about 6% of the sample - which means that, due to the way the study is worked, one "whiny" conservative kid in a sample size this small would make the study completely useless as a predictor.

One day scientists discover the gene for conservatism and the Berkeleyites can then abort any "whiney" fetus.

So what these folks are basically saying is, "Yeah, so you may think I'm lame now, but when I was 4, I was AWESOME."

Hmmm.

I want to find the part in the study where the researchers write "and the conservatives smell like poo!".

Yet another example of why I'm starting to lean towards creationism.

lol.

This right here, the article and the comments, is why there will never be a republican or democrat in high office will not be impeached and/or censured. You all are red or blue. You can't see anything BUT red or blue. You hate red or blue depending on if you are blue or red. Anyone who is not red (if you are red) or blue (if you are blue) is wrong and evil and a traitor and a bigot and a fear monger and a chicken hawk and a facist and a communist and a redneck and an elitist. What a joke the state of american politics has become.

Yep. No whining here. Not a jot. In fact, I don't believe I've ever heard a conservative whine about anything, unless of course you count economic issues, women's rights, the gay conspiracy, homeless bums, atheists, immigrants(both kinds), health care, terror, poor people, and the omnipresent menace of liberalism.

Shouldn't you be out defending Easter from secalurist attacks?

You hate red or blue depending on if you are blue or red.

Actually, I just dislike bad science used to push social agendas.

As far as "hating," I really don't get that worked up about most of this crap, like (for example) the folks who keep insisting on a clear dichotomy in things like "conservative versus liberal" and "blue versus red."

For example, I tend to the conservative side fiscally, but I'm more towards the liberal side in civil rights.

It's the people who insist that everyone must be in one camp or the other who seem to need the help.

Like, for example, Paul.

Glenn (aka Instapundit) and Helen had a podcast interviewing Dr. Nick Cummings former president of the American Psychological Assn on the "Politicization of Psychology". This study was mentioned in their discussion. I believe there is a link on the 3/22 page.

Jonas,

Sounds like you're doing most of the whining.

The Silence is Deafening. These kind of posts remind me of the Rush Limbaugh program during the NAFTA/ WTO "debates" when things got macrocosmically uncomfortable for him: he would present himself, for days on end, "distracted" by "Sister Souljah!","Ruth Kris Steakhouse", "Calypso Louis!", "My golf handicap", "Chainsaw Al is God", and so on. ANYTHING but elaborating on the Issues of the Day (if he even recognized them at all). If Bush is f'ing up, issue your remedy or urge a course correction, or DEFEND him. Don't worry what your "betters" think: Captain Quarter-pounder will keel over by '08 anyway (heartbreak if not heart attack). The Bush-bot / Victim Card paradigm is too feminine. Put down the cocoa and open up a can of whup-ass, and for Gawd's sake leave the babies alone!

I guess this explains why the woman in the "Democratic Dates" ad looks so smug.

bryanD,

Talk about being stuck on one issue. Regardless of the subject, all we hear from the likes of you is the same anti-Bush, anti-Bush supporter monotone diatribe. We don't even have to read your post, only your moniker to know what the post is about. If anyone is a robot mindlessly following their programming, it's you. Take a cue from Data, try to be more than your programming.

Hmmm.

This right here, the article and the comments, is why there will never be a republican or democrat in high office will not be impeached and/or censured.

Frankly I don't hate anybody. But when it comes to liberals they generally just make me feel tired all over. I think that describes a lot of conservatives who tend to debate with, or try to debate with, liberals.

It just gets old having to endless repeat yourself. After the 50th iteration of "the turkey wasn't plastic" it goes beyond irritation and all the way to "oh christ here we go again.".

*shrug* perhaps you prefer to characterize in this fashion but I don't see the equivalence.

What struck me is the difference between this study and the pew research on happiness. http://blogs.wizbangblog.com/2006/02/16/dont-worry-be-happy.php

Think about it. If their data was at all universal, then you would think that the 30+ years of pew research would have inverse results. Liberals happier than conservatives and the characteristics associated with liberals showing happier people than those associated with conservatives.

I would have to do a great deal more study to access if the conservative sample was to small to be meaningful. Also, sense a great deal of this was subjective, I would want to see a blind sample of how the people assessing things went. If those "like the assesors" are judged more open than those unlike the assesors, then the issue may be more how it was measured than actual data. Finally, I think the original post on this here hit it on the head. A conservative in Berkley would have to feel a bit like the world is out to get them or they would not be of a normal mentality.

Mac Lorry, you said: "Take a cue from Data, try to be more than your programming."---------I read that and looked for a commentator named "data": Data...Data...where's a "Data"....THEN IT HIT ME!! IS HE (but, no he COULDN'T BE!) REFERRING TO THAT FRUITY, HALF-BAKED TRANSEXUAL VERSION OF STAR TREK WHERE WOMEN ARE MEN AND THE NEGROS WEAR BUTTS ON THEIR HEADS???? (Butt, of course you are!!)

I'd rather be whiny and bratty as a toddler than whiny and bratty as an adult.

"WAH, we lost the election, let's move to Canada! WAH, Bush lied kids died!"

Please.

bryanD you are just so incredibly boringgggg......snore.....

bryanD,

IS HE (but, no he COULDN'T BE!) REFERRING TO THAT FRUITY, HALF-BAKED TRANSEXUAL VERSION OF STAR TREK WHERE WOMEN ARE MEN AND THE NEGROS WEAR BUTTS ON THEIR HEADS???? (Butt, of course you are!!)

Ok, so what if I used a liberal as a positive example for you to emulate? You could learn something about variety in you posts from an android character, just turn off the emotion chip and try to process real hard. If it helps, you can go sit on the toilet.

bryanD, WHAAAA?!??!?

Is there a coherent thought up there? Things might be clearer if you pulled your head out of your ass.

Mac Lorry, wave, virgo,
But at least he hasn't found a way to blame the jooos this time. Making progress.

Hmmm.

would have to do a great deal more study to access if the conservative sample was to small to be meaningful.

Go visit Michelle Malkin about this. A reader of hers sent her some details about a daycare center in Berkeley that matches up with this study perfectly.

This daycare facility is open *only* to the faculty of Berkeley. So that tells you right there just how much credibility this "study" deserves.

"Liberals are Superior " WRONG