1 3 Next
Topic: Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice
heavenlyboy34's photo
Fri 01/27/12 06:28 PM


Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,

Nope. There were plenty opposed to civil rights on both sides-including Lincoln. There were also abolitionists on both sides. Some very vocal, like Lysander Spooner.

InvictusV's photo
Fri 01/27/12 07:58 PM




Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,
actually it was the Republicans who pushed the Civilrights Act!



research DEEPER
The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)


it was NORTHERNERS who supported the bill

not ONE southern republican supported it(in the house or senate),but some of the southern democrats did

conversely, a HIGHER percentage of northern democrats supported it(in the house and senate) than northern republicans


it was a REGIONAL issue, not one of political parties

confederates were trying to preserve slavery/jim crow
others were not






I just noticed this post..

The Democrats had 248 members in the house.. You need 218 to pass the bill.

They had 152 for and 96 against..

That is 61% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill..

The Republicans had 172 members..

138 for 34 against..

That is 80% of Republicans voting for a Democrat bill..


In the Senate the Democrats held 67 seats.

45 voted for and 22 against..

That is 67% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill

Republicans had 33 seats.

27 voted for 6 voted against.

That is 82% of Republicans voted for a Democrat bill..


The Democrats held huge majorities in both Houses with more than enough votes to pass the bill on their own.

Neither chamber would have passed the bill without Republican support..

If it were left to the Democrats to pass this Civil Rights legislation it would have never made it to Johnson's desk..

You can twist it any way you want.. The numbers don't lie..


msharmony's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:08 PM





Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,
actually it was the Republicans who pushed the Civilrights Act!



research DEEPER
The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)


it was NORTHERNERS who supported the bill

not ONE southern republican supported it(in the house or senate),but some of the southern democrats did

conversely, a HIGHER percentage of northern democrats supported it(in the house and senate) than northern republicans


it was a REGIONAL issue, not one of political parties

confederates were trying to preserve slavery/jim crow
others were not






I just noticed this post..

The Democrats had 248 members in the house.. You need 218 to pass the bill.

They had 152 for and 96 against..

That is 61% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill..

The Republicans had 172 members..

138 for 34 against..

That is 80% of Republicans voting for a Democrat bill..


In the Senate the Democrats held 67 seats.

45 voted for and 22 against..

That is 67% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill

Republicans had 33 seats.

27 voted for 6 voted against.

That is 82% of Republicans voted for a Democrat bill..


The Democrats held huge majorities in both Houses with more than enough votes to pass the bill on their own.

Neither chamber would have passed the bill without Republican support..

If it were left to the Democrats to pass this Civil Rights legislation it would have never made it to Johnson's desk..

You can twist it any way you want.. The numbers don't lie..




'twist' being the imperative word

republicans could not have passed the bill without SOME democratic support

and because the democrats didnt have a majority of support they coudlnt pass the bill without the participation of REPUBLICANs

but because of the 'southern' votes, it leveled out, because the northerner republicans voided out the southern repub opposition(85 compared to 0 percent support) and the northerner democrats voided out the southern dem opposition (94 compared to 7 percent support)

and when looking at "REGION' democratic votes were a higher percentage of yeah votes in both the northern(94 to 85 percent) and southern(confederate) representation (7 to O percent)

InvictusV's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:13 PM






Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,
actually it was the Republicans who pushed the Civilrights Act!



research DEEPER
The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)


it was NORTHERNERS who supported the bill

not ONE southern republican supported it(in the house or senate),but some of the southern democrats did

conversely, a HIGHER percentage of northern democrats supported it(in the house and senate) than northern republicans


it was a REGIONAL issue, not one of political parties

confederates were trying to preserve slavery/jim crow
others were not






I just noticed this post..

The Democrats had 248 members in the house.. You need 218 to pass the bill.

They had 152 for and 96 against..

That is 61% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill..

The Republicans had 172 members..

138 for 34 against..

That is 80% of Republicans voting for a Democrat bill..


In the Senate the Democrats held 67 seats.

45 voted for and 22 against..

That is 67% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill

Republicans had 33 seats.

27 voted for 6 voted against.

That is 82% of Republicans voted for a Democrat bill..


The Democrats held huge majorities in both Houses with more than enough votes to pass the bill on their own.

Neither chamber would have passed the bill without Republican support..

If it were left to the Democrats to pass this Civil Rights legislation it would have never made it to Johnson's desk..

You can twist it any way you want.. The numbers don't lie..




'twist' being the imperative word

republicans could not have passed the bill without SOME democratic support

and because the democrats didnt have a majority of support they coudlnt pass the bill without the participation of REPUBLICANs

but because of the 'southern' votes, it leveled out, because the northerner republicans voided out the southern repub opposition(85 compared to 0 percent support) and the northerner democrats voided out the southern dem opposition (94 compared to 7 percent support)

and when looking at "REGION' democratic votes were a higher percentage of yeah votes in both the northern(94 to 85 percent) and southern(confederate) representation (7 to O percent)


It was a DEMOCRAT BILL....

Republicans didn't have enough votes to pass anything.

Democrats had more than enough to pass it in both houses.. PERIOD


msharmony's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:14 PM







Let's see.
Was Johnson a democrat?
July 2, 2004

Forty years ago today, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a bill that changed the face of America. It opened all public accommodations — hotels, restaurants, swimming pools — to all Americans regardless of race, color, religion or national origin.

Just after he signed, he was heard stating;

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

-- Lyndon B. Johnson to two governors on Air Force One according Ronald Kessler's Book, "Inside The White House"

Democrats fought to keep an entire race in slavery during The Civil War. Now today 150 years later the same Democrat Party fights to enslave EVERY American to government and in the process destroy the traditions, values and principles that have made out country great. They seek to spend us into oblivion to accomplish this slavery and blame Republicans, the Tea Party and anyone else they can find for their truly unamerican obsession with enslaving the masses through government.

So, tell me, what is the party of racists and bigots?


neither, actually, at the time of the civil war our politics wasnt quite as two sided, it was also regional

most who opposed civil rights were southerners, both democrat and republican,,,
actually it was the Republicans who pushed the Civilrights Act!



research DEEPER
The original House version:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)


it was NORTHERNERS who supported the bill

not ONE southern republican supported it(in the house or senate),but some of the southern democrats did

conversely, a HIGHER percentage of northern democrats supported it(in the house and senate) than northern republicans


it was a REGIONAL issue, not one of political parties

confederates were trying to preserve slavery/jim crow
others were not






I just noticed this post..

The Democrats had 248 members in the house.. You need 218 to pass the bill.

They had 152 for and 96 against..

That is 61% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill..

The Republicans had 172 members..

138 for 34 against..

That is 80% of Republicans voting for a Democrat bill..


In the Senate the Democrats held 67 seats.

45 voted for and 22 against..

That is 67% of Democrats voting for a Democrat bill

Republicans had 33 seats.

27 voted for 6 voted against.

That is 82% of Republicans voted for a Democrat bill..


The Democrats held huge majorities in both Houses with more than enough votes to pass the bill on their own.

Neither chamber would have passed the bill without Republican support..

If it were left to the Democrats to pass this Civil Rights legislation it would have never made it to Johnson's desk..

You can twist it any way you want.. The numbers don't lie..




'twist' being the imperative word

republicans could not have passed the bill without SOME democratic support

and because the democrats didnt have a majority of support they coudlnt pass the bill without the participation of REPUBLICANs

but because of the 'southern' votes, it leveled out, because the northerner republicans voided out the southern repub opposition(85 compared to 0 percent support) and the northerner democrats voided out the southern dem opposition (94 compared to 7 percent support)

and when looking at "REGION' democratic votes were a higher percentage of yeah votes in both the northern(94 to 85 percent) and southern(confederate) representation (7 to O percent)


It was a DEMOCRAT BILL....

Republicans didn't have enough votes to pass anything.

Democrats had more than enough to pass it in both houses.. PERIOD





yes, they did, but because of the southern democrats AND republicans they didnt have the support and needed the northern republicans to pass it


InvictusV's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:24 PM
There were only 11 southern Republicans combined..

The way they voted was totally IRRELEVANT..

It was because Democrats voting against a Democrat bill that required Republican support to pass it..

80% and 82%...

The title of this thread is portraying Republicans as all being racists and you have infantile posters saying that we are all ignorant bigots and racists.

I am personally fed up with this BS and when I see someone trying to revise history I am going to challenge it.




msharmony's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:27 PM

There were only 11 southern Republicans combined..

The way they voted was totally IRRELEVANT..

It was because Democrats voting against a Democrat bill that required Republican support to pass it..

80% and 82%...

The title of this thread is portraying Republicans as all being racists and you have infantile posters saying that we are all ignorant bigots and racists.

I am personally fed up with this BS and when I see someone trying to revise history I am going to challenge it.






the bill needed a majority which included dems and repubs,,

I dont personally think all of anyone is anything, although ALL of the southern republicans of congress voted NO on the bill

andrewzooms's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:31 PM
What are we trying to prove here? Blame the Supreme Court with the ruling of Plessy V Ferguson for racial segregation. Not congress.

Dragoness's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:31 PM





There's no gentle way to put it: People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb, according to a new study that is bound to stir public controversy.

The research finds that children with low intelligence are more likely to hold prejudiced attitudes as adults. These findings point to a vicious cycle, according to lead researcher Gordon Hodson, a psychologist at Brock University in Ontario. Low-intelligence adults tend to gravitate toward socially conservative ideologies, the study found. Those ideologies, in turn, stress hierarchy and resistance to change, attitudes that can contribute to prejudice, Hodson wrote in an email to LiveScience.

"Prejudice is extremely complex and multifaceted, making it critical that any factors contributing to bias are uncovered and understood," he said.

Controversy ahead

The findings combine three hot-button topics.

"They've pulled off the trifecta of controversial topics," said Brian Nosek, a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Virginia who was not involved in the study. "When one selects intelligence, political ideology and racism and looks at any of the relationships between those three variables, it's bound to upset somebody."

Polling data and social and political science research do show that prejudice is more common in those who hold right-wing ideals that those of other political persuasions, Nosek told LiveScience. [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

"The unique contribution here is trying to make some progress on the most challenging aspect of this," Nosek said, referring to the new study. "It's not that a relationship like that exists, but why it exists."

Brains and bias

Earlier studies have found links between low levels of education and higher levels of prejudice, Hodson said, so studying intelligence seemed a logical next step. The researchers turned to two studies of citizens in the United Kingdom, one that has followed babies since their births in March 1958, and another that did the same for babies born in April 1970. The children in the studies had their intelligence assessed at age 10 or 11; as adults ages 30 or 33, their levels of social conservatism and racism were measured. [Life's Extremes: Democrat vs. Republican]

In the first study, verbal and nonverbal intelligence was measured using tests that asked people to find similarities and differences between words, shapes and symbols. The second study measured cognitive abilities in four ways, including number recall, shape-drawing tasks, defining words and identifying patterns and similarities among words. Average IQ is set at 100.

Social conservatives were defined as people who agreed with a laundry list of statements such as "Family life suffers if mum is working full-time," and "Schools should teach children to obey authority." Attitudes toward other races were captured by measuring agreement with statements such as "I wouldn't mind working with people from other races." (These questions measured overt prejudiced attitudes, but most people, no matter how egalitarian, do hold unconscious racial biases; Hodson's work can't speak to this "underground" racism.)

As suspected, low intelligence in childhood corresponded with racism in adulthood. But the factor that explained the relationship between these two variables was political: When researchers included social conservatism in the analysis, those ideologies accounted for much of the link between brains and bias.

People with lower cognitive abilities also had less contact with people of other races.

"This finding is consistent with recent research demonstrating that intergroup contact is mentally challenging and cognitively draining, and consistent with findings that contact reduces prejudice," said Hodson, who along with his colleagues published these results online Jan. 5 in the journal Psychological Science.

A study of averages

Hodson was quick to note that the despite the link found between low intelligence and social conservatism, the researchers aren't implying that all liberals are brilliant and all conservatives stupid. The research is a study of averages over large groups, he said.

"There are multiple examples of very bright conservatives and not-so-bright liberals, and many examples of very principled conservatives and very intolerant liberals," Hodson said.

Nosek gave another example to illustrate the dangers of taking the findings too literally.

"We can say definitively men are taller than women on average," he said. "But you can't say if you take a random man and you take a random woman that the man is going to be taller. There's plenty of overlap."

Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world.

"Socially conservative ideologies tend to offer structure and order," Hodson said, explaining why these beliefs might draw those with low intelligence. "Unfortunately, many of these features can also contribute to prejudice."

In another study, this one in the United States, Hodson and Busseri compared 254 people with the same amount of education but different levels of ability in abstract reasoning. They found that what applies to racism may also apply to homophobia. People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays. As in the U.K. citizens, a lack of contact with gays and more acceptance of right-wing authoritarianism explained the link. [5 Myths About Gay People Debunked]

Simple viewpoints

Hodson and Busseri's explanation of their findings is reasonable, Nosek said, but it is correlational. That means the researchers didn't conclusively prove that the low intelligence caused the later prejudice. To do that, you'd have to somehow randomly assign otherwise identical people to be smart or dumb, liberal or conservative. Those sorts of studies obviously aren't possible.

The researchers controlled for factors such as education and socioeconomic status, making their case stronger, Nosek said. But there are other possible explanations that fit the data. For example, Nosek said, a study of left-wing liberals with stereotypically naïve views like "every kid is a genius in his or her own way," might find that people who hold these attitudes are also less bright. In other words, it might not be a particular ideology that is linked to stupidity, but extremist views in general.

"My speculation is that it's not as simple as their model presents it," Nosek said. "I think that lower cognitive capacity can lead to multiple simple ways to represent the world, and one of those can be embodied in a right-wing ideology where 'People I don't know are threats' and 'The world is a dangerous place'. ... Another simple way would be to just assume everybody is wonderful."

Prejudice is of particular interest because understanding the roots of racism and bias could help eliminate them, Hodson said. For example, he said, many anti-prejudice programs encourage participants to see things from another group's point of view. That mental exercise may be too taxing for people of low IQ.

"There may be cognitive limits in the ability to take the perspective of others, particularly foreigners," Hodson said. "Much of the present research literature suggests that our prejudices are primarily emotional in origin rather than cognitive. These two pieces of information suggest that it might be particularly fruitful for researchers to consider strategies to change feelings toward outgroups," rather than thoughts.

http://news.yahoo.com/low-iq-conservative-beliefs-linked-prejudice-180403506.html


Having fought against it for so long, this is nothing new to me.

I made the connection to conservative or right wing politics years ago.

Racism and discrimination go hand in hand with right wing politics.

Also misogyny goes well with right wing politics.

And I am a person who really tries to believe each of us are individual like I am but it just never pans out in this environment. They feel inferior and their only way to boost themselves up is to believe there are those inferior to themselves be they gay, another race, a woman, of a different religion or non religious, poor, etc... and any combination of the above


wow... You needed a brush the size of Jupiter to paint a larger generalized picture than this..

I seriously doubt you know every conservative personally, so to make these wild and wholly ludicrous accusations is pretty laughable.




Haven't met one yet that makes it untrue. The only saving grace they have is there are those who really don't realize, they are ignorant of the fact they are bigoted or racist or discriminatory because they falsely justify what they believe usually with what they were taught by their family friends and the social environment they hang out in.

When I meet one that makes it untrue I will make sure to change my view on it. It will actually make me a happier person to not be let down by my fellow man so badly.


You only see what you want to see and when what you see doesn't fit into your agenda you come up with nonsense like this.

I am glad you support left wing ideology because this is a perfect example of why it needs to be defeated.






Actually it is the reason for it becoming more common as how intelligence needs to become more common.

Right wing ideology is the bane to this country and brings it down further every year it is allowed to influence anything here.

msharmony's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:35 PM

What are we trying to prove here? Blame the Supreme Court with the ruling of Plessy V Ferguson for racial segregation. Not congress.


I can only speak for myself.

Im not trying to prove much, just trying to logically address the fallacy that the democrats or republicans are 'thee' party of slavery,, because the parties have evolved and changed over time into something different than they once were when the country was divided between confederate and non confederate states,,,

andrewzooms's photo
Fri 01/27/12 08:39 PM


What are we trying to prove here? Blame the Supreme Court with the ruling of Plessy V Ferguson for racial segregation. Not congress.


I can only speak for myself.

Im not trying to prove much, just trying to logically address the fallacy that the democrats or republicans are 'thee' party of slavery,, because the parties have evolved and changed over time into something different than they once were when the country was divided between confederate and non confederate states,,,


Yes correct. The south had the Jim Crow laws. The south was the slave states. The north was always the more civilized part of the United States.

Bestinshow's photo
Sat 01/28/12 09:26 AM
Edited by Bestinshow on Sat 01/28/12 09:27 AM
Im just glad science has confirmed what most of us have suspected but have been too polite to say.

willing2's photo
Sat 01/28/12 09:31 AM

*(Im}just glad science has confirmed what most of us have suspected but have been too polite to say.
*I'm. Fixed.
Now, what was that about conservatives being illiterate?laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh :wink: smokin

Bestinshow's photo
Sat 01/28/12 09:34 AM


*(Im}just glad science has confirmed what most of us have suspected but have been too polite to say.
*I'm. Fixed.
Now, what was that about conservatives being illiterate?laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh laugh :wink: smokin
Congratulations you found a type O now move to the front of the class and I'll place a star by your name. laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Sat 01/28/12 09:40 AM

Im just glad science has confirmed what most of us have suspected but have been too polite to say.
yep JUNK-Science!:laughing:

Bestinshow's photo
Sat 01/28/12 10:19 AM


Im just glad science has confirmed what most of us have suspected but have been too polite to say.
yep JUNK-Science!:laughing:
Please explain what you find to be junk science and why you think it is, be specific so I can address this in a way that isn't a waste of time.

1 3 Next