'They hate what we see right here in this chamber -- a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."
"Newt Gingrich called for a reexamination of free speech at the Loeb First Amendment Award Dinner in New Hampshire this week, saying a “different set of rules to prevent terrorism” are necessary."
"Insofar as a member of Congress taking an oath to serve America and uphold its values is concerned, America is interested in only one book, the Bible. If you are incapable of taking an oath on that book, don't serve in Congress."
How scary is it that I'm starting this entry off by referring to 3 a^%h#(*&? What is that hotline number to call when we suspect that there are terrorists nearby plotting to destroy America?
After all, in Shrub's own words, Newt Gingrich and Dennis Prager are seeking to destroy America and are publically saying it loud and clear.
That Prager started things off by lying about the Congressional Swearing-in ceremony neither excuses his following statements nor gives him the grounds to plead deminished capacity.
And for those of you who remember the Contract on America, this is the lizard's second murder attempt.
Ray Meier had the decency to denounce a particularly nasty attack by the NRCC, but what else do the Neandrathal-Cons have to attack before whatever remaining decent people over in that corner say enough is enough? (weird..I remember that he denounced the ad, but it took a bit of searching on Google to find the documentation on it.)
Or have they all drank so deeply of that Krazy Coolaid that they all truly believe American values need to be destroyed...
Maimun
20061130
Ah-ha!
Are George W. Bush lovers certifiable?
By Andy Bromage
November 23 2006
A collective “I told you so” will ripple through the world of Bush-bashers once news of Christopher Lohse’s study gets out.
Lohse, a social work master’s student at Southern Connecticut State University, says he has proven what many progressives have probably suspected for years: a direct link between mental illness and support for President Bush.
Lohse says his study is no joke. The thesis draws on a survey of 69 psychiatric outpatients in three Connecticut locations during the 2004 presidential election. Lohse’s study, backed by SCSU Psychology professor Jaak Rakfeldt and statistician Misty Ginacola, found a correlation between the severity of a person’s psychosis and their preferences for president: The more psychotic the voter, the more likely they were to vote for Bush.
But before you go thinking all your conservative friends are psychotic, listen to Lohse’s explanation.
“Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader,” Lohse says. “If your world is very mixed up, there’s something very comforting about someone telling you, ‘This is how it’s going to be.’”
The study was an advocacy project of sorts, designed to register mentally ill voters and encourage them to go to the polls, Lohse explains. The Bush trend was revealed later on.
The study used Modified General Assessment Functioning, or MGAF, a 100-point scale that measures the functioning of disabled patients. A second scale, developed by Rakfeldt, was also used. Knowledge of current issues, government and politics were assessed on a 12-item scale devised by the study authors.
“Bush supporters had significantly less knowledge about current issues, government and politics than those who supported Kerry,” the study says.
Lohse says the trend isn’t unique to Bush: A 1977 study by Frumkin & Ibrahim found psychiatric patients preferred Nixon over McGovern in the 1972 election.
Rakfeldt says the study was legitimate, though not intended to show what it did.
“Yes it was a legitimate study but these data were mined after the fact,” Rakfeldt says. “You can ask new questions of the data. I haven’t looked at” Lohse’s conclusions regarding Bush, Rakfeldt says.
“That doesn’t make it illegitimate, it just wasn’t part of the original project.”
For his part, Lohse is a self-described “Reagan revolution fanatic” but said that W. is just “beyond the pale.” ●
abromage@newhavenadvocate.com
Copyright © 2006, New Haven Advocate
By Andy Bromage
November 23 2006
A collective “I told you so” will ripple through the world of Bush-bashers once news of Christopher Lohse’s study gets out.
Lohse, a social work master’s student at Southern Connecticut State University, says he has proven what many progressives have probably suspected for years: a direct link between mental illness and support for President Bush.
Lohse says his study is no joke. The thesis draws on a survey of 69 psychiatric outpatients in three Connecticut locations during the 2004 presidential election. Lohse’s study, backed by SCSU Psychology professor Jaak Rakfeldt and statistician Misty Ginacola, found a correlation between the severity of a person’s psychosis and their preferences for president: The more psychotic the voter, the more likely they were to vote for Bush.
But before you go thinking all your conservative friends are psychotic, listen to Lohse’s explanation.
“Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader,” Lohse says. “If your world is very mixed up, there’s something very comforting about someone telling you, ‘This is how it’s going to be.’”
The study was an advocacy project of sorts, designed to register mentally ill voters and encourage them to go to the polls, Lohse explains. The Bush trend was revealed later on.
The study used Modified General Assessment Functioning, or MGAF, a 100-point scale that measures the functioning of disabled patients. A second scale, developed by Rakfeldt, was also used. Knowledge of current issues, government and politics were assessed on a 12-item scale devised by the study authors.
“Bush supporters had significantly less knowledge about current issues, government and politics than those who supported Kerry,” the study says.
Lohse says the trend isn’t unique to Bush: A 1977 study by Frumkin & Ibrahim found psychiatric patients preferred Nixon over McGovern in the 1972 election.
Rakfeldt says the study was legitimate, though not intended to show what it did.
“Yes it was a legitimate study but these data were mined after the fact,” Rakfeldt says. “You can ask new questions of the data. I haven’t looked at” Lohse’s conclusions regarding Bush, Rakfeldt says.
“That doesn’t make it illegitimate, it just wasn’t part of the original project.”
For his part, Lohse is a self-described “Reagan revolution fanatic” but said that W. is just “beyond the pale.” ●
abromage@newhavenadvocate.com
Copyright © 2006, New Haven Advocate
20061126
Cleanup in Aisle 3
takes on a whole new meaning...
"Adults take note: Pony comes unassembled in box with head detatched. You may wish to not open the box around your children if they may be frightened by a box with a decapitated horse inside."
How's that for a creepy note?? It's the bene nota on Hasbro's yet to be released Furreal Friends Butterscotch Pony.
That's Furreal.... with an "f."
Seems though that this would have a lot of potential for product placement on The Sopranos...
Maimun
"Adults take note: Pony comes unassembled in box with head detatched. You may wish to not open the box around your children if they may be frightened by a box with a decapitated horse inside."
How's that for a creepy note?? It's the bene nota on Hasbro's yet to be released Furreal Friends Butterscotch Pony.
That's Furreal.... with an "f."
Seems though that this would have a lot of potential for product placement on The Sopranos...
Maimun
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)