Are Libs Smarter?

By Jeffrey Folks

Every teacher knows that one can make any group of kids look smart just by altering the content of the test. That is what's behind several studies purporting to show that liberals are smarter than conservatives.

Using data from previous studies in Britain, researchers at Brock University in Canada claim to have discovered a relationship between IQ scores and political orientation. The study suggests that persons of lower IQ choose to be conservatives because conservatism opposes change and is thus "safer" for those who are slow to adapt. Not only that, the researchers find that conservatives, being persons of low intelligence, are less tolerant, less original, and less open-minded than others.

In a separate study, Satoshi Kanazawa of the London School of Economics purports to have found that highly intelligent people tend to identify themselves as liberals and atheists. Researchers suggest that the link may reflect "evolutionary forces," as smarter humans advance the species with "new thinking," or it may result from smarter individuals competing for status by embracing unconventional and "advanced" ideas.

There are several fallacies, I believe, behind both of these studies. Intentionally or not, the "questions asked" -- in this case, IQ tests from as long as forty years ago that measure a subset abstract intelligence but nothing else -- were selected to arrive at the result that libs are smarter.

In fact, on all measures of practical intelligence and performance, conservatives would seem to be brainier.

Standard IQ tests have never been a very good predictor of success because they fail to measure a broad range of mental aptitudes -- everything from mechanical ability to social skills and emotional stability. Many of these alternative mental aptitudes contribute to one's ability to function in the real world. They comprise a set of skills that philosophers have traditionally referred to as "good sense," the sort of intelligence that liberals appear to lack entirely if we are to judge from their recent "investments" in green energy and their mishandling of health care reform.

In contrast to the abstract reasoning measured by standard IQ testing, this deeper intelligence plays a crucial role in making essential life choices. It involves more than solving problems on paper; it makes possible prudent choices, careful planning, and responsible behavior over the course of an entire lifetime. The evidence suggests that liberals don't score too well on these benchmarks. It is a fact, for instance, that those stodgy conservative sorts who marry and stay married over the period of a lifetime live longer. They also raise children who are less likely to commit crimes, take drugs, or commit suicide. And they end up donating more to charity and participating more in volunteer activities. All of these measurements reflect a more profound order of intelligence that exists among conservatives and not among liberals.

Perhaps the best overall proxy for intelligence is happiness. One would expect that those who are truly intelligent would find a way to obtain happiness. And yet every objective study of happiness, conducted by unbiased polling, reveals that as a group, conservatives are happier than liberals. If conservatives are such idiots, why are they so happy?

According to Jaime Napier, a researcher at Yale University, conservatives are happier because they believe in meritocracy. That is, they believe that in America, with its free-market system, they will be rewarded for their efforts. When people believe in the system in which they work and live, they have a sense of purpose and fulfillment. They can work toward a goal, and they have a positive orientation toward life. This is certainly part of what it means to be happy. But not all.

The more important reason why conservatives are happier than liberals is because they possess a moral intelligence that liberals lack. While they may disagree on the details, conservatives believe in the existence of fixed ideas and strict moral accountability. This deeper level of intelligence involves more than just multiplying numbers or solving word games; it involves making decisions based on crucial assessments of the broader purposes of life. In other words, it involves the possession of a moral and religious sensibility.

Conservatives display this sort of moral intelligence; liberals, whose moral orientation is based on relativism if not nihilism, don't. Not only that, liberals spend their lives mocking and sneering at the very sorts of intelligence that would otherwise make them happy.

The most powerful novelistic treatment of this paradox can be found in Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Devils. In this magnificent novel, the "devils" are those who, out of pride and spite, turn their faces away from those simple truths that would actually save them. Like liberals today, Dostoevsky's devils imagine themselves to be more intelligent than their more conservative-minded neighbors. They believe that they constitute the intelligentsia, and that, as such, they have the right to decide the future direction of their country. Unfortunately, their "intelligence," and their penchant for social transformation whatever the cost, leads to violence, anarchy, and ruin. Dostoevsky understood that the intellectual class, so full of confidence in its own powers to transform life for others (and in its absolute right to do so, based on superior "intelligence"), is the greatest threat to human happiness.

For one thing, liberal intellectuals pay little if any attention to the cost of their reforms. Yet fiscal responsibility, which is integrally related to happiness if not survival, is one of the aspects of life that is controlled by this deeper level of intelligence. The ability to conceptualize the long-term effects of debt, and to restrain one's impulses so as to manage debt responsibly, is a form of intelligence that conservatives possess and liberals lack. One need look no farther than Obama's 2013 budget proposal, with its endless future of trillion-dollar deficits, for proof.

In reality, the abstract intelligence measured by academic testing -- the testing that "proves" that liberals are smarter than conservatives -- is precisely the sort of impractical, detached mental functioning that leads to failure in the real world.

Among those who actually produce actual goods and services -- those who are not government bureaucrats, teachers, or community organizers -- a very different kind of intelligence holds sway. This practical intelligence involves the ability to focus on outcomes, to display resolve, and to make difficult decisions within an imperfect world. It involves mental qualities that are not measured on academic tests.

Put simply, conservatives are smarter.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/are_libs_smarter.html#ixzz1mNg7IPmB

Top Dem: 'The Fact is You Don’t Need a Budget'

http://nation.foxnews.com/budget/2012/02/08/top-dem-fact-you-don-t-need-budget


All reality has left these people. If it wasn't so terrible it would be hilarious.

A Post-American World?

By Victor Davis Hanson In a scathing denunciation of Mitt Romney last week, Fareed Zakaria praised Barack Obama for his nuanced understanding of what Zakaria has called the “Post-American World”: This is a new world, very different from the America-centric one we got used to over the last generation. Obama has succeeded in preserving and even enhancing U.S. influence in this world precisely because he has recognized these new forces at work. He has traveled to the emerging nations and spoken admiringly of their rise. He replaced the old Western club and made the Group of 20 the central decision-making forum for global economic affairs. By emphasizing multilateral organizations, alliance structures and international legitimacy, he got results. It was Chinese and Russian cooperation that produced tougher sanctions against Iran. It was the Arab League’s formal request last year that made Western intervention in Libya uncontroversial. By and large, you have ridiculed this approach to foreign policy, arguing that you would instead expand the military, act unilaterally, and talk unapologetically. That might appeal to Republican primary voters, but chest-thumping triumphalism won’t help you secure America’s interests or ideals in a world populated by powerful new players. Where to start with Mr. Zakaria’s indictment? George Bush traveled frequently to “emerging nations,” as did Bill Clinton. The former’s multibillion-dollar initiatives to help battle AIDS in Africa have saved millions of lives. Long before Obama, the G-something meetings were already more than “the old Western club.” Unlike Obama in Libya or Clinton in Serbia, Bush did not intervene in Afghanistan or Iraq without first obtaining congressional support. Bush obtained United Nations approval for our intervention in Afghanistan and tried to for Iraq. In contrast, Clinton did not go to the U.N. before bombing Serbia, and Obama obtained U.N. resolutions to enforce a no-fly-zone in Libya and offer humanitarian aid, and he then summarily far exceeded both by bombing ground troops. War with Iran is more likely now than it was in 2008. The opening of a U.S. embassy in Syria accomplished nothing, while China and Russia hand-in-glove block American efforts to impose sanctions on Damascus. The Arab League authorized American action in Libya and then whined when we interpreted its so-so support as a green light for bombing rather than merely giving the rebels military and material aid. Libya is a blueprint for nothing, and that pattern will not be followed in Syria. Unfortunately, the U.S.-forced removal of a tyrant without the presence of American ground troops — completely different from what we did in Germany, Italy, Japan, Serbia, Panama, Afghanistan, and Iraq — gives no guarantee that something just as bad cannot follow, as we are seeing with the Arab Winter. In the case of Iran, loud promises of face-to-face talks; empty threats about deadlines; failed efforts at quid pro quo deals with the Russians to thwart proliferation; near silence when protesters jammed the streets of Teheran in spring 2009; mushy apologetic references to our role in the 1953 coup against Mossadegh; and ostentatious outreach to Syria, Iran’s best friend in the region, coupled with even more ostentatious snubbing of Israel, Iran’s worst enemy in the region — all these have made both an Iranian bomb and a war in the Persian Gulf more, not less, likely. In short, I am afraid that “multilateral organizations” and “international legitimacy” long ago were mostly reduced to partisan talking points. Liberal hysteria over Guantanamo, renditions, tribunals, preventive detention, and Predators vanished when Obama embraced or expanded all of them. If there is a war with Iran, the Left will be as quiet about a preemptive effort as it was once so loud over Iraq. “Chest-thumping triumphalism” of course is unwise; but even worse is naïve and clumsy deal-making at the expense of American interests and allies. It cannot be seriously argued that since 2009 China, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Syria, or Venezuela are either more reasonable toward, or more deterred by, the United States. The old hot spots in Afghanistan, Cyprus, Eastern Europe, Iraq, the Falkland Islands, Mexico, North Africa, the former Soviet republics, Taiwan, and the West Bank are not cooler than in 2009, for all the 2012 Obama cool, but more likely warmer and more unstable. I do not think that allies like Britain, Canada, India, Israel, or Poland are more rather than less friendly. So what about the president’s being praised for transitioning America to “a post-American world,” in which we are supposed to accept a new multipolar reality to replace the fossilized concept of American exceptionalism? Our own massive debt, the rise of China, and the emergence of India and Brazil as major economies are often offered as proof that post-Americans should accept a new “lead from behind” role abroad. Yet in 1939 there were more multipolar contenders — France, Britain, Germany, Russia, and Japan — than there are now. And in varying ways all those rivals deprecated an isolationist Depression-era America, despite the fact that the U.S. had the world’s largest economy and had miraculously, just two decades earlier, sent a million men to Europe in a single year to ensure the allied victory over imperial Germany. Long ago we first heard faddish talk of post-Americanism. Supposedly superior models in Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan energized throngs and produced modern arms far more than did a Grapes of Wrath America. Next, the declinists warned us about the ascendant Communist Soviet Union, which overran Eastern Europe and Asia, and whose missiles went up, unlike ours, which crashed on the launch pad. Then followed Japan, Inc., in the 1970s, which was to own American golf courses, while we were to tend them. Then in the late 1990s it was the turn of the utopian European Union, which reminded Americans what a waste was our military budget and how silly was our suspicion of man-made global warming. Currently, the fact that China has a bullet train and we do not is supposed to convince us that half a billion Chinese never having been to a Western-style doctor and the Chinese industrial landscape resembling the area around Lake Erie circa 1920 simply don’t matter. But is the latest cry-wolf trend one that we should finally heed? Post-Americans certainly have put themselves in a financial jam by borrowing an additional $12 trillion since 2000. If Obama were to be reelected, he would finish his presidency having borrowed more money than all prior presidents put together. We run chronic trade deficits and outsource millions of jobs overseas. Unemployment remains high, economic growth sluggish. Federal oil leases are canceled and pipelines not built. We did not pacify Iraq quickly, and we remain bogged down in Afghanistan. Still, all of that hardly adds up to a post-American world. Instead, by almost any historical standard of assessing civilizations, the 21st century looks far brighter for America than for its rivals. American population growth is robust; post-Japan, post-Europe, and post-China are aging and shrinking. We are daily increasing our known fossil-fuel reserves; those in Europe and China are declining. Copying and rivaling America’s free-market economy are impressive Chinese achievements, but hardly proof that China can likewise emulate our Constitution, racial inclusion, transparency, or cultural dynamism. With all the post-America talk, we forget that one American on average still produces threes times as many goods and services as do three Chinese. Our Constitution facilitates economic change; post-Communist Russia and China still cannot square the circle of authoritarian government and free markets. In its worst financial crisis in the last 80 years, the United States nonetheless proved more robust and stable than the soon-to-be-post–European Union. In some world rankings of the top 15 institutions of higher learning, California’s universities are more heavily represented than are those of any entire country — except the United States itself. India is still straitjacketed by caste impediments, Europe by class boundaries, China, Japan, and South Korea by sharp racial distinctions, and the Arab world by insidious tribal loyalties. The idea of a Brazilian or Chinese President Obama is the stuff of fantasy. All that retrograde typecasting seems pretty post-something to me. In contrast, America, alone of the major powers, is a multiracial open society bound by one culture, where merit, more than race, tribe, birth, or class, determines success. When post-Americans unwisely talk about slashing the military, we still should remember that all the world’s other carrier battle groups combined will for decades lack the power of one of our eleven. The productivity of American agriculture continues to be unsurpassed, in a world that will become increasingly food short and hungry. And a notable thing about American farming is that it has millions of acres idle or allotted to subsidized biofuels, suggesting that we could easily produce even more food than we do now. China has riots; Russia has riots; Europe has riots; the Arab world is one large riot these days. America has a few sputtering Occupy Wall Street street carnivals. An authoritarian, aging, resource-starved, mercantilist, and racially intolerant China is hardly an inspiration for an aspiring Africa. Latin American elites do not send their children to Tokyo for medical training. American families are not emigrating to India or Brazil to find opportunity. Americans cross the border for vacation homes, not to find work in Latin America. The equivalents of post-America’s Facebook, Amazon, Walmart, and Google do not sprout up in a supposedly ascendant Istanbul or Mumbai. Nor does the United Nations offer much hope of replacing American influence. In Libya, the U.S. bragged that it had obtained U.N. approval for a no-fly zone and humanitarian relief — but then had to violate those resolutions in order to join its NATO allies in bombing Moammar Qaddafi’s forces. Whether Iran lets off a nuclear weapon, or North Korea uses one against South Korea or Japan, depends not on the U.N. Security Council, or Chinese deterrence, but only on whether those rogue states fear a response from the United States. Again, as far as Syria goes, the U.N. is irrelevant. Of course, the United States should work with its allies. It must be a good international citizen and where possible embrace international cooperation. Who even minds if on occasion an unsure American president may feel obliged to bow or apologize to foreign leaders? America will have to reduce its borrowing, pay down its debts, and reformulate its entitlement system, or face a Greek-style financial crisis. That said, let us not confuse the trendy pumps of the hour with the unchanging water of the ages. A new Shanghai airport, a Brazilian Olympics, a new Russian pipeline, or a new Indian enterprise zone still does not tell us much about the underlying principles and values of nations that so far have not been able to create transparent institutions, stable consensual constitutions, sustainably lawful societies, and meritocratic, rather than racially or tribally based, advancement of the sort that allows a nation to meet crises, adapt, and grow stronger. As far as the 21st century goes, compared to the alternatives, it is more likely that we are in a pre-American than a post-American age. — NRO contributor Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author most recently of the just-released The End of Sparta, a novel about ancient freedom.

© National Review Online 2012. All Rights Reserved. 

New conservative publication offers to practice 'Combat Journalism' for the right

New conservative publication offers to practice 'Combat Journalism' for the right

http://freebeacon.com/

The Duty of the Citizen

Its up to us.

Its up to YOU...

What do we do? How do we take back control of our

government and protect the ideals which made the

United States of America that shining city on the hill

Ronald Reagan described?

We need to do many things. We need to re-educate

ourselves as to how different a society based on

individual freedom is from societies that are not. We

need to pass down ethics and morals inherent in the

founding of our nation. A focus on fairness is not an

American ideal. Equality of opportunity is the goal, not

equality of results. We need to create a standard of what

is expected of every United States Citizen. We need to

use the time provided by our freedom and success to

better ourselves and our minds. American

exceptionalism has provided us with leisure time to do

great things because of the efficiency created by talented

and exceptional people. It would be shameful to waste

the gift of freedom we possess. Let us not continue to

waste this gift we have as Americans but let us fight

everyday against the natural decay which comes with

being comfortable.

Put simply, we need to make better choices, choose

carefully, and always think about the possible outcomes.

We need to choose the hard things in life. One of the

most memorable quotes I know is from John F. Kennedy

when he said: “We choose to go to the moon and do the

other things not because they are easy but because they

are hard.” We went to the moon but we can always work

better and harder at the other things in life. Difficulty

and struggle builds character and self esteem. Our free

society allows people to go through their lives if they

choose always making the easy choices. I think

sometimes unconsciously because they are comfortable

and/or afraid of failure. It is my opinion that someone

who remains a fence sitter, one who always makes the

easy decisions will not amount to much of anything in

their lives and it makes me sad to see such opportunity

squandered when I see it. This is the human nature

aspect we must become aware of internally, and as a

nation of citizens, struggle to overcome. We must be

conscious of our decisions and ask ourselves why am I

making this choice? Is it best for me and my country in

the long run or am I looking for a quick fix? Where will

it likely lead?

When we choose the easy route we learn nothing

and we gain very little. It is when the difficult choice is

made which requires long periods of effort, focus,

struggle, thought, and many times risk of failure that

results in something worthwhile in life. Risk and hard

fought effort is what builds a person of good character

and confidence. This is American Spirit. You know

people like this. Most likely you look up to them

because you want to be like them in some ways. You can

and I can. It only takes the willingness to do the hard

things in life and be willing to put in your time. Few

things worth having or of real meaningful value in life

come easy. If they did, everyone would have them. This

could be either material things or personal attributes that

people of strong character possess. You can only legally

possess these things by earning them in an honest way or

learning for yourself, in a way that required hard fought

internal drive and effort.

We must fight human nature and the urge to make

the easy choice or the choice which allows us to stay in

our comfort zone. To keep America great it is our duty

to do this. We must educate our children to think about

this starting as young as possible. Help our children

understand risk taking and how it helps grow us as

individuals. We must also teach consequences and

understand them. To take risk is to understand the

consequences and willingly accept them if and when

they come. Sometimes we fail but if we think through

the possible outcomes, we will most likely not be

overwhelmed if things go array and they will. But this is

not bad, this is America. We learn the most from the

mistakes we make in life. Taking risks and making

mistakes gives us more information which allows us to

make better decisions in the future. It opens doors, gives

us new routes and other choices to make. A person who

never takes risks or makes decisions will never see new

choices or opportunities. They remain not knowing what

they do not know. They stay comfortable in their state of

not knowing very much at all. This is not an American

ideal.

Do not fear mistakes. You will know failure.

Continue to reach out.

-Benjamin Franklin

Think about what kind of person you are and be

honest with yourself. If you think you are weak at

something, admit it. If you do, the next time you have to

make a decision you will be more aware of your

weakness in the past and may be more likely to make a

different decision. Do not beat yourself up if your fail at

first. Knowing why you failed now gives you the tools to

do better and try again. You still may fail but you may

just learn that one small piece of information which was

missing before and it is now enough to lead to success.

Someone who fears failure will never really know

the true taste of success. For to achieve success,
one must risk failure.

-This U.S. Citizen

This is American Spirit. Make your goals smaller and

more easily achievable. Do not take on more than you

can handle but do push yourself to try to do more than

you think you can. If you break things up into sections to

conquer one at a time you achieve something big by

succeeding a little at a time. Life is a slow process and

most of the time, success is as well. Success, like life is a

journey. You have to enjoy the journey and smell the

roses instead of worrying about getting to the end of the

road. Over time you will become more of a do-er like

America’s founders and ready to pass on that American

Spirit instead of the fence sitter who decided maybe I’ll

cross that ocean tomorrow but never does.

Now if you are a do-er and you know who you are.

It is your obligation to pass on the American Spirit to

others, especially to those who lack it. The feeling of

being part of something bigger than yourself and making

a contribution to the preservation of the United States of

America as the founders created it is worth the continued

effort. Take notice of those who do not possess the drive

and spirit you possess and talk to them. It will be hard at

first. Some will be open to ideals they are not

accustomed to hearing and will need additional

motivation. Some people will not care no matter what

and those people; you must leave behind because they

may unfortunately be a lost cause in the preservation of

our founding principles. I am realistic and I know there

will always be those who cannot be helped so we must

focus on those who can benefit from your spirit of taking

action and making a difference. It is our duty and our

debt to the Founding Fathers who pledged their lives and

their fortunes to create a new way of life for us. To

honor those who died for our freedom on foreign shores,

we owe it to them as well. I know I do.

I have talked about what I believe to be influencing

the decay of American ideals and how we can overcome

them. We are possibly reverting to the mindset of the

rest of the world due to fear of passing judgment, fear of

upsetting or offending someone, and the lack of

accountability by people and parents to the ideals which

founded the United States of America. This means we

have failed at the task of conserving those ideals and

passing them on for the specific purpose of preserving

the American Way, the American system, and the

American way of life. The term conservatism

specifically is the belief in preserving and protecting

these ideals and founding principles and comes directly

from the definition of conserve which is to preserve,

save, keep, protect, and safeguard. To safeguard the

Constitution is the Rule; everything else should fall

under this Rule. Lip service to an oath of office is not

enough and we have ventured down a path where the

Constitution is not the first consideration and thus we

end up where we are today, approaching despotism. If

collectivism was ever to be useful, a collectivist effort on

the part of the U.S. citizenry to protect the Constitution

from meddling politicians and their damaging agendas

would be an acceptable use. This is the only instance

where collectivism should be part of the United States of

America.

This U.S. Citizen has spent much time and written pages

explaining what he thinks about the causes and given

some solutions to what is going on in our country. He

would like to hear everyone reading this say the words

and think This U.S. Citizen followed by what you

believe and think. Do not be timid in speaking about our

founding ideals. Write it in a book, on a website, say it

to your neighbor, to your family members, to your coworkers,

and especially to your children, on a sign, at a

tea party and repeated to your representative and

senators. If they do not listen, run against them or work

with and support those who will for the sake of the

United States of America.

Say the words This U.S. Citizen… and you decide

what comes next in the quote and what comes next for

our country. We are empowered by the Constitution to

stand up to an oppressive federal government. It is time

for the real power of this country to speak and finally be

heard because we have been silent too long and we are

now paying the price for our complacency. This U.S.

Citizen not only wants to hear your words but the more

important point is every other U.S. Citizen needs to hear

what you think and believe. We all need to know we are

not alone in our thoughts and that our ideals are still the

ones which made America great and will allow it to

remain that way. This U.S. Citizen does not want to be

told what to do, what is best for him, and will not be

tread upon any longer. We must come together as a

group of individuals, as U.S. citizens, focused directly

on the same object, to expound the greatness of America

and the ideals which made it so. It is time for the next

generation of American leaders to step up and take

charge of protecting the freedoms of the U.S. Citizens. It

is apparent our current group of leaders is not up to the

task because they do not even understand the cause of

Liberty. They can no longer be trusted with such an

important undertaking.

The price of freedom is vigilance.

-Thomas Jefferson

So what happened in the elections of 2014 an 2016?

This is what I hope does happen... It is what I believe will happen...

Elections were held and new representatives and

senators were elected while others lost their seats for the

straightforward reason that they were no longer

trustworthy enough to fulfill their oath to the people and

to the Constitution of the United States. The U.S. was

taken to the brink of government meddling with our very

lives (Obamacare) and the people stood up and said no, not this. The do-ers showed up and took action, promising they would

not be lulled back to sleep. They would closely monitor

our representatives and participate in lawmaking and the

operations of our officials who are so dutifully entrusted

with the care of our precious republic. The people have

vowed to support only those candidates who will correct

the problems created by the latest political agenda and

by actions not words, preserve the ideals of the

Constitution and the Founding Fathers.

We have returned the republic to one focused on

protecting us from our enemies and creating

opportunities for all citizens of the United States instead

of controlling and meddling in their lives. We have again

realized how important our freedom is, the sacrifices

which have been made for it, and vowed to never let a

few people rule over us in our best interest because we

know they will do no such thing. We have never come

so close to returning to the old ways of the rest of the

world left behind hundreds of years ago in search of new

and better opportunities in the new world of America.

We have walked down the easy path of government

control and dependency and saw that its price is too

high. A price that sentences us and our children to a life

where we can no longer say the sky is the limit and that

one is only limited by one’s self because those words

would have no longer been true. We have chosen the

path where those words again have real meaning and

have chosen the difficult path to protect our part of the

American dream and the American Way.

Stand by… We The People are paying attention, we

are watching, we are taking action, and we are not going

away!

Its up to us.

Its up to YOU...

Signed,
This U.S. Citizen