“‘We found strong support,’ they write, for the proposition that libertarians ‘will rely upon reason more — and emotion less — than will either liberals or conservatives.’ Blubbery Clintonian empathy isn’t our bag, baby; we don’t ‘feel your pain.’ Where ‘liberals have the most ‘feminine’ cognitive style … libertarians have the most ‘masculine.’ And where others often ‘rely on peripheral cues, such as how attractive or credible a speaker is,’ when formulating opinions, libertarians are more likely to pay ‘close attention to relevant arguments.’
Oh, goodness me. To read this, you might forget that Ms. Mercer, in a long whine about Wikipedia, wrote:
I predicted libertarians would ooze all over this particular spontaneous bowel movement. I was right.(Yes, that's me in the comments section. You may notice that Ms. Mercer has decided to skip over the endorsement of scientists. I wonder why that is?)
And when she calls for a "return to reason", it's worth bearing in mind that she takes a militantly "who knows, who cares" attitude towards evolution by natural selection (though she's not above little gems like: "In fact, Rousseau, Darwin and Nietzsche can go places Hitler, Stalin, Chavez and Obama could never dream", proving that there really is no such thing as neutrality here, merely a shady taking of the worst side). Or, if that isn't blatant enough, she thinks the symbol of the AWB is not "intended Nazi insignia", and that Tereblanche's funeral didn't have Nazi salutes (here's a hint - when the Daily Mail thinks a group is pro-Nazi, they're probably right).
How does such a mediocre group as American liberals keep winning? They're up against types like this.
No comments:
Post a Comment