Senate goes "nuclear"

[Bob Juch]

[TheCalvinator24]

"The Senate, of all places, should be sensitive to the fact that this large and diverse country has never believed in government by an unrestrained majority rule. Its composition is a repudiation of the very idea that the largest number of votes always wins out. The members from places like Rhode Island, Maine or Iowa know that their constituents are given a far larger say than people from New York simply by virtue of the fact that each state has two votes, regardless of population."

"The filibuster, which allows 41 senators to delay action indefinitely, is a rough instrument that should be used with caution. But its existence goes to the center of the peculiar but effective form of government America cherishes."

"it seems to us this [Judicial nominations] is a matter in which it's most important that a large minority of senators has a limited right of veto. Once confirmed, judges can serve for life and will remain on the bench long after Mr. Bush leaves the White House. And there are few responsibilities given to the executive and the legislature that are more important than choosing the members of the third co-equal branch of government. The Senate has an obligation to do everything in its power to ensure the integrity of the process."

Any guesses where the editorial from which I pulled these passages appears?

It's on about 500 right-wing blogs. I don't know which one you copied this from.

I copied it from the New York Times.

[silverscreenselect]

Any guesses where the editorial from which I pulled these passages appears?

It's on about 500 right-wing blogs. I don't know which one you copied this from.

I copied it from the New York Times.

And did you happen to discover that tidbit by researching through the archives of the New York Times or by going to a site like this one:

http://patterico.com/2013/11/21/hysteri ... ork-times/

or this one:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/11/on ... er-of.html

or this one:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/ ... ilibuster/

The reason the right wing is so out of touch with the rest of the country is their tendency to isolate themselves from any opposing viewpoints (i.e., the will of the people) and instead reinforce each other's biases. That's what led to the shutdown, and I'm confident that sometime between now and the next election, it will lead the Republicans astray again and again.

[themanintheseersuckersuit]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

[silverscreenselect]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

From Forbes, not exactly a bastion of liberalism:

I read this article about the Mitt Romney campaign being blindsided by Tuesday’s election results. Obviously, a bit of wishful thinking is inevitable in a losing presidential campaign. But the degree of cocooning portrayed in that article is surprising. You’d expect at least some of Romney’s highly-paid advisors to be competent at their jobs.

Two decades ago, conservatives liked to argue that the ivory tower had put academics out of touch with reality, and that conservatism had reason and science on its side. The recent collapse of communism seemed to confirm this view. Today the tables have turned. While academia certainly still has pockets of out-of-touch leftists, there has been a much more dramatic decline in intellectual standards on the political right.

don’t think it’s a coincidence that Team Romney’s polling cluelessness comes after years of conservatives demonizing pointy-headed academics, including scientists. On subjects like evolution, global warming, the biology of human conception, and even macroeconomics, conservatives have been increasingly bold about rejecting the consensus of scientific experts in favor of ideologically self-serving pronouncements. That attitude may have contributed to their loss of the White House in 2012. It will be much more costly for the country as a whole if it doesn’t change before the GOP next captures the White House.

George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq was a good example of the kind of damage that can be done when elected officials choose ideology over expertise. Bush didn’t just ignore the many experts who warned that invading Iraq was a bad idea. The ideologues were so convinced the war would go well that they massively underestimated the amount of preparation that would be required for the occupation to go reasonably smoothly. As a result, the aftermath of the war was much more chaotic than it would have been if experienced experts had been more involved in the planning process. Many more people died and much more property was destroyed than would have occurred with proper planning.

I think global warming is a more complex issue than some people on the left acknowledge. But rather than accepting the basic scientific reality of climate change and making the case that the costs of action outweigh the benefits, many conservatives have taken the cruder tack of simply attacking the entire enterprise of mainstream climate science as a hoax.

On macroeconomics, a broad spectrum of economists, ranging from John Maynard Keynes to Milton Friedman, supports the basic premise that recessions are caused by shortfalls in aggregate demand. Economists across the political spectrum agree that the government ought to take action counteract major aggregate demand shortfalls. There is, of course, a lot of disagreement about the details. Friedman argued that the Fed should be responsible for macroeconomic stabilization, while Keynes emphasized deficit spending.

But rather than engaging this debate, a growing number of conservatives have rejected the mainstream economic framework altogether, arguing—against the views of libertarian economists like Friedman and F.A. Hayek—that neither Congress nor the Fed has a responsibility to counteract sharp falls in nominal incomes.

The conservative movement seems to have adopted the same attitude toward Nate Silver. The world is messy and complicated, and understanding it often requires years of study and a willingness to consider evidence objectively regardless of where it comes from. Yet the conservative movement has increasingly become a hostile place for people who think for themselves, no matter how deeply they understand their subjects.

While many aspects of public policy are the subject of genuine ideological disagreements, there are also many issues where experts really do know things the rest of the public does not. A party that systematically favors ideologically convenient arguments and marginalizes dissenting voices will inevitably make costly mistakes. Thankfully, in 2012 those mistakes merely helped Mitt Romney lose the White House. But sooner or later, a Republican is going to get elected president. We should all hope the conservative movement develops a greater respect for expertise in the meantime.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/ ... y-problem/

There's lots more like that. You just won't find them on anncoulter.com

[Bob Juch]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

Yep, sounds like Republicans.

[TheCalvinator24]

It's on about 500 right-wing blogs. I don't know which one you copied this from.

I copied it from the New York Times.

And did you happen to discover that tidbit by researching through the archives of the New York Times or by going to a site like this one:

http://patterico.com/2013/11/21/hysteri ... ork-times/

or this one:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2013/11/on ... er-of.html

or this one:

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/ ... ilibuster/

The reason the right wing is so out of touch with the rest of the country is their tendency to isolate themselves from any opposing viewpoints (i.e., the will of the people) and instead reinforce each other's biases. That's what led to the shutdown, and I'm confident that sometime between now and the next election, it will lead the Republicans astray again and again.

Apparently, you have missed (or ignored) all the times I've mentioned that I don't read right-wing blogs or watch Fox News.

[BackInTex]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

Yep, sounds like Republicans.

Freud proven correct right there folks.

[silverscreenselect]

Apparently, you have missed (or ignored) all the times I've mentioned that I don't read right-wing blogs or watch Fox News.

Then what was your source for this information? Or did you just happen to remember that editorial from the Times of eight years ago at coincidentally the same time all those other blogs were writing about it?

[Beebs52]

Hate to tell ya but Althouse isn't rightwing. She was an Obama supporter. Was.

[Beebs52]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

Rec

[silverscreenselect]

Psychological projection was conceptualized by Sigmund Freud in the 1890s as a defense mechanism in which a person unconsciously rejects his or her own unacceptable attributes by ascribing them to objects or persons in the outside world.[1] For example, a person who is rude may accuse other people of being rude.
Although rooted in early developmental stages,[2] and classed by Vaillant as an immature defence,[3] the projection of one's negative qualities onto others on a small scale is nevertheless a common process in everyday life

Rec

You might try looking up confirmation bias and seeing how many people used the term to describe the Republicans in the last couple of years.

[Beebs52]

Rec

You might try looking up confirmation bias and seeing how many people used the term to describe the Republicans in the last couple of years.

Tres amusant.

[silvercamaro]

Rec

You might try looking up confirmation bias and seeing how many people used the term to describe the Republicans in the last couple of years.

This is a magnificent argument, as I learned in my younger days. Back in kindergarten, though, we didn't know the words "confirmation bias." When we were 5, we just said "I'm rubber and you're glue...."

Yeah, it didn't work then, either.

[Bob Juch]

Yep, sounds like Republicans.

Freud proven correct right there folks.

If you like Freud you should like his book, The Future of an Illusion.