 | | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) Yeah, O'Reilly uses his radio program to say things he wouldn't say on the telly, and vice versa--in this way, he can claim he didn't say something bigotted or factually wrong on whatever (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Ahh, I forgot to factor in O'Reilly. I didn't even know he had a radio program. As for Howard, well, he is the poster child for much that is S & R [1] with our country. JOHN [1] Sick and Wrong (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Good guess, but actually, it was a not-so-stern jab at Bill O'Reilly. I'm not sure, but I don't think that Howard currently has a primetime show. And anyway, he's more of a kvetcher than a whiner. Dave! (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) But if you go there, don't tell them that you know John, or you'll be summarily booted. Dave! (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) See Sore Thumbs (the webcomic) lately. I'd give you a link but not from behind this firewall... (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Sorry. That was an inside reference to Dave! I was referring to the (URL) Democratic Underground>. (...) You could have a sample size of 1,000,000, but if it isn't random, then it is worthless. Berkeley is arguabley the most liberal place in (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) That's an inside joke between Mr. Neal and me. Nothing to do, incidentally, with discussions of the UN Embassy in Denmark, which we have all "let go." (...) I don't know about that last part, but a sample of 2,000 kids growing up in a famously (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) ???? (...) Disagree. One hundred people is a decent amount (error is proportional to 1/sqrt(sample size)). Besides, if the sample size was considered inadequate in a statistical sense by the experts in the field who review the paper (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) lol For the record, I signed up again with yet another email addy, and was summarily nuked; they must checking IPs. I have officially given up life in the underground. Pity. (...) Agreed. (...) I wasn't a whiney child (so I'm told), and I did (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) I read about this on a certain Other Forum and basically said "eh." It's a too-small sample size from a too-small geographic area. I'd say it's close to meaningless, and in any case the factors of adolescent life and parental leanings likely (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Would you explain what points you disagree with? It seems a fairly narrow but objective study to me and a surpringly well written science article about the study. Tim (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
I'm shocked. I'm also kidding. The most interesting thing to me about (URL) study> is the motivation of the researchers. When the day is done and the results are in, it simply amounts to patting oneself on the back. This is research? JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) What-- is it "Sarcasm Day" down there? (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well good naturedness was certainly the overwhelming impression I came away with from your post. a (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Is this yet another example of your "obvious sarcasm"? JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well, at least I was good natured enough to have made my sarcasm obvious. Your comment borders incivility. ROSCO (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well, at least I was good natured enough to have included a smiley. Your comment borders incivility. JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Time to let it go. Really. ROSCO (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Time to let it go. Really. JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) The UN doesn't have embassies, as far as I know. (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
