A Berkley Study (Need I say More)

Scientist says Conservatives Were Whiny as Children

The study may be good psychology but its poor political science. The conclusion, that the whiny, clingy children need the comfort of dogma, and tradition, versus the "self-reliant" liberal kiddies, who are free to explore (free to explore, and therefore inevitably choosing to be liberals).

What kind of conservatives were they? Were they libertarians, anxious to remove the government "safety blanket"? were they neo-conservatives, seeking to utilize American power to "make the world safe for democracy", were they "the religious right" clinging to biblical verse and the embrace of a church congregation?

Were the liberals progressive, pro-drug legalization and gay rights? Were they socialists, seeking the loving embrace of a nationalized industry, and the comfort and security of labor unions with protected jobs?Were they protectionist "anti-globalization" activists fearful of the competition represented by the abilities of the third world to manufacture, faster, better and cheaper than the US?

Even if the study is accurate and quality science (and I'm suspicious) it still doesn't say anything, because "conservative" or "liberal" doesn't mean anything. They are nothing more than a convienent label for our two party system to slander their doppleganger opponent with, when in truth both parties are made up of a diverse quantity of often discordant and competing ideas, allied only to seek power but with no real loyalty to each other.