SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
I found this a while back. It seems to show on one axis the Pull-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps ideology vs The Good Samaritan notion and the other axis looks to be the I-know-what's-best-for-you meme vs the It's-your-life,-live-it thing.
Maybe you too will find the relative positions of the various sects interesting.
The Buddhists and Atheists are close together.
The Muslims, Hindus, and black Baptists aren't far apart.
The Mormons and Southern Baptists are clustered.
The Catholics barely budge from dead center.
The Center for American Progress asks:
Does where you go to church (or temple, or mosque, or service, etc.) actually dictate your political views? A new chart, compiled by Tobin Grant of the Religion New Service [...] takes a stab at answering this question by visually illustrating the general political beliefs of religious people on two policy questions. In it, an individual's income bracket--and political opinions generally reflective of one's economic situation--looks to coincide with what "kind" of church he/she attends. Except for when it doesn't.
As Grant explains: "This new graph maps the ideologies of 44 different religious groups using data comes from [Pew Research's 2008] Religious Landscape Survey. This survey included 32,000 respondents. It asked very specific questions on religion that allow us to find out the precise denomination, church, or religion of each person."
In other words, the dimensions of each color-coded circle reflect the relative size of the religious group it represents, and a circle's position on the graph illustrates how the faithful feel about the government's involvement in both the economy (bigger government with more services vs. smaller government with less services) and morality (greater protection of morality vs. less protection of morality).
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday December 02 2014, @12:40PM
When and where exactly were "better times"? If you're talking about the US:
- Before the Civil War, dueling between congressmen was common. In the 1850's, representatives were routinely armed in the House and Senate chambers, and in at least one incident drew their weapons.
- During the late 19th and early 20th century, they didn't even try to hide the bribery and corruption. The railroad company executives would show up in town with suitcases full of cash, the representatives would line up in front of the hotel room and walk out with their bribe, and the next day the bill giving away a bunch of public land to the railroad company in question would pass.
- Before 1920, more than half of the US adult population could not vote. Before 1964, non-white people effectively couldn't vote. While this does reduce the number of people represented by a single representative, it also guarantees that there will be lots of people not represented at all.
- We had a terrorist group (the KKK) in charge of much of the country for over a century. They're still a force to be reckoned with in some places.
- For much of US history, having the wrong skin color, the wrong religion, the wrong last name, or the wrong political opinion could get you killed, and the law was not always a protection against that.
So when were the better times, and what made them better?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Tuesday December 02 2014, @01:53PM
Before the Civil War, dueling between congressmen was common. In the 1850's, representatives were routinely armed in the House and Senate chambers, and in at least one incident drew their weapons.
At least that would increase the turnover rate since it appears that they only way they leave is horizontally in most cases.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Tuesday December 02 2014, @02:02PM
True, however, if you elected somebody because they actually represented what you wanted and they kept on getting killed by fellow congresscritters, that would sooner-or-later motivate you to vote for somebody who wouldn't get killed rather than somebody who represented you because a representative who was alive but wrong was marginally better than one that was right but dead.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday December 02 2014, @03:14PM
It might be worth it if just once we get to hear a sitting president say "If you don't pass a budget TODAY I'm gonna bust a cap in all yo asses". and mean it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 02 2014, @05:28PM
President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho? [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 02 2014, @04:46PM
That, or vote Chuck Norris for Congress.
(Score: 2) by M. Baranczak on Wednesday December 03 2014, @02:54AM
Chuck Norris? That little sissy who's scared of some scrawny Kenyan law professor? [wnd.com]