Prairie Pooch Howls at the Genetic Moon

Rachel Maddow is the host of a relatively new MSNBC evening news and commentary show.

"Maddow was, according to her parents, a curious, serious child who never spoke baby talk. When her mother, Elaine, would walk into the kitchen to prepare breakfast, the 4-year-old Rachel would be perched on a stool, with her nightgown and bed socks on, reading the newspaper." Newsweek, December 1, 2008, p. 56

That's amazing!

"Maddow remembers when she was 7, standing in front of their black-and-white television during the 1980 election and loathing Ronald Reagan, although she is not sure why now: 'all I remember is the feeling of dislike.'"  ibid, p. 56

It sounds to the Prairie Pooch as if Rachel Maddow was primed politically at a very young age, if not at birth! Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN medical contributor, said that research now indicates that 1/3 of our political choice is genetically inherited.  (The statement was from some months ago, and due to my memory might be flawed.  Suffice it to say that his point was that genetics plays a significant role in political choice.)  And, you can certainly see the possibility that her visceral reaction to Ronald Reagan had a genetic component.  

S.P.Lunger posted a blog on The Prairie Pooch Hole some weeks ago called Conservative & Liberal Personality Differences...

Another study compared childhood temperaments with later outcomes:    "As kids, liberals had developed close relationships with peers and were rated by their teachers as self-reliant, energetic, impulsive, and resilient. People who were conservative at age 23 had been described by their teachers as easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and vulnerable at age 3... "

Amazing!

The importance of genetics in political choice is becoming evident to me.  And, it explains to some degree why evidence by "the other side" is shrugged off as inconsequential by all of us.  We "know" what is true.  Why bother with facts!  (Including myself here; I don't care how closely I listen to Rush and Bill O, they truly sound nonsensical in their arguments.  And, I doubt that they are that nonsensical.)

About genetics and upbringing.  About the old standby dinner party conversion topic nature vs nurture...

"As people age... they tend to become less open to new experiences and ideas, and less outgoing.  All of these traits have been linked to genes.  But curiously - and here's hope for anyone who resents his genetic baggage - the influence of genes wane with age: in middle and later adulthood, environment plays a larger role than genetics in shaping personality, a hint of the power of accumulated experiences."  Newsweek, December 1, 2008, p. 14

Does this clear up the nature vs nurture controversy in the political sphere of life?  The Prairie Pooch is glad to be of service!