That there ARE indeed stupid Americans, and they all have one thing in common, they vote demoratic.

Ok, how many times have we heard that the democrats think that a) Bush is a moron (or insert your favorite here) and/or b) American's are stupid.

I've also heard that gee, democrats are the smart ones.  Hmmmm, really?  Then how come you can't make your case to the 'stupid' American people that according to liberal thinking - their Idiot king has no clothes on?  Worse yet, if you can't defeat someone that many people in the democratic party think is intulectually inferior, then what does that make them?  I don't think I need to spell that out do I?  Perhaps I do, democrats are stupid.

Let's look at it objectivly, many people that lean left isolate themselves in a theoretical & political bubble, (moreso than their republican counterparts) discussing amougngst themsleves things that make them feel good about themselves.  I suppose it's therepudic, I mean if all the people that you talk to think the same way that you do, then do you really grow intulectually?  Or do you stagnate?  Look at this board here, I, as well as others have tried to objectivly point out the mistakes & wrong thinking of those who might disagree with us, but rather than be objective & admit when logical points are made, any irefuteable facts are dismissed & their author ridiculed as missing the point, or being stupid.  Those Democrats are just being stupid.

I am watching the board discuss supposed voter fraud citing sources that are a) not credible and b) are nothing more than editorials.  Talk about being obtuse.  Gee, if something happens that I don't agree with, well that in of itself is evidense that the results *must* be fradulent.  Stupid democrats.

To go a little further - I always hear that the democrats have more of the US population that agrees with their platform.  Ok, for a moment let's assume that that is the case.  Also let's for argument sake say that the majority of democrats are intelectually superior.  Wouldn't it follow therefore that in pure numbers the democrats who vote would far outnumber the republicans who vote?  (because using liberal logic, those who dont' agree w/ them must be stupid & therefore republican)  Stupid democrats.

In my work (finance), I travel all over the western US & prior I talked to people from pretty much every area code.  One thing that they all had in common, no matter if they were from Seattle, Wyoming, Montana, California, Virgina, or Maine they all are pretty darn sharp.  And no I am not talking to the fortune 1000, alot of who I talk to are the Bubba Joe's and Martha Sue's of this world.  Common people who perhaps only own one suit (if that), and would be dismissed by the liberal elete as country bumpkins.  Funny thing is though that these people have more common sense than do most educated people that I know.   Democrats are stupid.

Why do I waste my breath?

Well, quite simply it's the little 'democrat' voice in me that would like to see the Democratic party stand once again for ideals that it once did before it was hijacked by the extremest contengency that currently controlls it.  Stupid democrats.

However the left has done a good job of alienating a great number of American's by postering as "The Brain on High".

I don't see it ending though. "INtelligence" is the religion of the secularist on the left.

Bill's comment, except to the extent that I would note that it is only the far Left which attempts to attribute stupidity to the other side as a mantra.

Who said the GOP / GOP Voters / Bush were stupid?

The funniest thing about the Clinton presidency was all these white, UMC, executive type guys driving around in their SUVs, going home to wifey and their 2.6 children, being at their income producing peak because of Clinton's economic policies, and being TOTALLY FUCKING MISERABLE AND ANGRY all the time. I never understood why, maybe you can explain it to me. Conservative Talk Radio's leading icons are Rush Limbaugh, a drug addict, and Michael Savage, a confirmed nutcase. Why reasonable men would find their message appealing is a mystery to me.

The vote fraud issue is not about Republican or Democrat. It's about democracy at large. I personally am troubled about a pattern, which started with VNS in Florida in 2000, and continued with exit polls in OH and FL in 2004, which showed the Democratic canidate winning decisively. Historically, these polls have been very accurate. To see such a large margin of error is troubling to me. Former Clinton advisor/hobbyist Dick Morris has suggested in his columns for Fox that exit poll manipulation took place. Frankly, it's hard to take that sort of accusation seriously, but for my mind, I wouldn't mind an investigation.

Finally, you should also find troubling how the Christian Right, our American Taliban, seems to have more power than it likely actually does. The mainstream media has done a fine job of brainwashing the public on this issue. They make it sound like they were responsible for half or more of W's vote.  

Like I wrote earlier, we'll see this week if the story has legs. You won't see it on CNN or Fox, though.

Laws6

1) Dems not "taken over by radicals"- you simply don't understand what a real radical.  Remember the Symbionese Lib Army- the weather underground- THOSE were radicals- like poeple who try to say creationism is true- oops thoseare on your side!  I think we might need to have a radical "shining path type group i the US to keep you guys comprehending the real political spectrum.  What you say are "radicals" are seen as Christian or Social Democrats in Europe and are the CENTER of the spectrum.  Here the center is a little further right but no as much as you guys!

2) You are in Finance?  And you bought the borrow and squander president?  Read the Slate article I posted about the deficit and you will see that you have bought "voodoo" economics-.  And you are no longer allowed to call anyone stupid- or to mention the words Nest or Eggs- a la the movie whose name now escapes me.  It's OK tho' your kids will love being enslaved by the Chinese when they take over financially.

Don't you need to have some schoolin' to work in Finance?  Or in typical American style were you able to forgo any liberal arts background of any kind while gettin your Certificate?  Clearly history and Economics were never on your slate...

BTW- I too think the voter fraud was minimal- it was plain ole lyin' and misleadin' and an larglely underinformed populace- oh that and the mental illness that is religious faith...

I begin to take it personal that you don't post anything substantial to most of my arguments here, which I think through with much labor and thought, and then you come out with a resentful, whiny post like this that liberals are being elitest.  If you could answer the arguments presented, do so.  If you can't, don't complain that liberals are in their own little bubble to praise themselves for intelligence.  Our posting here  to you and other conservatives proves that this isn't the case.    

This is a peculiar obsession you and Jbirdica have about stupidity.  I'll put it like this: if you disagree with somebody on a course of action with something material at stake, with all perceptions and knowledge being equal, and the results and consequences are yet unknown, of course you are going to think your decision was the most intelligent, till proven otherwise at least.  If you thought the other person made an intelligent decision, you'd be doing what he is doing; isn't that correct?  

But in politics, we have a situation where conservatives have overridden liberals, and have done so for some time, and there's no way to create a "control" world to find out how it would have gone otherwise.  So, how is it strange that if you talk to liberals, you find that they believe their decision, their vote in this election, was the more intelligent.  How would you feel about them if they said they were doing the stupid thing, and were still doing it?  

Unfortunate that this no-brainer fact of human psychology irks you so much, but if it does, maybe you should get out of the discussion.  Otherwise, you should mark it down as part of the cost of doing business.  Yes, people disagree, and yes, they will make what they think is the most intelligent decision.  This implies that they think that they are smarter than the other person who makes the opposite decision, till proven otherwise at least.  Please stop boring us with more posts about how arrogant this is, and analyze why liberals think they're decision is the intelligent one.  Look at the reason they make their decisions, not how they feel when they do, and knock these reasons down with your superior arguments if you can, but don't give yourself points for intelligence unless you do.

Being in a majority is definitely not a badge of stupidity, but there's nothing about being in a majority that shows intelligence either, that is, unless conformity has created it's own momentum, then the majority is definitely as dumb as a school of fish.  

For the sake of peace and rights, the majority rules-- but not because it's necessarily smarter or less prone to error.  How can 59 million people be wrong?  Fair question, but how can 56 million people be wrong, then?  Majorities have screwed themselves royally before.  Electing Hitler for one thing. Prohibition for another one.  Liberals think that this was a very, very bad decision in this election.  

I'll counter one other point: I am one of those "common people."  I don't have a high class, high paying six-figure or even high five figure job.  However, I do talk to over a thousand different people a day on my job-- no exaggeration.  So, I'm as much an expert about this as you are.  If you think everyone you run into is very intelligent, then you're giving away the compliment much too easily and it doesn't mean anything to you.  Maybe you resent most the suggestion that it does.  

Also, since you were writing instead of talking, I don't know what you mean about "wasting your breath," unless you're saying that you're tired of living.  At least that meaning would be original, and clever.

The Left just doesn't get it.  They are out of step and out of touch with most of America.  Long live the Red States!

Yes, we think we are right, just as conservatives do.

Convince us otherwise with reasoned arguments.

you ARE being an elitist and STUPID, as well as supremely arrogant.

My point has been that BOTH sides have been slinging crap around and insulting the "opposition". Arguing and name calling are not debate, nor are they truly discussion.

You stated " I'll put it like this: if you disagree with somebody on a course of action with something material at stake, with all perceptions and knowledge being equal, and the results and consequences are yet unknown, of course you are going to think your decision was the most intelligent, till proven otherwise at least.  If you thought the other person made an intelligent decision, you'd be doing what he is doing; isn't that correct? "

And, in the context you have written, yes you are correct. However, what I see consistently here is the balance of your statement you have omitted-namely that the person who has perceived thier decision as correct openly calls the other person (or persons) stupid or other insulting names.

Your next point: "Yes, people disagree, and yes, they will make what they think is the most intelligent decision.  This implies that they think that they are smarter than the other person who makes the opposite decision, till proven otherwise at least." This may be YOUR percepiton, however it means nothing. If I feel that my decision is correct and yorus is not, I do not necesarily assume, nor believe that I am "smarter" than you, I feel that I have made the more correct decision. It truly IS arrogance to assume that because you believe you have made the "right" decision, that makes you "smarter". It is not normal, and a truly critical thinker realizes that.

I have taken several of the poster's opinions here as personal insults, but I also realize that at some point it makes no sense to continue the debate/arguing.

wow, you speak to over a 1,000 DIFFERENT people a day?  I am VERY impressed. Let me quote you:

"However, I do talk to over a thousand different people a day on my job-- no exaggeration."

Gee, and you are one of those people who say that Americans are stupid.  Gee, you must be really smart to conduct business with over a thousand different people a day.   Let's see, let's figure you work a standard 8 hour day, let's also say that you don't take any breaks or lunch or anything.  8 hours is 480 minutes which is 28,800 seconds.  That means that someone calls you, get the introduction out of the way, state the problem, you provide the resolution and say goodby in under 1/2 a minute - 28.8 seconds to be exact.

Man, you must be omnipotent.  (or stupid) No wonder you are a liberal elete!!!

Either that your you really think people are dumb enough to take you at your word.  Hmmmm.

Ok, I have many liberal friends and one thing they all have in common no doubt is that they look at the worlds problems emotionally without much if any rational thinking.  So I think that while having all the best intentions the Liberals of this world think their course of action is best because it "feels" right.... all the while their actions create more harm than good.

All I am saying is that Democrats are stupid since they don't sit back & think about what course of action their emotionally driven opinions will result in.  Consider this:

The south, used to be a Democratic strong hold - no longer - they have less than a handfull of senators there now.

Our presidents in recent history have come from the south.

Migration, people are leaving the blue states & migrating to the red - and will like it or not be assimilated, even if some of them aren't, it's a simple numbers game where those who vote red will still outnumber the others.

It's simple.  The democratic party has lost strengh.  It's stupid not to see it.  The liberal elete have taken over the party.  No longer is the Democratic party that of the likes of President Kennedy.  Now it's the party of M. Moore & Howard Dean who I understand is seeking leadership of the party.  I hope he does since if y'all are stupid enough to do that, the party will move further left, away from the center of American thought & voting patterns.

Gee, how stupid can you be?

... and 24.8 seconds per call is more like it.  Do the math now with that revised time.  I was hoping to keep my confidentiality about this, and I resent your accusation that compelled me to out myself.  Check with any description of operator work that you find, and it will confirm for you that I am 100 percent accurate in the number of calls I claim.

A compliment: you have proved that you could do basic math.  At the same time, you've demonstrated with that knee-jerk insult that you are  truly stupid.  Your  logic/math isn't flawed, it's your choice of premises in the pre-logic phase.   This is the same error, I contend, that the majority of Americans are making with their politics.      

If you had taken a tone of inquiry about it, rather than accusing me, I might have felt differently.  Curiosity isn't your virtue.  

/Zin  

-- Modified on 11/9/2004 8:33:31 PM

Yeah, I already knew you were an operator... and you must be a damm good one if you can in 24.8 seconds access someone's intelegence - which is what I was implying.

Suppose me being subtle was asking to much for you to get the point.

So let me be blunt - there is no possible way for you to access someone's intelegence (or lack thereof) in just over 20 seconds as you claim to be an expert simply because you talk to 1000 people a day.  It takes time and give & take discussion to make that determination, if it's able to be made at all.

Looks like you are now the demonstrated idiot..... oh that's right, it's a given since you are a democrat.

And since you are now able to think I bet you are sorry you voted for Bush.

"Yeah, I already knew you were an operator...and you must be a damm good one if you can in 24.8 seconds access someone's intelegence - which is what I was implying."

No you didn't, and that wasn't what you were implying, but I've edited my previous message.  I regret being that bad tempered, I apologize.  But saying I lied is just a low blow, and that's exactly what you said.

If it takes time and discussion to make a determination about intelligence, how does that fit your claim that almost all the people you've met are so intelligent?  Why this in depth inquiry to determine the rubber-stamp obvious?  My entire challenge was that you seem to be giving that merit out too easily, and I challenged it by saying it doesn't really fit with my own experience.  

What do you mean by "accessing someone's intelligence?"  You make it sound like you've hacked their passwords.  What do you actually find that proves their intelligence to you?

My take on it is something more basic.  You put two hungry rats in a maze, and the one who finds the cheese fastest is the most intelligent.  You've already determined, before you put them in the maze, what they desired most at that moment.  

When people call in, they do so because they desire a number.  It's my job to understand their request, find it, and give it to them, ASAP, if possible.  

My sample isn't biased by people who are interested in financing.  However, I think I'm qualified to know what I'm talking about from experience.  I've done this work now for 8 years, and I've noticed ...a certain slippage.  Let's just say if I were presented, unknowingly, with news that our education system has been last in the industrialized world for the last decade, that it wouldn't surprise me.  Wouldn't you know? It has been last in the industrialized world for more than 20 years.  It doesn't help when intelligence is just accepted as a given, graded on a curve, especially if are in the majority.
   
That's all I will say about the comparison.  Accept it or not, this part of the discussion is closed.

/Zin

In fact, it came out of the blue and was rather OT.  (See url)  Then you dropped the subject as suddenly as you brought it up.  At least now you are taking part again.

If you've made the point that both sides have been slinging crap, It is also true that you have been disproportionate about which side you've attacked about it.  Therefore, that doesn't seem to be your main complaint.

Now you wrote:

"...what I see consistently here is the balance of your statement you have omitted-namely that the person who has perceived thier decision as correct openly calls the other person (or persons) stupid or other insulting names."  

On the contrary.  When you answered my post (see URL), I didn't call **anybody** stupid.  You titled your post "So...the majority of America is NOW STUPID?"  What I said in my post (paraphrase) was that Bush's first term had been a failure, and with his election won, the world nations would blame the American people now, rather than the American government.  Whereas before they were saying they liked the American people but despised their government. I assure you I didn't fling that insult.  You manufactured it for me anyway.    

After you put it in that term, I didn't deny it.  In fact, I pointed out that this has long been the worst education system in the industrialized world, and that does imply that I think it has effected the political system.  You gave no answer for that.  Check the thread.  Did you have one?    

Either way, maybe others have called you names over this, but **you** completely manufactured my flinging that insult.  And the thread proves it.

Your final point about arrogance and contrary decisions: making a contrary decision does imply that you think you are smarter, till proven wrong.  That would be the implication, anyway, if the thought is taken that far.  However, that doesn't mean that it's necessary to take it that far.  Obviously, when you yourself make such a decision, contrary to somebody else, it's not your usually practice to take it that far.  It isn't mine either.  Agreed, taking it that far with every decision so made would not be normal, and would be arrogant in most circumstances.

Nevertheless, with a political decision such as this election, with so much at stake, this thought does get finished.  Especially when you confront a defeated, but still concerned and uncontrite, minority. With any inquiry at all, you could find it.  Especially if you jump the gun like you do about it.    
     
Call it arrogance if you like, but the conservatives have finished that thought, too.  It's disguised in the gloat and glow of their election victory.  They won the decision about policy, but whether that policy is a winner will only be determined by the next geo-political results.  The losers are apprehensive.  Conservatives are in control, and the rest of us are just along for the ride.  

I'll put off answering your accusation about my elitism, arrogance and stupidity for now.  

/Zin

Actually Hitler if memory serves me never had a majority.  He was at best a leader of a small (but powerfull) faction in the Weimar Republic.

So how did he get to power?  Quite simple, German had a multiparty system & the party that had the most votes asked Hitler to join them since they figured they could controll him.  Umm, they were wrong.  His brownshirts & quickly helped him consolidate power, lots of political manuvering & soon, he had centerlized power under him.

Not unlike the liberal element that's currently in controll of the Democratic party.

Hmm, what possible profession can someone conduct business in under 1/2 a minute.... hmmm, only one - a telephone operator!  I was going to mention the occupation in my original reply but decided against it, so like I said, I already knew - but you fall I guess into the catagory of the rat that dosen't get the cheese.

This is not to say that you are not intelegent, just that you aren't as quick as this rat.

See that's the rub isn't it?  I know that most Americans are smart - very smart, but in gradation, there is of course different levels of intelegence.  This dosen't mean that you can catagorize half the population as being stupid just because they aren't as smart as the other half..... to make the argument for that is..... well.... just stupid.

Again, you prove my point.

My contention is that you need to get to know the person, spend some time with them in order to understand their level of intelegence.

But I suppose it's just easier to think of people as stuipid if they happen to disagree with the values and ideas that you incorrectly hold as the truth.

Mr. Referee: I knew I had an open goal there, but I decided to pass instead.  Could we count the goal anyway?

Do you know of a game, of a situation where this attitude might  prevail?  

So, taws, you knew I was either an operator, or a liar, and opted to insult me rather than say the intelligent thing.  You    illustrate here why I think conservatives are less than bright:  given a choice between doing something intelligent or doing something mean, almost all conservatives would choose mean hands down, usually justifying it with quasi-religious authority worshipping bullshit that doesn't stand up to ten seconds of thought.    

It's not that conservatives can't do the intelligent thing: call it values.  They don't value intelligence.  Conforming to what people have always done is more important to them, and more emotionally satisfying when cruelty is added.  

I believe this thread started with you calling your opponents stupid, purportedly as a lecture on not doing it to your side.  For my part, however, that will always be a term of insult.  I only use it when I want to insult and pick a fight.  

However, I think the majority's decisions in this election are not too bright.  I think we'll probably know within 10 years if I am correct. Judging by the tone here, conservatives would faster blame liberals when things get worse than question their decisions.

/Zin


 

-- Modified on 11/10/2004 11:57:56 PM

But his majority had waned by the time he was appointed chancellor by Paul von Hittenburg.  

/Zin