Republicans Have Become Anti-Intellectual

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
The problem is that everyone thinks they are right. The bigger problem is that, on most of these issues, there is no right or wrong. Since neither the D's nor the R's can understand that, they're all idiots.

Agreed. However, at least one D does understand. A past statement by our new President elect:

"In fact, I would argue that the most powerful voices of change in the country, from Lincoln to King, have been those who can speak with the utmost conviction about the great issues of the day without ever belittling those who opposed them, and without denying the limits of their own perspectives."

I realize that some people are still in gloating mode. However, once they finally get past that maybe they should heed Obama's words? Because they seem to be so focused on disparaging and belittling the other guy that they don't seem to recognize that their own words reflect damn poorly on themselves and, by extension, their party of choice.

hehe, you first.

Doesn't apply to me. I'm not a D or R. 😛

You are 110% Republican

Wow Dave. Figured you'd be so busy analyzing the forecast of exactly where Paloma is going to hit New Orleans and cause gas to skyrocket to $10 a gallon that you'd be too busy to reply to this thread.

 

[QuantumPion]

Originally posted by: eits
the republican party has pretty much decided that being intellectual makes you an "elitist," therefore somehow unqualified to run a country or run for public office.

can some of you explain why? what is wrong with having an intellectual with nuance ren for president? because he doesn't grow corn, wear overalls, and shoot off at the mouth, he's not "average" enough?

it's just ridiculous... the republican party really needs to re-evaluate itself. the jesus freaks and unintelligent bumpkins just aren't gonna do it for you guys anymore. your people are dying off.

We're not anti-intellectual. We're anti-"we're-smarter-then-you-and-know-whats-best-for-you" mentality. Which is the essence of elitism.

I agree with your last statement completely (the first sentence anyway). The Republican party foolishly thought that they could out-liberal the liberals and mistakenly counted on their base to "hold their nose and vote for the lesser of two evils".

 

[counterstrikedude]

Originally posted by: Farang
I think if you watch William Buckley debate Noam Chomsky you'll see that it has been that way for a while.

noam chomsky is kind of a douche, u know that right?

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Its known as faith . Many trust in OBAMA . I trust GOD. When God says not to do something best not to do it.

Do you hear god speaking? Does he only tell you what not to do or does he also tell you what to do? And, if you do indeed hear him, just to settle an age old question, is he a he or a she?

I thought obama was the messaih. Is god the messiah? I'm confused.

 

[counterstrikedude]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I think that's why Obama is such a big proponent of affordable college education.

He knows college age students break heavily towards Democrats.

he's a proponent of anything that will earn him votes.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: counterstrikedude

Originally posted by: Farang
I think if you watch William Buckley debate Noam Chomsky you'll see that it has been that way for a while.

noam chomsky is kind of a douche, u know that right?

I think chomsky might take issue with you on the grammatical structure of your posts - including this one.

But, you're kinda right about him. His doomsayer talk gets tedious - even if he's right.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: counterstrikedude

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I think that's why Obama is such a big proponent of affordable college education.

He knows college age students break heavily towards Democrats.

he's a proponent of anything that will earn him votes.

You're starting to sound like noam chomsky.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: counterstrikedude

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I think that's why Obama is such a big proponent of affordable college education.

He knows college age students break heavily towards Democrats.

he's a proponent of anything that will earn him votes.

You're starting to sound like noam chomsky.

Then Chomsky must be a ventriloquist that talks our of his ass.

 

[Jmman]

I think the issue is that people on the left generally think that the smartest person should obviously be the one best capable of leading, and history has shown this not to be the case....

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Jmman
I think the issue is that people on the left generally think that the smartest person should obviously be the one best capable of leading, and history has shown this not to be the case....

You had to know that someone would ask for examples... have any?

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: eits
the republican party has pretty much decided that being intellectual makes you an "elitist," therefore somehow unqualified to run a country or run for public office.

can some of you explain why? what is wrong with having an intellectual with nuance ren for president? because he doesn't grow corn, wear overalls, and shoot off at the mouth, he's not "average" enough?

it's just ridiculous... the republican party really needs to re-evaluate itself. the jesus freaks and unintelligent bumpkins just aren't gonna do it for you guys anymore. your people are dying off.

Republican territory is rural territory, landlocked state territory (generally), uneducated. Now if you lived in such a state you would tend to thumb your nose at educated people too. There's no doubt that the GOP is openly anti-intellectual. It's a tremendous problem in this country, the dissing of intelligence and education. It's been going on for years, and it's been getting worse. It's part of the sickness we have to overcome.

 

[Jmman]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Jmman
I think the issue is that people on the left generally think that the smartest person should obviously be the one best capable of leading, and history has shown this not to be the case....

You had to know that someone would ask for examples... have any?

Nixon, Carter, Clinton, etc, etc........



And on the other hand presidents like Truman and Roosevelt were great leaders but not great intellects......

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: eits

the point i'm trying to make is that the republican party keeps trying to make it seem like redneck > intellectual and it's pathetic. it doesn't make sense why republicans would go along with that kind of message.

They do it to get votes, believe it or not.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: eits
the republican party has pretty much decided that being intellectual makes you an "elitist," therefore somehow unqualified to run a country or run for public office.

can some of you explain why? what is wrong with having an intellectual with nuance ren for president? because he doesn't grow corn, wear overalls, and shoot off at the mouth, he's not "average" enough?

it's just ridiculous... the republican party really needs to re-evaluate itself. the jesus freaks and unintelligent bumpkins just aren't gonna do it for you guys anymore. your people are dying off.

I truly feel it has less to do with intellect and more with the Dems/Libs desire to control social behaviors based on what "they" deem acceptable...least for me that is a big gripe...wheras on average republicans/conservatives don't focus on these issues

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Nemesis 1
Its known as faith . Many trust in OBAMA . I trust GOD. When God says not to do something best not to do it.

Do you hear god speaking? Does he only tell you what not to do or does he also tell you what to do? And, if you do indeed hear him, just to settle an age old question, is he a he or a she?

I thought obama was the messaih. Is god the messiah? I'm confused.

No. and yes I carry or try to carry Christ(messaih) in my heart and I know what he said . and that stands from the beginning till the end.


Obama is the messaih to black americans. Thats a little strong but his victory was there victory. But he still a breed. I really don't get it but his skin is brown. Half white /Half Black = African American . Just doesn't ring right . Like its a false victory based on color tone. Befor any go off half cocked my kids are breeds. Indian/ white . could even be black in there somewere. If my child is 1/4 black 1/4 white 1/4 yellow 1/4 red . Is he an african american if he is White? Is he African american if he is black .

I just don't get it at all . The sound of American rings true in my ears. African American sounds racist to me . German american . Brit american/ Russian american . We don't have to Use home nation first . If your American . your an American . Only for non whites do we use a prefix. . THAT IS RACISM. Not a discreption . its racism . It serves to divide. Divided we fall . united we stand.

Another thing What country did Obama dad come from . Why is he african american . That doesn't tell where his orgins were. It onlys says BLACK African = Black .

Now A white from south africa that moved to usa becomes a citizen . IS he African American????? Would he get pissed if you called him african American? AFRICA = Black . Just seems so racist . Negro would be correct term. But just like the word GAY that word was made ugly. I don't ever want to be as smart enough.To were it all makes since because thats insanity.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: gardener

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
as it's been over the years in here I'll probably be pegged as a GOP apologist because, heck, if I'm not against 'em I must be with 'em.

You are one of the most rapid republicans on the site.

I believe the word you intended was "rabid."

I'm a registered Indepenent who happily voted for Obama. But stereotypes and people seeing what they want to see trumps facts in this place. Always has. Unfortunately, and sadly, I don't expect that to change with Obama taking office.

Well, you can hope.

 

[TallBill]

Screw both parties. I'm more interested in individuals, not labels that they carry. Let's do what our future President says and stop pointing fingers at sides, and instead find out who the idiots are.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Republicans are, in my opinion, no more stupid than Democrats. What they are, in my opinion, is less introspective and thus more authoritarian. This makes them act more like fools than Democrats. Having never really looked at themselves, they have little organic shame. They don't see the huge pimples they have on their nose. And when you walk around pointing your finger at people with those huge pimples blocking your vision, causing you to see only puss, you're going to get popped in the nose. Sadly the pimple's are so large that when punched one can disappear oneself into the puss.

LOL This is practically poetry. :laugh:

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
I think that's why Obama is such a big proponent of affordable college education.

He knows college age students break heavily towards Democrats.

That's true, but that's not why... that's got it backwards. He knows that educated people aren't as apt to suffer, they are going to have a better chance of pulling themselves up. He's more idealistic than to be trying to recruit Democrats. Obama is an idealist. That's why he's been able to energize the young. This bodes well for his presidency.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: Jmman

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Jmman
I think the issue is that people on the left generally think that the smartest person should obviously be the one best capable of leading, and history has shown this not to be the case....

You had to know that someone would ask for examples... have any?

Nixon, Carter, Clinton, etc, etc........

Can't disagree about nixon or carter. Clinton did ok but I wouldn't call him a great leader.

And on the other hand presidents like Truman and Roosevelt were great leaders but not great intellects.

Don't know enough about intelligence levels of these to have an opinion.

---

Assuming smart equals raw intelligence, I think everyone has a story about someone being too smart. Among other qualities of the leader of a large and varied country, one is that the person be smart enough. The right seems to have a much lower bar for this than the left.

---

You defined two groups above: 1) smart but not a good leader and 2) not so smart but a good leader. I assume a third category is to be created for bush. How should it be defined?

 

[twjr]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: eits
the republican party has pretty much decided that being intellectual makes you an "elitist," therefore somehow unqualified to run a country or run for public office.

can some of you explain why? what is wrong with having an intellectual with nuance ren for president? because he doesn't grow corn, wear overalls, and shoot off at the mouth, he's not "average" enough?

it's just ridiculous... the republican party really needs to re-evaluate itself. the jesus freaks and unintelligent bumpkins just aren't gonna do it for you guys anymore. your people are dying off.

I truly feel it has less to do with intellect and more with the Dems/Libs desire to control social behaviors based on what "they" deem acceptable...least for me that is a big gripe...wheras on average republicans/conservatives don't focus on these issues

From what I can see as an outsider there is clearly as much social control attempted by the Republicans.

 

[twjr]

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Jmman

Originally posted by: seemingly random

Originally posted by: Jmman
I think the issue is that people on the left generally think that the smartest person should obviously be the one best capable of leading, and history has shown this not to be the case....

You had to know that someone would ask for examples... have any?

Nixon, Carter, Clinton, etc, etc........

Can't disagree about nixon or carter. Clinton did ok but I wouldn't call him a great leader.

And on the other hand presidents like Truman and Roosevelt were great leaders but not great intellects.

Don't know enough about intelligence levels of these to have an opinion.

---

Assuming smart equals raw intelligence, I think everyone has a story about someone being too smart. Among other qualities of the leader of a large and varied country, one is that the person be smart enough. The right seems to have a much lower bar for this than the left.

---

You defined two groups above: 1) smart but not a good leader and 2) not so smart but a good leader. I assume a third category is to be created for bush. How should it be defined?

I can't think of anything 'intelligent' enough to describe him.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: brencat
This statement here is what we "Republicans" most object to about know-it-all liberals. I don't object to Democrats or people with common sense that have a clear informed conscience of right and wrong. The problem comes about when we start hearing statements that everything is relative. BULLSHIT! Everything is NOT relative! Nuance is important but not when comes at the expense of decisiveness.

I agree completely. Ethical principles dictate that some things are right or wrong. Enforcing laws to that effect should be the principal role of government. Unfortunately, we live in a relativist society where everything must be permitted. If you try to restrict anyone's behaviors because they are ethically unacceptable, then you are labeled closed-minded, ignorant, or similar ridiculous things by those who actually are ignorant.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Originally posted by: twjr

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: eits
the republican party has pretty much decided that being intellectual makes you an "elitist," therefore somehow unqualified to run a country or run for public office.

can some of you explain why? what is wrong with having an intellectual with nuance ren for president? because he doesn't grow corn, wear overalls, and shoot off at the mouth, he's not "average" enough?

it's just ridiculous... the republican party really needs to re-evaluate itself. the jesus freaks and unintelligent bumpkins just aren't gonna do it for you guys anymore. your people are dying off.

I truly feel it has less to do with intellect and more with the Dems/Libs desire to control social behaviors based on what "they" deem acceptable...least for me that is a big gripe...wheras on average republicans/conservatives don't focus on these issues

From what I can see as an outsider there is clearly as much social control attempted by the Republicans.

Were dieing off . Thats funny LOL . Look at the world were all dieing off soon enough.

I love how you talk about intelligance. Than cut into God belief. Like your a retard if you believe there is more. Than taxes and death. But Dems elitist have always been good at such things. Just cause I want to believe and you don't . Know reason to think I am looking down at you like your a sinner. THe time of Converting to Christians is Past . We entered the time of remorse(THE ending of age) Than my age comes. Water Barer. I could careless what U believe . I don't look down at you as a sinner . Just a being that lived and died is all I see with your types. Now the Christian. I know he lived . But I don't know that he died and niether do you. So just because people want to believe and you can't or won't . Don't act like an elitist snub because its only an act . You know your going to die . Good for you . I am happy for ya.

Loks at World after the man says were( Faith) going the way of dino. LOL . Yes you are . But not us. your time is over. its the end of an age. you think that the beings that walk this planet now are the smartest of all time . Your a funny type. If you believe in evolution as simply random event . Than you should know lifecrawled out of the ocean .

Your sure that man is smartest . Or is man the only sinner. Because if you believe life crawled from ocean . The ocean is were most advanced life will be found . Probabaly not sinners so content just to live in the glory of his light.

Ya know what really funny about elitist. UFO's most don't believe they exist. But Christians do . Now thats a realkick in the ass. The smart guys look at universe and says MAN rules . The dum guy says its a hugh universe most be lots of inteligent life out there.

Read the book of Enoch man its just crazy its older than Moses writing . Enoch lived befor the flood and After. OH my! NOAHand friends. wasn't the only ones saved.

The thing is Enoch was taken up from earth by GOD . Read his discreptions and remember he is early man. The guy was in a space ship . Read enoch LEARN about the ages . Millions of years. not 6 days. Unless you search for the trueth you can't find it. It gets confusing when both angels and God are around. But your elitist so you figure it out . And angels have flesh. Read it . its interesting if nothing else.. Any scripture using words like ERa didn't make the big book. in the bible are scarist. But only in the books that religious leaders could bend and fold to hide the trueth.

Read the gosphel of Mary Mag . It 5 min. read and a life time to comprehend what she says . No friend if the whole word were revealed . Science would back the God theory. But that can't be . Because man would requirer less FAITH> This is about doing what a higher being says to do . Without proof of such beings other than old text . Its called Faith. You call it smoke a mirrors. Don't worry have fun, live fast die hard. Because its all you will ever know.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: brencat
This statement here is what we "Republicans" most object to about know-it-all liberals. I don't object to Democrats or people with common sense that have a clear informed conscience of right and wrong. The problem comes about when we start hearing statements that everything is relative. BULLSHIT! Everything is NOT relative! Nuance is important but not when comes at the expense of decisiveness.

I agree completely. Ethical principles dictate that some things are right or wrong. Enforcing laws to that effect should be the principal role of government. Unfortunately, we live in a relativist society where everything must be permitted. If you try to restrict anyone's behaviors because they are ethically unacceptable, then you are labeled closed-minded, ignorant, or similar ridiculous things by those who actually are ignorant.

I believe there are some basics that we nearly all can agree on. Those basics comprise what is necessary for society to function, within reason. However, plenty of ethics and morals that one side or the other would deem to be incontrovertible really aren't. Most of the discussion is not logical either since just about any of us will take one side or the other based on circumstance and the emotional aspects involved, so our opinions become convoluted.

Our real differences reside not in what is logic, but what is reason. Because of that we'll never completely agree since one man's reason is another man's crazy.