Jack - Answer the questions that I have posed to you.

You keep deflecting....it's like you are afraid to answer the questions.

What is loaded about the questions, Jack? Let's try again:

Come on Jack....explain *YOUR* post above in which you posted a picture of a protestor -- tell us what the complaint is so we can see if you understand *anything* about the argument, or if you are just a left-wing attack dog. --- Not a loaded questions, I'm asking you to explain YOUR post.

Come on Jack, please tell us which version of Obama you support - the one from 2006 that thought debt ceiling increases were dangerous and a failure of leadership and immoral, or the Obama of 2013 which said NOT raising the debt limit was dangerous, a failure of leadership and immoral. Not a loaded question....I'm just curious *which* version of Obama you support

Come on Jack, please tell us why another $1 Trillion in debt over three months is beneficial to the nation, without any structural changes to the budget. You are clearly in support of this $1Trillion in aded debt, as you have previously claimed Republican were "holding America hostage" and that they should step aside and let the $1 Trillion debt increase go through uncontested. So explain how this is a great and wonderful thing. Nothing loaded in the question Jack...I'm asking you to explain your stance on an important topic.


When you start answering the questions posed to you then I may consider answering you.

Man up, Jack.

@Semck ... kudos to you. Even you acknowledged the sheer stupidity of the article yet you still managed to get krellin and Jack riled up. Well done.

"The Sheer stupidity of the article" Why is it stupid, Bo, because a Liberal Professor admitted that his media-created preconceived notions of "Tea Party" members had no basis in reality? And this assertion conflicts with your similarly constructed warped view of reality? Is that why it's stupid?

I'm mean, I'm certain you do believe it's stupid....but I wonder if you are intelligent enough to actually articulate why you think it's stupid...chances are, not, as most around here prove themselves unable to articulate their beliefs.

The funny thing is, there have been threads in the past that made the *opposite* assertion, that Liberals are smarter or whatever based upon some study, and all you Libtard yahoo's start jumping up and down and high-fiving because you found some study asserting Liberals are better people than conservatives, and this validates your emotions and gets you all giggly inside.

So why is this article so stupid? Indulge me.

Futher to the point, Bo....your illiteracy saddens me. Jack and I haven't been discussing that article at all. So clearly you have demonstrated that you don't read for content or comprehension, but you look at a name and jump to a wild ass conclusion and think your smart.

It's sad, Bo, because I think you might be smart enough to behave better....but time after time you disappoint me with your lazy thinking, lack of reading comprehension and contradictions of yourself. Maybe there's no hope for you after all...

"I'm mean, I'm certain you do believe it's stupid....but I wonder if you are intelligent enough to actually articulate why you think it's stupid...chances are, not, as most around here prove themselves unable to articulate their beliefs."

Here's my reasoning:

1. There are some smart people in the Tea Party.
2. There are some dumb people in the Tea Party.
3. There are some smart people in every political party.
4. There are some dumb people in every political party.

SHOCKER.

Just because Rick Scarborough thinks AIDS is a punishment given down from the world above and Michelle Bachmann - well, just that she exists - doesn't mean everyone in the party is stupid.

"Futher to the point, Bo....your illiteracy saddens me. Jack and I haven't been discussing that article at all."

Of course not. You've been mouthing off random useless insults. You've been fighting over who is more cowardly because neither of you can actually debate a point with each other. It's your usual Jack Klein v. Krellin showdown. Never has anything to do with the article.

Bo - and there it is - you missed the entire point of the article. It isn't about which party has smart or dumb people in it.

The point of the article is that this college Professor admitted that his *entire* view of Tea Party members was a media-constructed caricature...that they are all a bunch of low-brow, uneducated religious zealots or whatever.

But even getting in to the "who is smarter" discussion - the general caricature as described above is generally true as presented by the media, so yes or no, it is surprising to hear that on average Tea Party members have a better grasp of science than other political factions?

You pretend as if this is not an important issue - intelligence in general -- but of course having a **knowledgeable** voter base *is* important.....or do you prefer your voters to be stupid, uneducated and gullible?

Actually, Bo --- there's your illiteracy again -- I've been trying to get Jack to answer some very specific and pointed questions....in fact, those questions are open to any good Liberal to answer if you care to take a swipe at them.

Again...you show yourself to be lazy and thoughtless...."duhhhh....krewwin is making random useless insults....hyuck hyuck hyuck..." says the droooling Bo (THAT was a random useless insult, by the way...) If you actually *read* what I am writing to Jack, you will see the pointed, direct questions.

Jack, on the other hand, has no answers, but plenty of insults.

Sad, Bo....maybe you need a cup of coffee....or a shot of intellectual integrity...

And Boski..."never has anything to do with the article".....Oh, I see, you are not irritated with us because we are "off topic" I assume?

Funny....I don't see your post above adding any value to the discussion of the article, either.

So here's Bo....just mouthing off to....<gasp>....throw insults at Jack and krellin.

Way to go, Bo....you hypocrisy is astounding.

Poor Krellin, complaining about *insults*

I'm not capable of measuring that level of irony.

Krellin, we're not debating anything. Your scrabbling amuses me, thats all. Debating requires me to actually care what you think.

So dance, poppet. Dance for my amusement.

Of course intelligence in general isn't an important issue. If it were, our high school graduation rate wouldn't have dropped from #1 in the world after WWII to #22 of 27 nations deemed developed by the OECD in 2012 and the land of opportunity that we all learned about in that worthless place we call school wouldn't have become the land of tough luck.

Krellin, do you actually expect to be deemed credible when you call someone "lazy and thoughtless?" Moreover, do you actually expect people to have any respect for what you say? Do you want me to respond to your insults? And do you think that you are going to persuade me into thinking that you don't insult people by insulting me? Is this your idea of "debate" and of a discussion between human beings or do you think you have the right to ask me to put you on your throne and bow down and kiss your knees?

You're a cool guy krellin, but your idea of debate is subhuman.

Bo - do you think I care if you deem me credible? YOu come on complaining about our insults by insulting us. Strike one against Bo....

Next, you completely ignore the fact that I have been trying to get Jack to address some specific qeustions in regards to HIS posts and past asssertions....so the posts were NOT all insults BO...so Strike 2 against bo...

So...no, Bo, I could care less if you believe I'm credible, because as I have pointed out, you appear to me to be lazy and thoughtless....lazy, in that you obviosuly just skimmed over a thread and decided to throw in your two cents worth of insults, and thoughtless, because even now, as I hav pointed out repeatedly to you I was seeking to get JAck to answer questions, you refuse to acknowledge that, and only want to pretend our posts were insults.

So Bo...you have *zero* credibility.

I'm not certain what you idea of debate is....but apparently, for you, it has nothing with questions and answers.

I openly confess I love to throw a good insult...as **all** of you do (thus your ridiculous hypocrisy when you start bitching about insults)...and I also notice that you Liberals around here have a pretty damned poor track record of actually defending your ideology. So I'm not certain many of you have a clue hat debate is, Bo, including you.

@ krellin:

"there have been threads in the past that made the *opposite* assertion, that Liberals are smarter or whatever based upon some study"

I have never seen a thread on this forum making such a claim. Link?

I kinda suspect for conservatives with college degrees there may be a higher prevalence of engineering, agricultural science, and other technical disciplines, compared to liberals. This is just a hunch and I would be interested if anyone has any data on this.

Actually most conservatives are professors of aviation and aeronautics.

I believe it's aviation and airplanes. Much more specialized.

No, it's aerodynamics and airplanes. Didn't you all read his dissertation?

I take it Krellin is not going to provide evidence of the "threads in the past" which claimed that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives?

Possibly you imagined these threads, Krellin?

Oh Jamie...you are right, there was never a discussion anywhere ever that Liberals are more intelligent than Conservatives, but clearly this is not true. The obviousness of the deficiency of the Liberal intellect is so well known that not even the most biased of fools would even attempt to indulge in such a discussion, for fear of the obvious, "Are you serious....?" backlash, and subsequent complete loss of respect.

None the less, the lack of shame present in the WebDip community is Epic, and the discussion has been had. Perhaps it was not in the context of a dedicated thread, but the discussion has been had.

So you have two options - accept that the discussion has been had within threads at times...or accept that it was a ruse on my behalf, because clearly the notion is so ludicrous that not even the leftist of lefties would attempt to pull off such a fraudulent discussion.

Your choice.

The notion that one or other side of the political spectrum is "more intelligent" than the other side is completely ludicrous, yes.

For example you're a conservative, on the right wing, and I'm a socialist on what might be called the left. Your political views are very different from mine. However I don't for a moment think that's because you are less intelligent than me. For all your trolling and name-calling, you are obviously a reasonably intelligent guy.

No, it seems clear to me that the reason that our political views differ is because our *values* differ.

Do you agree?

Even talking about a political "spectrum" is ludicrous. Is universal suffrage a left wing or right wing position? What about freedom of speech? Freedom of religion? Habeas corpus? If you want to talk about things with any kind of intellectual depth you can't cling to political binaries. It's a heuristic method that actually makes it harder to see reality.

Is it religious freedom for the government to require a Catholic hospital to perform abortions? Is it political freedom to require a Catholic doctor to prescribe birth control? Can you claim to support free speech and outlaw Holocaust denial?
Everything in life is political.

So the people who sentenced Socrates to death were just a intelligent as his defenders? Sorry Jaime, but your false premise doesn't stand up to real world evidence.

The people who supported Hitler and the Nazi party were as intelligent as those that didn't?

People who voted to pass the 18th amendment were as intelligent as those that saw it as a farce?

Emac - you are confusing morality and ethics with intelligence. Depsite your fondest wishes, they are not equivalent. For example, seemingly intelligent Democrats think overbearing, authoritarian government is a good solution to problems because they see the loss of personal choices and personal freedoms as a fair exchange for the "greater good" in which freedom is exchanged for the concept of "caring for all". Seemingly intelligent Republicans, on the other hand, reject his authoritarian solution as immoral, becaue they see it as theivery and de-facto economic slavery both for the tax payer *and* the welfare-enslaved voter who will never see an end to their poverty via the government solution) - and they believe a systems that allows free access to opportunity, where personal choice and responsibility determine outcomes (with a much smaller safety net) as the moral solution.

It really isn't that difficult to see how inteligent people can have wildly different opinions. As for the extremes of Hitler...meh...."Not in my backyard..." Pretty common in humanity...terribel things happen all the time, but there is food on MY table, and the attrocity isnt' in my backyard, so no, I'm not risking MY life to change anything.

You are ALL guilty of this...every sngle one of you that speak outrage to some violence, bitches about it *here* and never does any real action *out there* to change what you think is horrible. It is all a matter of degrees.

Is it just not possible to.. perhaps answer questions posed to one another instead of dodging them with insults? Aren't some points raised, such as the issue of the debt ceiling and Obama's position on it, regardless of krellin's known character judged by a minority, legit?

Hyperion - of course they are. Par for the course around here - throw insult when the questions hit too close to home/hypocrisy...Yes, I'm guilty of it as well.

Though personally I like to co-mingle my legit answers WITH my insults...I do try to answer questions...Santa was just outright evading.