No Intellectuals allowed!!!!

[Coloradomtnman]

Maybe if Pelosi and Reid would stop calling people Nazis, other people might stop threatening to take them behind the wood shed and kick their ass. They are supposed to be leaders in this country and they are acting like petulant college kids.

Do you think that Pelosi and Reid are the only politicians to use the "Hitler" or "Nazi" card? How about Palin's ridiculous comment on "death panels"? Close enough to fit the bill if not further. How about Muslim, terrorist, Marxist... none of which Obama is. You can point your finger at the other side, but neither side has the moral high ground on such an issue as name-calling.

*edit*

In fact, here is an example now: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/85497-its-none-of-your-fucking-business-congressman.html

 

[nodoginnafight]

Maybe if Pelosi and Reid would stop calling people Nazis, other people might stop threatening to take them behind the wood shed and kick their ass. They are supposed to be leaders in this country and they are acting like petulant college kids.

Do you think that Pelosi and Reid are the only politicians to use the "Hitler" or "Nazi" card? How about Palin's ridiculous comment on "death panels"? Close enough to fit the bill if not further. How about Muslim, terrorist, Marxist... none of which Obama is. You can point your finger at the other side, but neither side has the moral high ground on such an issue as name-calling.

*edit*

In fact, here is an example now: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/85497-its-none-of-your-fucking-business-congressman.html

imho - you sir, are on a roll today.

 

[chanel]

Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread reductio ad Hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has argued,[4] that overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

Godwin's law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thought that was interesting. Both sides play the Hitler card.

 

[Ringel05]

So the question I have is, “How do Republicans define “intellectual” and why aren’t they wanted?”

Because stupid people outnumber the intellectuals. Intellectuals are bad. They are elitists. They are professionals who went to school to be doctors and lawyers and CPAs. They hang around with those scientist guys.


bad bad bad............

He was probably refering to the so called intelligensia, i.e. "intellectual fascists". Those who proport social/governmental/economic change based on theoretical models while not allowing for the human factor in their equation. (Those with no real world comprehension).
Just giving the guy the benifit of the doubt.

 

[Annie]

Maybe if Pelosi and Reid would stop calling people Nazis, other people might stop threatening to take them behind the wood shed and kick their ass. They are supposed to be leaders in this country and they are acting like petulant college kids.

Do you think that Pelosi and Reid are the only politicians to use the "Hitler" or "Nazi" card? How about Palin's ridiculous comment on "death panels"? Close enough to fit the bill if not further. How about Muslim, terrorist, Marxist... none of which Obama is. You can point your finger at the other side, but neither side has the moral high ground on such an issue as name-calling.

*edit*

In fact, here is an example now: http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/85497-its-none-of-your-fucking-business-congressman.html

imho - you sir, are on a roll today.

How does his post move the discussion forward? I don't see it, but will consider why you think so. The only thing I see is both sides are lacking high moral ground, but that would be impossible for politicians.

Thus I'm left to conclude you aren't discussing an Obama or an Army, but rather the rank and file?

 

[Jay Canuck]

I thought this thread didn't want intellectuals.....so I posted.

 

[MaggieMae]

So the question I have is, “How do Republicans define “intellectual” and why aren’t they wanted?”

Because stupid people outnumber the intellectuals. Intellectuals are bad. They are elitists. They are professionals who went to school to be doctors and lawyers and CPAs. They hang around with those scientist guys.


bad bad bad............

Maybe if our primary education wasn't in such a shambles, more kids would aspire to become intellectuals. When I went through the first 12 grades, I was not only taught the basics, but I was guided by teachers to learn to learn. Education is a process and it's never-ending. How can children be inspired when they can do all their homework by rote on a computer? How can they grasp the problems of today without knowing history?

If we can EVER get through this endless health care debate, education is my BIG ISSUE. Without an educated population, how can we maintain our global status? How will future generations even maintain themselves?

 

[MaggieMae]

The Republican Party used to be THE party of the highbrows. Truly it was!

After losing election after election to the Dems they RNC finally figured it out.

Now both parties appeal mostly to people's prejudices and conceits because they know those emotional issues, rather than the boring details of highly complex problems and their solutions, are what motivates people to vote.

One can easily see by the emotionalism on this board, what the average voter understands.. and facts and complex details AREN'T IT.

Look how quickly the LIE that the Obama health plan was going to kill the old took hold of many anti-Obamans.

Now that was a lie. It was never anything but a lie, but it appealed to the emotional fears and conceits and prejudices of very stupid people.

And very stupid people SO ounumber people capable of the complex and nuanced thinking it takes to understand a problem so vast as the HC crises.

Again, as is so evident by simply reading the comments found on this board.

The old adage "Sell the sizzle not the steak" is exactly how our poltical dialogues are framed now, folks.

Every issue, however complex, is reduced to something that even nearly retarded people can THINK they understand.

It's basically RETAIL politics.

Being called "stupid" by a liberal makes me laugh. It's like the pot calling the kettle black. It's one of the things I find so humorous about liberals. They think they are so much more intelligent then anybody else and try to tell us what is good for us and what we need. Liberals are like the kid on the playground that always trys to tell the other kids what game they are going to be playing and who is going to be on each team. When they don't get their own way, they make all kinds of noise and are generally obnoxious and rude. That pretty much sums up liberals for me. Go back under your rock.

Pot calling the kettle black? Obnoxious and rude comments by the right as well on this board, are those liberals acting obnoxious and rude at the town hall gatherings?

 

[MaggieMae]

An intellectual is a lazy fuck who has no real world experience, no basic understanding of how an economy works, no appreciation for American history and would get mugged on a NYC Subway right in front of a policeman

I dunno........a lot of poli-sci majors have history minors........

And a lot of them got those history minors by taking:

The History of Feminism
The History of Political Struggle in the United States
The History of Colonialism in Africa and Asia
African-American History
etc.

So what was your minor? WASPism?

 

[MaggieMae]

if liberals are so damn smart why do they need so much taking care of? one would think an intellectual could figure out survival..

it seems you don't know the first thing about liberalism.

Among most other things.

 

[MaggieMae]

Far be it from me to defend or pretend to add meaning to anything Bay Buchanan says, but here's my take.

There is no point in trying to "win" or entice an intellectual to your side of the political debate. An intellectual, almost by description, has thought about the issues of concern to the country and come down mostly on one side or the the other for reasons of their own.

If you are going to pander to a group, you pander to the idiots because they don't know they are being pandered to. There are plenty of idiots on both sides. Bay was pandering to idiots that also fancy themselves "patriots" as in that is one of the top five descriptors they would use in defining who they are as social beings. I would hazard to say, there are more of those who identify with the Republican party currently than the Democrat party. I also think this last is transient.

Only because "patriotism" is inherent in most Americans. It's not necessary to have to keep PROVING our allegiance solely for political advantage.

 

[Gudrid]

This thread is scary.

 

[rdean]

This thread is scary.

Scary? How?

 

[skookerasbil]

During the presidential campaign, Bay Buchanan, sister of Pat Buchanan, a regular visitor to Anderson Cooper’s show, was asked what the Republican intellectuals thought of Sarah Palin.

I’m guessing, but I believe he was referring to people such as Charles Krauthammer, Kathleen Parker, Michael Smerconish, Christopher Buckley and the like.

Bay Buchanan said Republicans didn’t care what intellectuals thought of Sarah Palin because they didn’t represent the Republican Party. Anderson looked very surprised and asked, “Are you saying the Republican Party doesn’t want “intellectuals”?”

Bay said that was absolutely correct. Intellectuals do NOT represent the base of the Republican Party and they were not welcome.

First, the definition of “intellectual”:

•of or associated with or requiring the use of the mind; "intellectual problems"; "the triumph of the rational over the animal side of man"

•appealing to or using the intellect; "satire is an intellectual weapon"; "intellectual workers engaged in creative literary or artistic or scientific labor"; "has tremendous intellectual sympathy for oppressed people"; "coldly intellectual"; "sort of the intellectual type"; "intellectual ..

•a person who uses the mind creatively

•cerebral: involving intelligence rather than emotions or instinct; "a cerebral approach to the problem"; "cerebral drama"

I feel confident that based on these definitions of “intellectual”, Bay was using a definition that was “different”.

So the question I have is, “How do Republicans define “intellectual” and why aren’t they wanted?”

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD....................

Easiest question Ive ever seen posted on a public forum!!! Baaatttter up!!!!!!!!!! ( I love when the k00ks put it on a tee for you!!!)


s0n..........intellectuals have a distinct inability to think on the margin. They will w0w you with philosophy and the virtue of good intentions, but to them, results dont matter.

Intellectuals have been opining all summer about the no-brainer that is Universal Health Care. 1/6 of the economy..........300+ million people and the government is going to operate this efficiently for the majority of Americans??!!! Yuk...........yuk........they cant even effectively run a Cash for Clunkers program s0ns!!! Its a fcukking joke!!
But oh.........the intellectuals assure us that Unversal Health Care will run like a top because GOVERNMENT is in charge. Really.........doin' a great job there with the Post Office and Amtrak, not to mention Medicare and Medicaid!!!

Liberals have always had a profound misunderstanding about the virtue of intellectuals either impacting upon or being a part of running government. To them, the smartest people ALWAYS make the best decisions. The "social engineers" of society who come up with slogans like "the root causes" and then champion legislation which leads to urban disasters where the illegitamacy rates are 80% amongst minorities. Intellectuals came up with the genius idea of the Community Reinvestment Act which destroyed the housing market thus planting the seeds for toxic bank assets decades later. Intellectuals see ways to balance the landscape with their brilliant idea's but in the process, fcukk up the whole market. Its actually fascinating........that such smart people can be so ok with conveniently ignoring the "results" of their genius!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Oh.........and I was just thinking the other day about how frequently I heard last summer about the incredible intellectualism of Barak Obama!!! See how liberals are so duped by this sh!t?? If you san speak fluently, for the lefty, that automatically translates into one being an effective leader.

This president doesnt know which end is up s0ns.............and even the devout Obama supporter must admit that its hold your breath time when the guy speaks without his telepromter

 

[Gudrid]

This thread is scary.

Scary? How?

Historically speaking, hostility toward intellectuals often proceeds fascism. That was certainly the case in the Bolshevik revolution that eventually led to the USSR, and true during the rise of Nazi domination in Germany. Hitler was famously anti-intellectual. Mao Tzedong would be another example; he killed em outright. A more recent example would be Iran. Let's hope such a sentiment doesn't become widespread here.

 

[rdean]

Oh.........and I was just thinking the other day about how frequently I heard last summer about the incredible intellectualism of Barak Obama!!! See how liberals are so duped by this sh!t?? If you san speak fluently, for the lefty, that automatically translates into one being an effective leader.

This president doesnt know which end is up s0ns.............and even the devout Obama supporter must admit that its hold your breath time when the guy speaks without his telepromter

Curious, do scientists and doctors and engineers fall into that category of "stupid intellectual"?

A recent PEW poll said that only 6% of scientists in the US will admit to being "Republican". The only reason that might be "important" is if you believe that scientists have somehow "contributed" to the country in a positive manner. Have they? Do they bring anything to the table? If no, why not? If yes, why are so few "Republican"?

Note: When I was a kid, the Republican Party was referred to as the "Party of Ideas". Is it still "the Party of Ideas"?

 

[rdean]

This thread is scary.

Scary? How?

Historically speaking, hostility toward intellectuals often proceeds fascism. That was certainly the case in the Bolshevik revolution that eventually led to the USSR, and true during the rise of Nazi domination in Germany. Hitler was famously anti-intellectual. Mao Tzedong would be another example; he killed em outright. A more recent example would be Iran. Let's hope such a sentiment doesn't become widespread here.

Now that is deep.

 

[veritas]

This thread is scary.

Scary? How?

Historically speaking, hostility toward intellectuals often proceeds fascism. That was certainly the case in the Bolshevik revolution that eventually led to the USSR, and true during the rise of Nazi domination in Germany. Hitler was famously anti-intellectual. Mao Tzedong would be another example; he killed em outright. A more recent example would be Iran. Let's hope such a sentiment doesn't become widespread here.

Iran is a great, recent and poignant example. We killed their democracy and installed the Shah and then the goatherders took over. The people of means, the educated ones, left and haven't been back.

 

[Tinker1121]

Being called "stupid" by a liberal makes me laugh. It's like the pot calling the kettle black.

Wait, let me get this straight. You're admitting you're stupid?