May be Liberals are just be dumb. Yes, it's all about IQ.

I did that, you can't read, it would seem.

Originally Posted by AlphaOmega View Post

Sorry we were all in math class we had to skip art.

I made clear to this claim (attempted insult), that yes indeed, I attended maths and have no education in art.

You jumped on in and subsequently look like a bit of a tool.

 

May be Liberals are just be dumb. Yes, it's all about IQ.


This is just too funny to ignore.....

 

Is the OP trying to make a complete fool of himself by using horrible grammar, or is he really that slow?

 

I "jumped on in" precisely because I'm sick of the type of illogical argument that you made. I don't care what the previous poster wrote.

You are missing the point entirely. The OP is stupid. Most of the posts after the OP were stupid, as well. You chose to write something something stupid that I felt like addressing. Your mistake is assuming I'm on someone's side.

You also failed to prove that my point is 'idiotic'. The fact that you do not concede that claiming education or intelligence to prove a point is fallacious shows me a clear lack of critical thinking skills on your part.

 

Whenever we read the phrase "just a theory" when discussing scientific theories it reflects an uniformed opinion by someone that honestly doesn't know what they're talking about. They're implying that it's just a belief or opinion but that is hardly the case when it comes to scientific theories.

A scientific theory is the result of the scientific method where all possible facts based upon observation are reviewed and considered before any "explanation" of the "cause" is presented by science as a theory. A theory cannot be contradicted by the facts and attempts to explain the facts. From a scientific standpoint they're not a belief or an opinion but instead they're an explanation.

When 97% of climatologists that are actively involved in researching climate change agree with the theory that humans play a role in global warming its virtually impossible for any intelligent person to not believe what the scientists are saying.

 

May be Liberals are just be dumb. Yes, it's all about IQ.

Really? And while claiming Liberals are dumb, simply amazing.

 

LMAO...Yeah, tell us about it, sport.

 

i had a talk with a very liberal nurse yesterday..i asked her about benghazt ...she said it is a good drug to help you sleep..then she asked me if i was having trouble sleeping..i just shook my head and walked away..

 

Yes, it's all about IQ. And you have just demonstrated yours.
"Liberals are just be dumb"?! And that's on your title block!

 

Err, no. Conversation in all likelihood went more like this:

*******************************************************************************

My liberal friend(MLF below for short): Walmart could probably treat its employees better, they are paid low wages, lack decent benefits, and substandard working conditions, and...

Me: U HATE WALMART BECAUSE IT STANDS FOR FREEDOM, AND THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPLOIT THEIR EMPLOYEES IF THEY WANT..THOSE EMPLOYEES COULD LEAVE IF THEY WANT, THE WALTON FAMILY IS RELATED TO REAGAN, AND REAGAN ONCE SAID---

MLF: ...but many of the employees in all likelihood don't have that choice, especially for those who lack good socioeconomic backgrounds, also...I don't think the Walton family is related to Reagan, and....

Me: THEY DO HAVE A CHOICE TO LEAVE, EVERYONE HAD THE EXACT SAME EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES, SOME PEOPLE CHOOSE TO WORK AT WALMART AND OTHERS CHOOSE TO GO TO HARVARD. LIKE SARAH PALIN AND GEORGE BUSH, THEY BOTH CHOSE TO GO TO HARVARD INSTEAD OF WORKING AT WALMART

MLF: ...the problem is that there is an illusion of choice. For people not born into wealth or the middle class, they have fewer doors available in terms of choice and outlook. Bush's path was set in stone the day he was born due to his family connection, also I don't think neither of them went to Harvard, but anyways...

Me: YOU TELL LIES ABOUT PALIN AND BUSH BECAUSE YOU ARE AFRAID OF THEM, PALIN WILL RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2014 AND WIN ELECTION, YOU JUST WAIT. PEOPLE WHO WORK AT WALMART ARE LAZY AND THEY COULD OF GONE TO HARVARD IF THEY WANTED

MLF: No..no..you see admission into Ivy League schools generally comes from either favors due to "Legacy" (your family has roots there) or you've done exceptionally well in school. People in the lower class typically don't have access to resources (they can't afford it) and they also lack legacy. As for the doing exceptionally well in school part, that is made significantly more difficult in lower income/rated schools due to their lack of adequate curriculum, AP enhancement programs, tutors. So you see, there is an illusion of equal opportunity in this case, because no two people are born in the same set of circumstances, and--

Me: ALL I HEAR ARE LIEBERAL LIES, EVERYONE HAS THE SAME CHANCE AND SAME SET OF CHOICES, WHETHER YOU'RE MITT ROMNEY'S KID OR THE KID OF A SINGLE-MOTHER HOUSEHOLD BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL. BOTH THOSE KIDS HAVE THE SAME CHANCE AT GETTING INTO A GOOD SCHOOL AND BOTH HAVE THE SAME CHOICE AS WHETHER TO WORK FOR WALMART.

MLF: Do you really believe that?

Me: I KNOW ITS TRUE BECAUSE SEAN HANNITY AND GLENN BECK TOLD ME SO, AND THEY ARE ON THE RADIO SO THEY WOULD NEVER LIE TO ME OR BE MISINFORMED ON ANYTHING. I DONT SEE YOU WITH YOUR OWN RADIO SHOW, AND THEY ARE RICH, SO THAT SHOWS HOW MUCH YOU KNOW!!!

MLF: We're getting a bit off topic..and the fact that Hannity and Beck have a radio show or are rich doesn't mean anything in terms of credibility, knowledge, common sense, or anything really..they just found a niche market in selling their rhetoric to like minded individuals

Me: EXCUSE ME, BUT RICH PEOPLE ARE SMART AND JOB CREATORS, BUT YOU WOULDNT KNOW THAT BECAUSE YOU HATE FREEDOM AND THE FOUNDING FATHERS

MLF: I wouldn't call all rich people smart or job creators..I mean do you honestly consider Paris Hilton or Snookie as smart or job creators? Also..none of that has to do with freedom or the founding fathers, but..

Me: I KNOW AMERICAN HISTORY ALRIGHT, I *KNOW* THAT THE CONSTITUTION WAS PERSONALLY HANDED TO THE FOUNDING FATHERS BY JESUS CHRIST, AND I KNOW THAT THE CONSTITUTION EXPLICITLY STATES THAT RICH PEOPLE ARE SMART AND JOB CREATORS. YOU JUST HATE THE CONSTITUTION AND ALL ITS 316 AMENDMENTS

MLF: Uhh..the constitution has only 27 amendments, and wasn't personally delivered by Jesus to the founding fathers, they actually wrote it...and..

Me: HAHAHA SHOWS HOW MUCH YOU KNOW. THE CONSTITUTION HAS 316 AMENDMENTS BECAUSE IT WAS BASED OFF JOHN 3:16 WHEN JESUS WROTE IT 2000 YEARS AGO. BUT YOU DENY THAT JESUS WROTE THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE YOU HATE CHRISTIANITY LIKE ALL LIBERALS

MLF: The constitution was written 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ and it has 316 amendments? ....You don't know much about American history, do you?

Me: I KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT AMERICAN HISTORY BECAUSE CONSERVATIVES ARE TRUE PATRIOTS WHO LOVE GOD, FAITH, AND FAMILY. AND I KNOW THAT THE WALMART WAS MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THE WALTON FAMILY TO COLLECT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. YOU JUST WAIT, PRESIDENT PALIN WILL WIN IN 2015 AND YOU WILL BE SO SAD, HAHAHA

MLF: I think we are done here.

 

They're aren't just dumb, and quite frankly you can't blame them for believing what they believe. The only story they've been exposed to is the one they believe. Part of that story is that conservatives are evil, lying, selfish people, so don't expect them to have an open ear for the other side either.

 

I agree, not all conservatives are dumb, many are just misinformed, ignorant, and incapable of thinking for themselves. Sadly, its that combination of characteristics which allows opportunists like Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh to dupe conservatives into believing lies, myths, and just about anything.

Oh, you were talking about liberals. Whoopsies. Perhaps so many conservatives are perceived as evil, lying, and selfish, because so many of them just happen to be exactly that.

 

I told you, I'm RETIRED.

I don't need to invent a NEW thing to better the liberal cause. An OLD thing (other than me) is quite sufficient. Several old things, actually: Learning (about the issues and their background), researching the positions of the parties, actually THINKING about the positions of the parties, comparing the positions of the parties, checking into politician's statements, to include some of their quotes, and reporting when they have their head in rectal defilade, that sort of thing.

I'll give you an example. No, it won't be the DEATH PANELS that the republithugs and their resident jiggle expert (guess who) were screaming about. During the debates on the Dodd-Frank bill, the idiots of the GOP (this includes all members) kept claiming that the bill meant more bailouts for firms, to include Wall Street. In doing so, they conveniently forgot that the "bailouts" were instituted under the regime of little georgie bush. Also, their claim was a blatant, out-and-out lie (in other words, standard repuke tactics). If you research the matter, the bill, basically, OUTLAWED such bailouts. Of course, this didn't slow the repubs down. They, and I include Senator Mitch McConnel (if I spelled the little toad's name right - he's not worth the trouble of looking it up at this time), just kept screaming BAILOUTS. They also, as usual, complained that the bill was being crammed down their throats with no GOP input, a claim hard to support given the fact that any repub who tried to cooperate and provide input was cut off at the knees by the GOP "leadership."

Invent something new? New for the GOP, perhaps. Research and thought. Those aren't new. With those and a little effort, you would be amazed at just how many GOP claims turn out to be pure bull.

 

Conservatives believe bs too, but it's not even close to what liberals believe. Conservatives are evil because they don't want welfare programs because historically they bankrupt countries. Liberals are too STUPID to know that capitalism is by far the best system for the poor, and the corruption we have now is because of the socialist leaning policies that allow big business and big government to #$%@ everyone all at once. Conservatives are dumb because they think every single Muslim wants to kill us, and that it's a good idea to have over 150 military bases abroad. The left doesn't even understand that the whole intention of the constitution was to try and limit corruption, but it's been completely perverted throughout the years by republicans and democrats passing big government/liberal policies. Talking to liberals about politics is useless because they use their emotions to try and solve complex issues that require intelligence.

 

And where is the macroeconomic evidence, F - - - n - Loser -? If your theory that globalism has a net benefit for the American economy, the trade balance would be up, average net incomes adjusted for inflation would be up, unemployment and underemployment would be down and the middle class would not be shrinking. Unfortunately for
FL, none of those things is true.

 

Both sides have their idiots. I don't think it's a question of smarts anyway. it's a question of mindset. Liberals in general want things to be easier to do, they want you to be able to bounce back from a mistake. Conservatives want you to pay for the mistake with the view to prevent you from making that mistake in the first place. Nothing is really that simple. If you want to get kicked out of the middle class, have a baby as a teen. Or be born to someone who had a baby as a teen. Both are real, both happen. Conservatives would wish to point out that poor choices tend to lead to poverty and not fix that -- the point being that people should make the choice to not have sex too early or drop out of school or whatever. Which is partly true -- provided you are born to a rich enough (middle class) family, if you work hard and get good grades, you'll probably do fine. If not, you're screwed. or if you were never in that group to begin with. On the other hand, liberals would point to the born-poor element and suggest that it's not right that a kid be punished for mommy and daddy being idiots. Which is fine, except that it has the consequence of making poor choices much more attractive as the consequences of those choices are seen to be less severe and more temporary.

I tend to be more conservative, just because avoiding unintended consequences is better than trying to fix them with more intervention.

 

ummm no here is what transpired.
You said and I quote: "Anyone supporting the OP should have attended the classes they obviously skipped at school. "
Then THEN you get offended when I responded with a very witty comment and said
"Sorry we were all in math class we had to skip art."
THEN you say "Of course, you don't bother with the part of this idiotic post, with the assertion from Alpha, that I didn't attend maths classes and went to art classes instead. "
Priceless. With all your math degrees you still don't see where you proved the OP correct?
Never did I say you didn't attend math classes nor that you attended art classes. You however assumed the rest of us missed classes because we simply agree with the OP and not you.

 

No, because you got poked where it hurts, and you can't let it go. You just have to get back at me somehow.

LOL.

- - - Updated - - -

And above most, pries right into you libs' soft spots.

 

I'll 2nd that. And I'd like to point out that you can win a Nobel Prize and still be clueless about economics.

Just take a look at the HuffPo/New York Times economist Paul Krugman.

 

Considering how much of economics is largely a matter of ideology and opinion, I'm not sure how much it matters.

Yes, Krugman does make some pretty wide sweeping generalizations, but honestly, he's just the opposite extreme of people like Milton Friedman.

And historically, both have been proven wrong on numerous occasions.

There really hasn't ever been an economic school of thought that has flawlessly assessed the market, and there probably never will be, because the market (especially as globalization advances) is vastly complex.

It's almost as speculative as religion at times.

There are basic principles to economics that hold true more consistently, but beyond these principles, most ideologies are very conditional in their accuracy.

 

Well not really, as I didn't read your your nonsense.