Democrats versus Republicans

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by PBzeer

Thank you craig, for confirming what I expected from you. That quote is certainly on par with those of the enlightened left who attribute 9/11 to some nefarious Bush/Cheney machination to seize power.

I knew you'd pick someone from the fringe, and that is all Falwell ever was, as your example.

Falwell had a direct line into President Bush (and probably other Presidents) whenever he wanted to talk. He started the largest University of it's type in the country. He is consider very mainstream in Va, as I have a friend who DREAMS of sending his kids to that college.

Are you really saying the President Bush let "fringe far-right" conservatives call him directly on the phone? That Bush asks fringes who to appoint to the Supreme court?

--------------Fringe?????
"the Bush Administration has actively sought the advice of radical right leader Jerry Falwell on whom to nominate for vacancy on the Supreme Court"


Is Cheney giving Limbaugh hugs (verbally) also "fringe"?

Look around, my man. I couldn't make this stuff up! Rush Limbaugh is head of the Grand Ole Party. He is steering the show. An entertainer who doesn't have a college degree and who does not even have a family (can't keep a wife, etc.)........

THAT is anti-intellectualism. Do as I say, not as I do (or not as logic and reason would point).

Instead of going on the attack, why not just say if you support ANY of the points I have made - which are ANSWERS or EXAMPLES that YOU asked for? Too much to ask? Yes or no....

[Selkirk]

Originally Posted by craigimass

Falwell had a direct line into President Bush (and probably other Presidents) whenever he wanted to talk....

Now, how would you know this? Aren't you, Like Don Quixote, just creating a foe that you may easily destroy because you are unable to combat the real foe?

.............Look around, my man. I couldn't make this stuff up!

Yeah, you could. And you did.

Rush Limbaugh is head of the Grand Ole Party. ........

See?

[saildork]

Originally Posted by craigimass

A liberal, on the other hand, KNOWS that the government is far out of control....but not because he "feels" it or because someone told him he should get to keep more of his own money. He knows it by reason and logic (meaning he/she can count).

If liberals KNOW that the government is far out of control, then why on earth do they want more government?

[OsmundL]

Originally Posted by PBzeer

I expected Palin to be raised as the "example", yet, what is it she has done, to merit the label extreme? Or, anti-intellectual?

PZbeer, I have listened to demagogues of both the right and left and don't like either. I choose to believe your question about Palin is disingenuous and that you honestly have heard her and wondered?

Does an Obama have a better understanding of the law, by going to Harvard, then someone who attends Hillsdale College?

Yes, a hundred times "Yes"! If you believe otherwise, why not appoint a whole class from Hillsdale College to the High Court? Obama has not merely attended but proven himself sufficiently to lecture in law.

I don't have a problem with your disdain for smug righteousness; I started out working life lecturing at University but left when the incest began to bore me and I realized "I cannot do this for the rest of my life." It is, however, a huge step from that to sincerely ignoring acquired knowledge. We don't want our boats to be built by violinists, and I sure as hell don't want Joe the Plumber to figure out legislation for me.

[Selkirk]

Originally Posted by OsmundL

........Yes, a hundred times "Yes"! If you believe otherwise, why not appoint a whole class from Hillsdale College to the High Court? Obama has not merely attended but proven himself sufficiently to lecture in law.

I don't have a problem with your disdain for smug righteousness; I started out working life lecturing at University but left when the incest began to bore me and I realized "I cannot do this for the rest of my life." It is, however, a huge step from that to sincerely ignoring acquired knowledge. We don't want our boats to be built by violinists, and I sure as hell don't want Joe the Plumber to figure out legislation for me.

There can be little doubt that Obama has acquired knowledge far beyond that of the "Hillsdale" grad. If any one of us found ourselves in serious trouble we would each want the Harvard grad to defend us and would wish to be prosecuted by the Hillsdale grad.

But it is not his knowledge that I find myself concerned with. There needs to be a balance between Joe and Obama. After all, Ronald Reagan only graduated from Eureka College, a college with some obscurity. The barking dogs among the liberals continually howled about Reagan's intellect, but the fact is he was a very effective leader. Far better, in fact, than James Earl Carter, who had a much better education.

I fear Obama has not anticipated the public's reaction to his policies and has created - accidentally created - an America that will never be the equal of its predecessor; never see 3% unemployment again; never see prosperity again to the degree we did in past years.

It makes me sad to see that we are drifting towards a more European style economy, but I understand that it was nearly inevitable. Inevitable, I say, because I believe the root cause of our demise is the 17th Amendment, which allows for popular election of senators thereby allowing them to remain in office virtually forever.
The contentious battles now being fought at the expense of the nation used to be fought only at the expense of the state. And that was a far, far, less costly battle.

[PBzeer]

No OsmundL, I don't believe a Harvard education is somehow superior. While Harvard may boast more "celebrated" faculty, that alone does not guarantee a better, nor more comprehensive, educational experience. Though it certainly promotes a more cliquish one.

Joe the Plumber is exactly who the Founders envisioned as the source of legislation. Citizen legislators, not professional politicians (who's record over the past 80 years leaves much to be desired). I'd much prefer someone not steeped in the business of legal contortion to write laws, then the lawyer heavy legislators we now have. Most of the actual work of which is done by staff, not the lawmaker.

So no, I don't fear laymen as legislators. In fact, I'd prefer someone who has to deal with the laws written, then someone who sees them as obstacles to be surmounted, avoided, or circumvented.

Having a list of letters after one's name does not impart wisdom, it is only a sign of mastering a certain and specific realm of knowledge. Statistically, Bush did better in college than Kerry, but which one is "perceived" as smart and which as dumb?

Knowledge is a valuable tool, but if one doesn't know how to use it, it's worthless.

[PBzeer]

Let me repeat this one more time for the cheap seats. Limbaugh is no more the head of the GOP than George Soros is of the Democrats. Soros, in fact is much more involved in the Democrats (through his various funded "groups" and actual financial support) than Limbaugh is, or ever has been, with the GOP.

[craigimass]

Pb obviously never took the Lsats......

Sure, you need street smarts, common sense and education - but a Harvard Law Degree (honors) and head of the Law Review there does not come easy. My daughter has a similar background and I can assure you that not only is she intelligent (96th percentile on the LSAT), but that she works unbelievably hard.

To equate a drop-out like Palin who went to 5 bland colleges to get some kind of a degree - with someone like Obama...is, well
Anti-Intellectualism at it's best.

Let's me ask my conservative friends a simple question:

If we had a Jeopardy Game Show about 10 of the most important subjects, such as government, geography, history, economics, medicine, etc.
and we had Palin and Obama as contestants.....

Who would win?

I await an intellectually honest answer.

I would bet 10 to 1 on Obama, even though I think the actually difference is much greater than that.

PB ASKED for examples of anti-intellectualism. Some of us answered. That does not mean I don't believe in a layman being smart. Such thinking is another tendency of conservatives. In fact, I think the complete opposite! Some of my top heros are folks like Steve Wozniak, Steve Jobs and other geeks who either didn't get degrees (before they invented stuff) or otherwise just "had it". But there is a difference between Woz and Joe the Plumber. One is just a political hack and quasi-celebrity and the other has intelligence.

[craigimass]

Joe the plumber is neither a plumber nor named Joe. His name is Sam and he was formerly in the employ of a plumbing contractor, but has no license.

He is no more a plumber or Joe than I am a CG approved 100 ton master (or whatever)...but I can sweat pipes with no leaks and drive a Boston Whaler.


In any case, PB, it is interesting that you ASK for examples and then, when they are given, you start yelling "abortionists!". THAT is anti-intellectualism.

[craigimass]

Originally Posted by Selkirk

Now, how would you know this? Aren't you, Like Don Quixote, just creating a foe that you may easily destroy because you are unable to combat the real foe?

Uh, one because I listened to a hour audio program by the man who ghostwrote Falwells books.....
two, because of confirmed news reports.....
After the signing of one ban on abortions:
"Rev. Jerry Falwell, a nationally known pastor, was part of the group that met with Bush afterwards.
"In this meeting, President Bush gallantly declared that his administration would put all of its resources behind the partial-birth abortion ban in the courtroom," Falwell said afterwards.
After some discussion and fellowship, Bush asked the group to join hands and pray "that God will bless our efforts to preserve life in our land."
"What an astounding moment this was for me personally," Falwell said. "Standing there in the Oval Office, I felt suddenly humbled to be in the presence of a man -- our president -- who takes his faith very seriously and who seeks the prayers of his friends as he leads our nation."

Following the prayer, Falwell told President Bush the people in the room represent about 200,000 pastors and 80 million Christians nationwide who consider him not only to be our president but also a man of God.

In response, Bush "humbly turned to me and replied, 'I'll try to live up to it.'"

So, PB says the guy is "fringe", but Bush will pray with him, meet with him in the Oval Office, ask him his OK on who to appoint with the Supreme Count (another story) and then try to live up to his expectations?

I didn't make this stuff up. It's pretty much common knowledge.

Falwell is certainly not fringe....I would use that title for folks like David Koresh (RIP). Robertson is not fringe. Limbaugh is not fringe.

If they are fringe....then please tell me who is mainstream? I might want to listen to them.