PDA

View Full Version : Searching for intelligent life on the left



bobbys
03-07-2010, 04:18 AM
Searching for intelligent life on the left.

by Burt Prelutsky It’s easy to see why liberals are convinced that they’re superior to conservatives. For one thing, in nearly all cases, professors in the liberal arts and members of the mainstream media are left-wingers. But you don’t have to be very intelligent or even the slightest bit honest to make one’s living in either field. To be a liberal arts professor, the major prerequisite is a willingness to endure sitting in classrooms from the time you’re six years old until the day you die. Once you’re into your post-graduate years, you merely have to concentrate on your specialty, be it Elizabethan poetry or the mating habits of the loon. That hardly bestows genius status on anyone. In fact, if you spot one of these bores headed your way at a cocktail party, my advice is to either feign a case of the vapors or grab your hat and go home.
The requirements for working in the mass media are even less stringent. You merely have to be hired. If you work in front of the camera, it goes without saying that you do have to have nice hair.
While I acknowledge that being a member of these professions is not absolute proof that one is an ignoramus. But neither is it a sign of superior intellect. Least of all is it an indicator of wisdom.
In fact, just about the only thing one can garner about these people is based, not on their occupation, but their politics, which shows them to possess the intellectual curiosity and independent thought of sheep.
There is a reason, after all, that liberals will unquestioningly accept all sorts of claptrap. For instance, like small children covering their ears and chanting, “Can’t hear you!” they ignore the fact that the earth’s temperature has been declining over the past decade, that Al Gore has been lining the pockets of his parka with bald-faced lies and that the East Anglia emails, aka Climategate, prove that academics, along with “scientists” affiliated with the United Nations, have been promoting the global warming hoax for their own selfish purposes.
Liberals want to expunge the Second Amendment from the Constitution even though the data proves that wherever law-abiding citizens, and not just the criminal element, carry concealed weapons, the crime statistics quite logically decline. Because liberals ignore facts about guns just as they do about freezing temperatures, even as their teeth are chattering like castanets, they refuse to debate the opposition, preferring to merely debase them.
Liberals don’t even question their like-minded politicians when folks like Obama, Pelosi and Reid, insist that it is possible to add millions of people to the Medicaid rolls, lower the minimum age for coverage to 55, and simultaneously cut costs without affecting care for the elderly. I do seem to recall Obama’s stating that a massive savings would come about through the elimination of medical fraud, but you can forget about a true blue left-winger ever asking him how he intends to go about it; or why, after all this time, he hasn’t even begun.
Liberals can be counted on to oppose drilling for oil in ANWR because they’re so concerned about the caribou and about spoiling the ecological state of frozen tundra. The fact that drilling for oil in Alaska would no more bother the caribou than drilling in Texas annoys jack rabbits, and that anything that affects frozen tundra would obviously be an improvement, doesn’t faze these blowhards in the least. But, then, neither does the fact that ANWR is nothing more than a tiny speck in our largest state, or the indisputable fact that the overwhelming majority of Alaskans are in favor of drilling.
But, of course, there aren’t a lot of academic pinheads residing in our 49th state and the only time the MSM types ever set foot within a thousand miles of caribou is when they head north, panning for dirt about Sarah Palin.
If the only thing that those on the Left lacked was intelligence, it would be bad enough, but that wouldn’t necessarily make them insufferable. But their ignorance is compounded by their snobbery. I mean, when egotistical lunkheads like Joy Behar, Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, Henry Waxman, Bill Maher, Janeane Garofalo, Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Keith Olbermann, Al Franken and Danny Glover, are convinced that they are intellectually superior to Charles Krauthammer, Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Beck, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Rush Limbaugh, Jonah Goldberg, Ralph Peters, Michelle Malkin, Ronald Radosh, Dick Morris, Ann Coulter and Bernie Goldberg, you have to wonder if they also believe that the moon is made of blue cheese. But, of course, if it were, Al Gore would be out peddling Uncle Al’s Roquefort Dressing.
But worst of all is the belief widely held by liberals that they are nicer and far more decent than those Americans who happen to be conservatives; you know, the poor besotted folks that those compassionate liberals are only too happy to label fascists, Nazis, racists and astroturfers. Their conviction seems to be based in large part on the peculiar notion that if you object to Obama’s transformation of America from thriving free-market capitalism to state-run socialism, you must be a bigot. However, when they dismiss Condoleezza Rice, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas, as oreos and Uncle Toms, that merely proves that they, rather than DNA or pigmentation, can truly determine racial identity.
Ideologically, these moral cretins embrace the beliefs of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara, and physically embrace the likes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez.
These self-anointed intellectuals are people who think that those who believe in God and Jesus Christ, those who “cling to their guns and their religion,” are a lower form of animal life, while they, themselves, have no problem whatever accepting Obama as a messiah and, in the past, deifying the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
Let’s face it, when you kneel in a church, you’re accepting that there is something greater and wiser than yourself in the universe. When, on the other hand, you kneel to a left-wing politician, you’re merely emulating Monica Lewinsky.

Michael Beckman
03-07-2010, 04:23 AM
Let's face it, when you don't format your C&P, you're accepting that I'm only gonna read the last line. When, on the other hand, you format in an aesthetically pleasing manner, you're merely emulating a left-wing liberal nutjob.

But more seriously,

http://www.angryzenmaster.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/obamafacepalm.jpg

Peerie Maa
03-07-2010, 04:38 AM
C & P, where the ampersand is shorthand for the letters R and A.;)

PeterSibley
03-07-2010, 05:25 AM
The horrible thing for those outside of your fine country ,is watching the snarling and bitching between so called conservatives and anyone who doesn't so identify .

We Australians are just more polite .

downthecreek
03-07-2010, 06:31 AM
The horrible thing for those outside of your fine country ,is watching the snarling and bitching between so called conservatives and anyone who doesn't so identify .


And such childish bitching too. It isn't even clever enough to be entertaining. For sure, there's no sign of intelligent life in that passage.

Ian McColgin
03-07-2010, 07:57 AM
The factual basis for this column is false and the emotional basis is a pure play to American anti-intellectualism, one of the less appealing sub-threads of our national culture. This column is just a good syntax updating of the propaganda of the No-Nothing party of almost two centuries ago.

“The Media ELite” from 1986 is usually used to justify the charge that the media establishment is liberal or even left wing. That survey found that a plurality of reporters at the New York Times and the Washington Post were indeed Democrats. There were some Republicans. Most were independents. The attitudes of the reporter pools towards issues as measured by the survey labeled the clear majority as liberal. The survey therefore concluded, without looking at the actual objectivity or slant of the coverage, that the coverage must be liberal.

Other authors like Herman and Chomsky (1988) posit a right wing bias based on a “propaganda model” that assumes advertising dollars control news slant.

In most new papers and in the electronic media that are actually news there are three well walled entities: Advertising, Editorial, and News. As any jerk can see from the Wall Street Journal, it is actually possible to have an extreme editorial bias that does not slop over into news coverage.

Sometimes it slops over in contradictory ways. The New York Times infamous support of the Iraq invasion was a bit of editorial wanting to be on the side of a way coupled with one report with supposedly secret access. In that case the bias had the effect of spiking stories that might have better informed the public that the “factual” justification for the invasion was wholly made-up.

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting labels itself liberal and devoted to fact-checking. It conducted the largest and most scientifically valid survey of journalists and learned that journalists tended to a majority slightly liberal on social policies and distinctly right of public opinion on economic, labor, health care and foreign policy issues. This was born out in the detailed methods questions where it was learned that for economic issued, for example, reporters sought data from and quoted government, business and conservative academic sources, far more than labor and liberal academic sources. They might cite the centrist Brookings Institute, very often cite the right wing Heritage Institute, and most readers of this forum can’t even name, have never seen cited, an actual liberal think-tank.

Glen Longino
03-07-2010, 08:11 AM
The first sentence says it all:
"It's easy to see why liberals are convinced that they're superior to conservatives."
The rest of it only proves that Burt Prelutsky is an idiot.

Paul Pless
03-07-2010, 08:12 AM
Let's face it, when you don't format your C&P, you're accepting that I'm only gonna read the last line. it were a good last line, no?:D

George.
03-07-2010, 08:24 AM
Dearest bobbys, do not waste time searching for intelligent life on the left. You'll find it is as scarce as empathy on the right. Didn't you know that whereas the former have no brains, the latter have no hearts? ;)

oznabrag
03-07-2010, 08:54 AM
... the latter have no hearts? ;)

And no brains, either, once the RWZs have eaten them.

huisjen
03-07-2010, 09:00 AM
This message is hidden because bobbys is on your ignore list.

:D

Dan

Nicholas Scheuer
03-07-2010, 12:18 PM
Would the Right know intelligent life if it were standing right in front of them?

Rich Jones
03-07-2010, 12:35 PM
Dearest bobbys, do not waste time searching for intelligent life on the left. You'll find it is as scarce as empathy on the right. Didn't you know that whereas the former have no brains, the latter have no hearts? ;)

Words of wisdom from Brazil! But I would say that the left does have brains. What they lack is guts.

Tom Montgomery
03-07-2010, 12:57 PM
Sure there are liberals with guts. They are the ones that get labeled "rabid."

spirit
03-07-2010, 02:20 PM
The fact that our Republicans in Congress vote as a unified block proves that no one there is allowed to think for themselves.

Michael D. Storey
03-07-2010, 02:31 PM
And such childish bitching too. It isn't even clever enough to be entertaining. For sure, there's no sign of intelligent life in that passage.

Every now and again, a few minutes of British politics are worth watching. The House of Commons no more than the House of Lords shows, on occassion, but not always and not even generally, in my opinion, can and chooses to, act like a rehearsal room for a Monty Python impersonator show. You know this; we all know this. Ever watched the Koreans go at it in their parliament? I could go on. Nearly all cultures have legislative bodies that try to appear civilized whilst they engage in buffoonery, and get paid well to do it. It is unfortunate that the electorate has to get involved in name calling, unwarranted statements, and comments shoveled out as fact that are no more than paranoid feelings of inadequacy, with no creditable data to back them up.

uwhilna
03-07-2010, 03:27 PM
Words of wisdom from Brazil! But I would say that the left does have brains. What they lack is guts.

Yup,the guts to take out a democratically elected leader in Chile, start the Spanish American War and to save us all from Saddam's weapons of mass distraction, we love ya dubbya & the other fine examples of the towering intellectuals that represent the American right.

Phillip Allen
03-07-2010, 03:39 PM
I didn't read the opening post...the responses tell me all I need to know...carry on, I"ll be somewhere else

pefjr
03-07-2010, 03:47 PM
Searching for intelligent life on the left.
.I was searching for a sense of humor on the left. No one has yet read this C&P as humor. Ian is still trying to debunk it:D great troll bobbys, you stirred up a hornets nest of libs with no ability to laugh at themselves.

Hal Forsen
03-07-2010, 03:50 PM
libs with no ability to laugh at themselves

It's just so much easier to laugh at all you redneck bumpkins. :rolleyes:

rbgarr
03-07-2010, 03:51 PM
Witless drivel. If that's supposed to be humor, it's as sorry as that TV show that attempted to mimic Jon Stewart, only from the right.

David G
03-07-2010, 03:57 PM
bs,

That's simply BS.

There's plenty of brains, heart, caring, patriotism, righteous indignation, and love on the left... and on the right.

There's also plenty of dogmatism, prejudice, irrationality, stupidity, absurdity, anger, and frustration... on both sides.

I am absolutely in favor of people from both sides candidly and vigorously discussing their perceptions, perspectives, feelings, beliefs, doubts, fears, and confusions. I love it when they can back up their assertions with fact.

I am absolutely opposed to people refusing to think for themselves. I hate it when folks take either sides commentary - be it Joseph Schumpeter or William F. Buckley Jr., Barack Obama or David Brooks - as gospel. I am dishearten, and sometimes disgusted, by the laziness inherent in such an approach.

So, bobbys, you decide which side you want to be on. It's not between Right & Left. It's between being a thinking citizen & being a True Believer drone, spouting talking points and posting ill-considered, bogus, Cut & Paste pieces that present an over-the-top, clumsily slanted, stupidly simplistic view of the world.

For those of you at either end of the spectrum, I'd suggest you read Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements". If the phenomenon he describes fits you, you might want to take some steps to re-acquire a state of balance. If you think it doesn't fit you... ask some friends - just to be sure.

pefjr
03-07-2010, 04:03 PM
Ian: I guess your ox is being gored here?:D

downthecreek
03-07-2010, 04:17 PM
Every now and again, a few minutes of British politics are worth watching. The House of Commons no more than the House of Lords shows, on occassion, but not always and not even generally, in my opinion, can and chooses to, act like a rehearsal room for a Monty Python impersonator show.

"No more than the House of Lords"? I'm not sure what you mean here. The House of Commons is certainly rowdy and childish on occasion. If you want to include the House of Lords I suspect you may be working on hearsay, because that particular gang is much better behaved.

But this is about commentary, not the behaviour of legislators - and there is nothing in British politics that remotely compares to the kind of avalanche of playground invective against adherents of the opposing parties that you have over there.

bobbys
03-07-2010, 05:05 PM
:D

Dan.

Someone has me on Ignore?.

WOW i never even tried to be honored so.....

Must be one of the...

I can dish it out but not take it People.

paul oman
03-07-2010, 05:57 PM
Most Left folks think the Right messed things up over the past decade. Most Right folks feel certain the Left is flushing us down the toilet in record time.

Appears that the Left attract the nutty brain trusts (I have 4 college degrees) and the really poor (with promises of free stuff) - while the Right appeals to folks that do things the hard way and on their own efforts. They think that the super rich Bill Gates type are responsible for millions of jobs, billions of tax income, and people too poor to buy computers.

Is there intelligent life on the Planet? Yes, but I'm only visiting... Maybe it is time to go home...

David G
03-07-2010, 06:15 PM
paul,

I guess I don't follow. What were you trying to say? Were you responding to any particular post? Do you consider yourself part of the Right? And you feel blamed and discarded? Or do you consider yourself part of the Left - nuttly brain trust/4 college degrees? Are you saying that Democrats appeal to the lower socio-economic groups because they figure Democrats are gonna give them Free Stuff? I missed the point of the Bill Gates reference totally.

Come again?

bobbys
03-07-2010, 06:44 PM
:D

Dan.

Quote:
This message is hidden because bobbys is on your ignore list.
:D

Dan
__________________.

Wait a second.

Im on your ignore list?.

But you shout out something then run back in your closet?.

Very gutsy move there Dan.:D

Michael D. Storey
03-07-2010, 08:24 PM
So I turned on the screen and this thread came up right next to the one named 'Let's go to Mars.'
Remember when the quest was for intelligent life on Mars? Now, we want to see how intelligent our neighbors are.
I can not help but feel that we have lowered our sights to a dangerously pitiful degree.
Jusayin

LeeG
03-07-2010, 09:12 PM
- while the Right appeals to folks that do things the hard way and on their own efforts.

Cheney enlisted some very smart people to deceive the country.

John Smith
03-08-2010, 09:24 AM
Searching for intelligent life on the left.

by Burt Prelutsky It’s easy to see why liberals are convinced that they’re superior to conservatives. For one thing, in nearly all cases, professors in the liberal arts and members of the mainstream media are left-wingers. But you don’t have to be very intelligent or even the slightest bit honest to make one’s living in either field. To be a liberal arts professor, the major prerequisite is a willingness to endure sitting in classrooms from the time you’re six years old until the day you die. Once you’re into your post-graduate years, you merely have to concentrate on your specialty, be it Elizabethan poetry or the mating habits of the loon. That hardly bestows genius status on anyone. In fact, if you spot one of these bores headed your way at a cocktail party, my advice is to either feign a case of the vapors or grab your hat and go home.
The requirements for working in the mass media are even less stringent. You merely have to be hired. If you work in front of the camera, it goes without saying that you do have to have nice hair.
While I acknowledge that being a member of these professions is not absolute proof that one is an ignoramus. But neither is it a sign of superior intellect. Least of all is it an indicator of wisdom.
In fact, just about the only thing one can garner about these people is based, not on their occupation, but their politics, which shows them to possess the intellectual curiosity and independent thought of sheep.
There is a reason, after all, that liberals will unquestioningly accept all sorts of claptrap. For instance, like small children covering their ears and chanting, “Can’t hear you!” they ignore the fact that the earth’s temperature has been declining over the past decade, that Al Gore has been lining the pockets of his parka with bald-faced lies and that the East Anglia emails, aka Climategate, prove that academics, along with “scientists” affiliated with the United Nations, have been promoting the global warming hoax for their own selfish purposes.
Liberals want to expunge the Second Amendment from the Constitution even though the data proves that wherever law-abiding citizens, and not just the criminal element, carry concealed weapons, the crime statistics quite logically decline. Because liberals ignore facts about guns just as they do about freezing temperatures, even as their teeth are chattering like castanets, they refuse to debate the opposition, preferring to merely debase them.
Liberals don’t even question their like-minded politicians when folks like Obama, Pelosi and Reid, insist that it is possible to add millions of people to the Medicaid rolls, lower the minimum age for coverage to 55, and simultaneously cut costs without affecting care for the elderly. I do seem to recall Obama’s stating that a massive savings would come about through the elimination of medical fraud, but you can forget about a true blue left-winger ever asking him how he intends to go about it; or why, after all this time, he hasn’t even begun.
Liberals can be counted on to oppose drilling for oil in ANWR because they’re so concerned about the caribou and about spoiling the ecological state of frozen tundra. The fact that drilling for oil in Alaska would no more bother the caribou than drilling in Texas annoys jack rabbits, and that anything that affects frozen tundra would obviously be an improvement, doesn’t faze these blowhards in the least. But, then, neither does the fact that ANWR is nothing more than a tiny speck in our largest state, or the indisputable fact that the overwhelming majority of Alaskans are in favor of drilling.
But, of course, there aren’t a lot of academic pinheads residing in our 49th state and the only time the MSM types ever set foot within a thousand miles of caribou is when they head north, panning for dirt about Sarah Palin.
If the only thing that those on the Left lacked was intelligence, it would be bad enough, but that wouldn’t necessarily make them insufferable. But their ignorance is compounded by their snobbery. I mean, when egotistical lunkheads like Joy Behar, Jon Stewart, Chris Matthews, Henry Waxman, Bill Maher, Janeane Garofalo, Barbara Boxer, Barney Frank, Keith Olbermann, Al Franken and Danny Glover, are convinced that they are intellectually superior to Charles Krauthammer, Andrew Breitbart, Glenn Beck, Dennis Prager, Michael Medved, Rush Limbaugh, Jonah Goldberg, Ralph Peters, Michelle Malkin, Ronald Radosh, Dick Morris, Ann Coulter and Bernie Goldberg, you have to wonder if they also believe that the moon is made of blue cheese. But, of course, if it were, Al Gore would be out peddling Uncle Al’s Roquefort Dressing.
But worst of all is the belief widely held by liberals that they are nicer and far more decent than those Americans who happen to be conservatives; you know, the poor besotted folks that those compassionate liberals are only too happy to label fascists, Nazis, racists and astroturfers. Their conviction seems to be based in large part on the peculiar notion that if you object to Obama’s transformation of America from thriving free-market capitalism to state-run socialism, you must be a bigot. However, when they dismiss Condoleezza Rice, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Ward Connerly and Clarence Thomas, as oreos and Uncle Toms, that merely proves that they, rather than DNA or pigmentation, can truly determine racial identity.
Ideologically, these moral cretins embrace the beliefs of Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara, and physically embrace the likes of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez.
These self-anointed intellectuals are people who think that those who believe in God and Jesus Christ, those who “cling to their guns and their religion,” are a lower form of animal life, while they, themselves, have no problem whatever accepting Obama as a messiah and, in the past, deifying the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
Let’s face it, when you kneel in a church, you’re accepting that there is something greater and wiser than yourself in the universe. When, on the other hand, you kneel to a left-wing politician, you’re merely emulating Monica Lewinsky.

The first sign of intelligence on these forums is breaking up the text so it's easier to read.

It is debatible what one is accecpting when on kneels in church.