Liberal Elite have NO CLUE

When did "intelligent" become a dirty word?

Campaign 2000?

Ask him how Norway won WW-II...

When Republicans started to use it to describe thier campaign.

That's interesting:

gugasnake obviously seems to prefer e.g. Russia to an USA NATO-ally.

Isn't the bottom of the barrel bare YET????!!!!!

Intelligent is not synonymous with Educated. You can teach a retard to repeat information. Education does not equate to wisdom, experience, or intellectual superiority. Education is nothing more than facts or skills that have been instilled in an individual.

I could tell him/them, bunny, that Norway was defeated in 1066 by the French ... :wink:

That is an extraordinarily narrow view.

Yes, on one level that is true - education is not SUFFICIENT to instil wisdom etc, however, it is an extraordinarily effective way of nurturing these things and, overall, of great assistance in encouraging them.

Please expound your views.

Are you anti-education? Would you for instance, prefer to have no access to it yourself? Would you prefer that it not exist in your country? Would you prefer your children have none? Do you think it has NO bearing on wisdom and intellectual superiority? Do you think we have more of these things if not educated?

This looks like as good a place as any since we are talking about education and the election here...

Mark Crispin Miller's "Reality Always Wins" sums up my thoughts much more elequently than I could. Great piece, IMO.

"Bush/Cheney have to lose, as all such crackpot movements must. In fact, it wouldn't be inaccurate to call them losers - as that is clearly how, deep down, they see themselves, for all their would-be macho swagger. Here they are, completely dominant in all three branches of the federal government, triumphant in state legislatures coast to coast, and over-represented all throughout the corporate media; and yet they always sound like livid also-rans, compulsively attacking those whom they've already beaten. Sitting through their last convention, with its incessant nastiness and choral jeering, you would never know that the Republicans had been declared the winners of the previous election. Like Nixon, they cannot help but play the rabid underdog, always right yet somehow always wronged."


And of course, this is priceless. It is SO on target.


"But it is not just through such institutional advantage that Team Bush keeps its would-be prosecutors up against the wall. The Busheviks forever cloud the issue, and try to sieze the high ground, by projecting onto everybody else the raging evil that they feel within themselves.

This is, on the one hand, an exquisitely disorienting ploy: the criminals imputing their own criminality to those whom they have robbed and beaten and would surely kill if they could get away with it. In the heat of battle (which is all the time, as far as they're concerned), such pre-emptive noisy indignation fools a lot of people into thinking that the innocent are guilty and vice versa, as when Bush accuses Kerry of endangering the troops, or when Cheney claims that Edwards doesn't care about the safety of the nation. It is a most effective tactic, and therefore one that always must be thwarted and exposed - - and now especially, as the Busheviks, demonstrably intent (again) on stealing the election, are charging that the Democrats are trying to steal it."


I recomend reading the entire piece.

http://www.alternet.org/election04/20360/

Yes - well - education is useful around things of that ilk, at least, no? Lol.

From the history of WW-II, would I rather have Russians at my side in any sort of a fight than French, Norwegians, Danes etc. etc. etc.??

Believe it.

My ancestors who had to flee the Czar for fear of being killed on sight would be proud. Life isn't a video game. Please enlighten us, in depth, about why you would prefer Russians at your side in a fight, based on the history of WWII. Be very specific, by the way.

American conservatives have no clue!

Conservatives has no clue about what Frank??

Damn near anything, Woiyo.

But in your case...and in this particular instance...

...about when to use the word "has" and when to use "have." :wink:

We have no clue because we don't like the Democratic candidate, who appears to have been created in a lab somewhere, using french DNA, catchup, and some frog ****.

Here's a thought: People I know ("liberals" to the mouth breathers in this thread) sometimes mutter about moving to Canada or Mexico if Bush is still in office come January.

Where, I wonder, would an angry conservative move if Kerry wins? Maybe Russia? They seem to have the kind of authoritarian gov't that modern conservatives feel comfy with...

cjhsa seems to be enjoying demonizing and sneering at the French.
As did the majority of the Fuhrer's minions...

It can't be helped; they make themselves such easy targets. Have you looked in the foreign press to see how they sneer at us Americans? I'm sure it is much worse there then it is here.