Sunday, January 14, 2007

THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Albert Einstein

If you've never seen the movie, "Idiocracy", you really should. In fact, this movie should be required viewing for any person aspiring to any public office, or leadership role of any kind. It's kind of a handbook for building civilization, a sad commentary on our current society, and a crystal ball, all rolled into one.

Idiocracy takes us on an imaginary journey, where Luke Wilson portrays an average Joe, an enlisted man in today's army, who is selected for a deep freeze experiment, where he and a civilian (a prostitute played brilliantly by Maya Rudolph) are frozen in stasis, to be thawed out one year later. Of course circumstances occur that cause their stasis chambers to be overlooked, for 500 years. They awake to a world, where evolution has weeded out the intelligent among us, in favor of the dull, and slow witted. The movie opens by showing us just how this came to be. While the more intelligent members of society limited and even restricted their procreation activities, the more common, less intelligent members of society,( represented by tank top clad, toothless brutes and their dull witted haggardly spouses), were busy cranking out "young-uns" by the dozens. This phenomenon spread throughout the land, as the government, and the media, catered to this "lowest common denominator" by feeding them an endless supply of hillbilly entertainment, flavored energy drinks and fatty, low nutrition foods. Life was good for the masses, as long as they allowed themselves to be lulled into a national mindless stupor, where intelligence was mocked, and "macho" was considered the standard to be adopted by all.

Eventually, natural selection weeded out intelligence as a factor for survival, and the nation fell into a semi-chaotic circus, where the police shoot first, and ask questions later, and where buildings, machines, etc, all fall into a perpetual state of disrepair (the image of the leaning Washington Monument was as disturbing as it was hilarious), surrounded by ever growing piles of garbage and waste, as the people are just too stupid, to know what to do with it.

As I watched this movie, in between rib splitting belly laughs, I also found myself shuddering, as the eerie similarities to life here in the states today, was reflected again and again on the screen in front of me. The police and medical personnel were simply mindless automatons, repeating droll, unsympathetic mantra's often heard today in similar circles. Store clerk personnel and service workers, ignored the customers in front of them as they babble incessantly at a phone, or another employee. Citizens sat in their homes, sucking sweetened juices through a hose, and scooping up a sweetened paste from a tub with their fingers, licking them as they ate, and watching mindless dribble on the television. One show, a favorite, was clearly designed to mimic the popular movie series, "Jack Ass".

And then there was the sex. The foul, endless supply of mindless, loveless sex. Starbucks coffee had become a place for the male population to get a "hand job", and H and R Block featured tawdry hookers to help prepare ones taxes.

It was a seedy, corrupt, mindless, lifeless, foul and ignorant society, where the lowest common denominator had become the standard for all.

And the real poignancy of this film, lies in the reality that this grim, unseemly picture of our nation, is not a fantasy at all, but a glimpse into what we are rapidly becoming as a people, evident each time we step out of our doors in the morning.

Compassion, logic and reason, have been replaced by national antipathy, non-scientific theory and hubris on a national level disguised under the banner of patriotism. Dullness and apathy dominate our retail environment, as store clerks, mostly multi-pierced teenagers, crassly ignore the customer in front of them, for the cell phone permanently affixed to their ears. Even driving an automobile has become an experiment in needless hazard, as people, many merely children, not capable of balancing a checkbook, race down the highways in cars too fast for their driving skills, and too expensive for their incomes. And of course Hollywood has not failed to capitalize on our ever-growing national obsession with violence and cruelty, as they churn out movies where innocent victims are mercilessly tortured and mutilated in slow frame, grisly detail, while audiences of mindless drones sit with their 3 D glasses, shoveling over buttered popcorn into their mouths, in-between mob like cheers. Even the age old sport of Boxing, has been replaced by appalling, gladiator like style combat between chemically morph'd characters whose bloodflow to their brains has long since been slowed by the perpetual hemotoma's inflicted by being repeatedly pounded to the cheers of salivating, profanely jeering mobs, rabidly screaming for more damage to be inflicted on the loser of a bout that would make emperor Trajan himself proud of the bloody spectacle before him.

And of course, who can forget Jackass, the TV show that went on to become a box office hit, where undereducated street cretins beat each other over the head senselessly with metal folding chairs, baseball bats, and dead fish, all to entertain the lowest and most limited members of society, who crave such Neanderthal offerings like a pig craves slop. Does anyone actually comprehend the significance that "Jackass" the movie, was the top selling movie in the United States on its opening weekend? Does anyone think that we are not facing a national crisis?

This is America. This is not the America of our fathers, but it certainly is ours.

This is what we've become, by allowing the bar to be lowered to reach the lowest, and most mundane of our fellow countrymen. The "greatest generation" has been replaced by the "lamest generation", and we continue to drive ourselves further towards the edge of the cliff, dismissing as weak willed, unpatriotic or even "gay", anyone who dares to point out our national push towards stupidity on this universal scale. And the author is not exempt from this intellectual plague. In fact, I am a product of it.

The immediate damage from this national stupidity is evident in our daily lives, and the long term consequences are being revealed on a daily basis. Stupid people with advanced technology and weaponry is a recipe for disaster in anyone's cookbook.

We did not elect George W Bush because we are smart, or because he is smart. We elected him because he looked like a "good ole boy".

We did not start the war in Iraq for national security reasons, but because Arabs flew planes into our buildings, so we wanted to fly bombs into theirs.

And just because enough of the people were able to out vote the Diebold voting machines this time around, does not mean we are on our way to a national elevation of higher thought, or wisdom.

I am not sure what the answer is to this national crisis, but one things for sure, a crisis it is. We see it in the invasion of religion into the science classroom, where tight fisted bible thumping zealots demand that "their" interpretation of the creation of the earth be included in any scientific discussion on the topic. We see it in our state governments, as religious leaders are elected to state office, and proceed to mingle their religous beliefs with state issued law. We see it on television, with a constant assault on our senses of sex, unbelievable violence and cruelty, displayed in grizzly detail in between commercials for drugs designed to do everything but think for us. (stay tuned)

If this picture sounds grim, cold or callous, thats because it is, and was intended to. This post is not meant to be "politically correct", nor is it meant to pacify the dull masses. It is meant as a wake up call to anyone who would start a family, write a book, or put anything back into society that represents a peice of themselves, or their lives work. Because they are in the minority. A ever increasing miniority. If we continue on our current path, then it is quite possible, whether you "believe" in it or not, that natural selection will "weed out" the smartest amongst us in favor of the dull witted, who fit more comfortably into society.

Evolution may in fact, ultimately weed out the only people with enough intelligence to teach the rest of us about it.

I am not sure what answers there are, if any, but as I watch our society applaud ignorance, and reward hate, and stupidity on a grand scale, one thing is certain. America is not in danger of becoming a Theocracy. America is in danger of becoming an "Idiocracy".

In fact, we might already be there.

WORFEUS



Watch the trailer for the movie, "Idiocracy" here

595 comments:

  1. Anonymous2:20 PM

    Oddly, I find myself in agreement.

    Only in reality, the Democrats will be there to pass out checks to the mindless zombie class they've created via the public school system.

    And actually aren't we all supposed to be 'tolerant' to all those stereotypes?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous2:25 PM

    Wow, this smacks of elitism...

    At first I thought it was about Dems...

    "Dull witted, low income underachievers are busy making welfare babies by the thousands, to become burdens on the state as they grow, and once they're grown, as they fill the national penal institutions."

    But there is ONE slanderous dig at conservatives...

    "Undereducated religious conservatives breed like rabbits, throughout the Midwest and the south, raising a large crop of thicknecked offspring, who are as dumb as the hillfolk parents who made them..."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous2:27 PM

    I wonder what the Beaver will have to say about this?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous2:39 PM

    Voltron said...

    But there is ONE slanderous dig at conservatives...

    Fair enough. Upon a second reading (this was a hastily posted first draft as we had overrun on the comments on the last thread), I can see that this statement is unfair, as many inner cities are cranking out "young uns" by the thousands as well, therefore its clearly a multi sided issue.

    We removed the word, conservative.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous2:50 PM

    Freedom Fan, it is quite interesting how you turn tail and flee like a churl, then subsequently claim to be locked out, and lo, when does this convienient lockout end, why precisely when i vacate the debate your mysterious banishment convieniently for you is ended, you sir are a cowardly sod afraid to openly engage me.

    Freedom Fan I see you have written another treatise over on the ruffian blog, however me think you doth protest too much sir.

    Regardless the objective of both the written word and theories should be truth and wisdom, and such writings and theories must therefore be able to stand the crucible or scrutiny of opponents with vastly differing theories and perspectives, in light of this sir I shall disect your treatise bit by bit, in small manageable bytes of course so the less intelligent and erudite among us may keep pace.

    For this afternoon sir consider Thu your humble servant, however I ask that you show the courage to respond and not flee and claim to be locked out when you are bested in debate and your intellect such as it is, is quite clearly overmatched

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous2:52 PM

    Thanks Worf. My sensibilities are now intact...LOL

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous2:56 PM

    "...I shall disect your treatise bit by bit, in small manageable bytes of course so the less intelligent and erudite among us may keep pace..."

    Oh puhleeze.....

    What's the matter Thu? Nobody patting you on the back so you have to do it yourself?

    ReplyDelete
  8. ...For this afternoon sir consider Thu your humble servant, however I ask that you show the courage to respond and not flee...
    -Thu

    Done. However, hopefully you are capable of reading as well as writing; since I do indeed respond to you. In fact, I gave you kudos for a good observation regarding the need for government audits.

    But anyway that's cool that you are my humble servant and all. Now run get me a taco, boy.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Volt, if Worf was hard on the beaver last night, no doubt he will need to order another inflatable companion for this evening's romantic activities.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous3:12 PM

    It's OK FF, I saved the link for him....LOL

    ReplyDelete
  11. We removed the word, conservative.
    -WR

    That was so sweet of you, girlfriend.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous3:14 PM

    Ya know FF, I'm worried about the Beaver...

    ReplyDelete
  13. ...the perfect companion while watching BB Mtn....

    ReplyDelete
  14. Where'd Thu go? I kinda miss his endless, effeminate whining about nothing in particular ... kinda like having hillary as a wife, I imagine.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous3:21 PM

    Must be out getting those taco's FF.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous3:22 PM

    Shall we begin sir?

    Freedon Fan stated"Liberals are fond of calling Conservatives “fascists” and “racists” and other lovely epithets. These are truly despicable terms, which flash disturbing images of Hitler, concentration camps, mass murder, the enslavement of citizens by tyrants, and imperialism. Fascism as perfected by the Nazis easily represents the lowest point to which humanity has ever sunk."

    Once again sir you are utilizing an all encompassing term to try to state that liberals are labeling all Conservatives "fascists" and "racists", from my experience both on this blog as well as else where, that is most certainly not the case.

    It appears to me that the liberal bloggers are referring to a much narrower cross section of Conservatives, namely those brutish neo con ruffians who support President Bush and his illegal war, and their attempted coup to destroy the Constitution and sacrifice our freedom.

    Further that subgrouping of Conservatives meriting the fascist label is an ever dwindling number of the far more vast pool of more mainstream decent Republicans who are fleeing the extremists as swiftly as they may.

    I predict that by 2020 The Republican party will be no more, it will either metastesize into another party with a different moniker and slightly more honorable core values and principles or it will fracture into quite possibly several parties along with the Democrats and we will then have far more viable choices than those currently afforded us with the current dodgy two party system.

    But alas sir I must return to the present once again to address your smears and hypocrissy, I find it quite interesting how you wail about liberals smearing Conservatives with derogatory terms, and yet you seem, quite fond and comfortable with refering to liberals as hating their country, being traitors, communists, supporters of terrorists, supporters of islam,haters of the military, unpatriotic etc..... with no factual basis to back your derogatory epithets, so sir the question begs an answer, do you have a double standard for strictly Conservatives, are you a hypocrite that spouts flowery feel good talking points with little substance or like our illustrious president, were you by chance for derogatory names before you were against such talk?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous3:22 PM

    I bet that accent would work real good at a mom and pop taco stand in east LA at night...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Hey Volt, I just found a picture of PP and friends.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous3:24 PM

    Please FF, I just ate and I'm trying to keep it down...LOL

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous3:25 PM

    Freedom Fan stated"Done. However, hopefully you are capable of reading as well as writing; since I do indeed respond to you. In fact, I gave you kudos for a good observation regarding the need for government audits."

    And I give you kudos as well sir for a reasonable and honorable position devoid of the typical Liberal vs Conservative idealology.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Once again sir you are utilizing an all encompassing term to try to state that liberals are labeling all Conservatives "fascists" and "racists", from my experience both on this blog as well as else where, that is most certainly not the case...
    -Thu

    Hey Thu, how's the weather on your planet?

    ReplyDelete
  22. I bet Volt has never, ever had any lib call him a "fascist", eh Volt?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous3:28 PM

    Kill 'em all! Let god sort 'em out!....

    huh?

    Oh, NO FF....Never....

    ReplyDelete
  24. The ONLY person who has ever used the word "hypocrissy" (with that spelling) on this blog is Mike. Busted.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous3:29 PM

    lest anyone be offended, the above was SATIRE....

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous3:31 PM

    Sorry TT. I don't think Mikey could keep up that accent for too long...

    ReplyDelete
  27. I predict that by 2020 The Republican party will be no more, it will either metastesize into another party with a different moniker...

    Cool. I'm hoping for the receding-hairline eagle as a mascot. Oh, and here I found a new one for the Dhimmicrats too.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anonymous3:32 PM

    Freedom Fan stated"Conservatism- a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change."

    Interesting, do you think President Bush and his policies of the last 6 or so years fit this definition, or do you fancy him more of a radical extremist who deviates from classic and traditional Conservative core values and ideals.

    Humor me for a moment, close your eyes and envision the top 10 classical core Conservative values and then picture President Bush and tell me if they dove tail together nicely or they clash savagely.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous3:34 PM

    You'll have to forgive me, I'm one of those "thick necked" midwesterners from the hill country of Illinois.

    I'll have ta wait till pa gits back from sloppin the hogs an axe him...

    LOL

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous3:37 PM

    Freedom Fan stated"Hey Thu, how's the weather on your planet?"

    Once again sir you use your sardonic humor to avoid a reasoned response, do you fear facing me that greatly sir?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous3:39 PM

    Thu FF was questioning your objectivity. There is no one on this blog with the POSSIBLE exception of yourself who has not called us "fascists" or "racists".

    ReplyDelete
  32. Freedom Fan stated "Conservatism- a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change."

    Interesting, do you think President Bush and his policies of the last 6 or so years fit this definition...
    -Thu

    Let's see:
    1) Tax cuts- check
    2) Strong national defense- check
    3) Christian moral values- check
    4) Appointing non-activist judges- check
    5) Fiscal responsibility- uh...no

    I give him a B-. Um...may I open my eyes now, cause I just had a nightmare about hillary becoming president and then sleeping with bill?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous3:44 PM

    Once again Talll Texan, I dont deem you a worthy opponent much less worthy to engage, yet I will lower my self to your diversion one more time to correct your ineptitude, Mike from what I have views uses the following spelling for the word you reference hippocrite.

    One last thing dotard, why is it those who likely have the most to hide are also the most distrustful, you sir are here for purposes other than reasoned debate, that was quite evident to me from my initial hour here.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous3:46 PM

    The missing link said...
    ...the perfect companion while watching BB Mtn....

    3:15 PM


    I would like to thank you for proving my theory.

    Your silly, juvenile one liner insults, particularly the one above, prove your heritage, as well as your current position in life.

    If my theory is correct, natural selection is on your side.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anonymous3:46 PM

    Remember.

    You might not believe in evolution, but evolution believes in you.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Thu, as I said, there is only one person who used that word with that spelling on this blog. I reiterate: busted.

    He/you may have also used the word with the spelling in your own posts, but, but "hypocrissy" was used once in March by Mike. Busted.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Anonymous3:52 PM

    Well, I don't know about what you're saying TT, I always thought THU was possibly an Asian fellow, but what I'd like to know, is why you have at your fingertips, a post from Mike, in fact ONE WORD from a post from Mike, from TEN MONTHS AGO?

    Seems you guys have quite the database going there.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Looks like WR, the computer genius, is still a mite confused on how to use Google.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Anonymous3:53 PM

    Votron stated"Thu FF was questioning your objectivity. There is no one on this blog with the POSSIBLE exception of yourself who has not called us "fascists" or "racists"."

    No Votron, my objectivity is irrelevant here sir, my point is not wether the liberals on this blog right or wrong refer to you as fascists, but rather that they are not advocating that all Conservatives are fascists, and almost every liberal on this blog has supported that conclusion, many in the prior thread.

    The liberal bloggers may very well be behaving as sods by referring to various Conservative bloggers as Fascists, and they may very well be correct, I see President Bush and his neo con administration as the fascists, and I lean toward the conclusion that the other Liberal bloggers do as well, but i do not presume to read the minds of my fellow men, that seems to be a Republican, or rather a neo con mantra.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Anonymous3:54 PM

    Worf, he'll have to convince me on that one too...LOL

    No offense TT. Like I said previously you might be able to do that in one or two short posts, but it's awfully hard to maintain a character much different than yourself during a long discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  41. " ST WORFEUS IGNATIUS said...
    Well, I don't know about what you're saying TT, I always thought THU was possibly an Asian fellow, but what I'd like to know, is why you have at your fingertips, a post from Mike, in fact ONE WORD from a post from Mike, from TEN MONTHS AGO?

    Seems you guys have quite the database going there.

    3:52 PM"

    Pretty cool, right?

    ReplyDelete
  42. TT it is possible that the spelling of "hypocrissy" only serves to illustrate an ubiquitous lack of attention to detail (ie intellectual laziness in my premise) on the part of libs.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Anonymous3:59 PM

    I don't know Volt. I mean, maybe TT's right. Mike will have to answer that. I haven't seen the post he's claiming where Mike spelled hypocrisy with two s's, and even if I did, seems like a simple typo to me.

    But listening to him talk, I always had the impression of an asian fellow, who was educated somewhere in the UK.

    I am not trying to stero-type him, just the name THU seemed asian to me. Also his english is somewhat broken, like an asian person would be.

    Thu?

    Don't get mad at me.

    I'm just "guessing".

    ReplyDelete
  44. Volt, I agree "Thu's" facade was exposing some hairline fractures for sometime, but I do agree, it must be hard to keep up a false style forever.

    One thing for sure is that Thu's British facade has seemed forced in the last few days. The very fact that he is trying to present himself as British tells me that he probably isn't.

    Even BG doesn't write that way.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The liberal bloggers may very well be behaving as sods by referring to various Conservative bloggers as Fascists, and they may very well be correct, I see President Bush and his neo con administration as the fascists...
    -Thu

    Quod erad demonstratum

    /modestly takes bow

    ReplyDelete
  46. Anonymous4:02 PM

    Very Well Freedom Fan, what is your opinion of President Bush's bungling of the war in Iraq, his violating and desecrating the Constitution, sacrificing our freedoms, do little to actually make our country safer as evidenced by both the ISG and numerous other reports, I believe President Bush to be a totally daft ruffian, and while you may admire some of the prior legislation that was also done by the 109 Congress, do you feel that you quite likely could and should have had a superior advocate of your principles and a far better stewart for this great country than President Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Anonymous4:03 PM

    Actually, the style is simillar to a liberal William F. Buckley....

    ReplyDelete
  48. Anonymous4:03 PM

    Well, I'm not sure who's right here, I hadn't really thought of it till now, but one things for sure.

    It's gonna be fun watching you rubes trying to figure it out.

    ReplyDelete
  49. You see, if someone is really British, they would have more British slang at their fingertips than just a few words, repeated over and over, like "sod," "dodgy," etc.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Anonymous4:05 PM

    TalllTexan said....

    Pretty cool, right?

    Sure.


    :|


    But what was that thing about we should "get a life" again?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Anonymous4:06 PM

    Hell, I'll agree with that.

    However, the congress shares some of the blame for not securing the borders...

    ReplyDelete
  52. Anonymous4:06 PM

    TalllTexan said...
    You see, if someone is really British, they would have more British slang at their fingertips than just a few words, repeated over and over, like "sod," "dodgy," etc


    I'm not sure he ever said he was british, did he?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Anonymous4:07 PM

    Voltron said...
    Hell, I'll agree with that.

    However, the congress shares some of the blame for not securing the borders...


    Absolutely.

    The 109th congress in particular.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Anonymous4:07 PM

    The part about "a better advocate" anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Anonymous4:08 PM

    But you go with the president you have, not the one you wish you had...LOL

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anonymous4:09 PM

    And as I've previously mentioned the constitution has been "violated" by both parties many times before and we've come through unscathed...

    And SOME violations are ongoing and considered 'third rails'...

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anonymous4:10 PM

    Voltron said...
    But you go with the president you have, not the one you wish you had...LOL


    Did you see Chris Matthews introduce him the other night for his address on the troop escalation?

    Here he is, the ONLY President we have, President George W. Bush

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anonymous4:10 PM

    Hence FDR's "raw deal".

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anonymous4:11 PM

    No Worf, I didn't. I don't watch a whole lot of news anymore. I pick up most of it from the web, and when I do watch TV it's mostly FOX....
    (sorry...LOL)

    ReplyDelete
  60. Anonymous4:12 PM

    Voltron said...
    And as I've previously mentioned the constitution has been "violated" by both parties many times before and we've come through unscathed...


    This is different.

    Every expert, analyst and scholar proclaims that constantly now.

    We are at a fundemental crisis point, as an amuck commander in cheif ignores the will of the people, the congress, and the Constitution.

    For someone who strikes me as a libertarian, you sure seem to be lulled to sleep this time around.

    ReplyDelete
  61. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Anonymous4:13 PM

    And also Worf, a troop surge WAS part of the ISG reccommendations, and I thought you guys agreed with those?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anonymous4:15 PM

    Voltron said...
    and when I do watch TV it's mostly FOX....


    Well thanks for admitting you prefer to be brainwashed by your own party news.

    Forget Mcneal Lehrer, Forget the BBC, Forget NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Meet the Press, This Week, Face the Nation, Captial Gang, hell forget them all.

    Why listen to the wealth of knowledge and information out there, when you've got Michelle Malkin?

    ReplyDelete
  64. "Voltron said...
    Actually, the style is simillar to a liberal William F. Buckley....

    4:03 PM"

    Volt, I can see where you might get that idea, but William F. Buckley has a command of the English language that put's all of us to shame, and probably has one of the best vocabularies of modern writers.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Anonymous4:16 PM

    You know, I said the same things about Clinton and he's gone now...

    I always thought it'd be like trying to stuff a cat into a pail of water, you'd have to cut off his arms and legs to get him out of the door.

    In less than two years Bush will be gone as well.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anonymous4:16 PM

    Voltron said...
    And also Worf, a troop surge WAS part of the ISG reccommendations, and I thought you guys agreed with those?


    Well then you didn't "thought" much.

    Maybe you'd better have TT check the database and find where I said I agreed with all of the recommendations of the Baker commission.

    Because I didn't.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Anonymous4:17 PM

    TT, agreed on Buckley...

    ReplyDelete
  68. Anonymous4:18 PM

    TT, run that down for me will you? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Anonymous4:20 PM

    St Worfeus Ignatius stated"But listening to him talk, I always had the impression of an asian fellow, who was educated somewhere in the UK.

    I am not trying to stero-type him, just the name THU seemed asian to me. Also his english is somewhat broken, like an asian person would be."

    Quite right sir, I grew up in Asia and spent a 17 year stint in the UK, but i prefer to not disclose any personal data, I am here for discussion, not revealing personal facts, if that is your cup of tea sir, might i suggest a chat room.

    One more thing if all Talll Texan can come up with for his foppish conspiracy theory is trying to impede my credibility is a spelling another blogger used for a specific word once over 10 months ago, then his intellect is as weak and inept as his non existant debating skills.

    Might it have been a spelling error, might it have been a coincidence, further I have never viewed this unproven error you refer to, yet I have seen manifold falsehoods you have attempted to pass off as fact sir.

    You sir are a fop, intent on derailing and diverting from reasoned discussion, with personal smears, you are an authoritarian who atempts to impugn, your opponents credibilty with inuendo and irrelevant diversions from the dustbin of 10 months ago, I have watched idly as you did likewise to Clif, now you try to impugn my credibility to halt my disection of your associate's treatise, why do you fear me so that you feel the need to attack and undermine me.

    Do you feel Conservative principles can not stand up under vigorous intropection in an honest reasoned debate?

    Is that why all the attempts at subterfuge and diversion sir?

    ReplyDelete
  70. Anonymous4:21 PM

    As to FOX Worf, some of the commentators are biased, (both ways) but on hard news they're pretty fair.

    I've never heard anyone accuse Sheppard Smith of bias, nor many Brit Hume. (although his panelists clearly are)

    ReplyDelete
  71. Anonymous4:22 PM

    Voltron said...
    TT, run that down for me will you? Thanks.


    Maybe you should have your body, the fan of freedom do it for you.

    After all, he can just "google" it.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Anonymous4:23 PM

    Voltron said...
    As to FOX Worf, some of the commentators are biased


    Gee ya THINK?

    ReplyDelete
  73. Now this is a first-class mind and writer:

    =======

    Deploring Bush

    By William F. Buckley Jr.


    If your assignment was, Write an essay on the stupidity of President Bush, you could start in with some confidence. The reason for this is that George W. Bush hasn't any flair for the spoken word, so that you can take specimens of this weakness and deduce, for your composition on G. W. Bush, that he is stupid.



    This is a game of sorts, but the temptations affect the thinking of those naturally attracted to condescension, an exercise which has the gratifying consequence of leaving you exalted. Slate magazine, the spicy child of Michael Kinsley, and nowadays the property of the Washington Post, is celebrating its 10th anniversary, to which end it advertises an anthology, The Best of Slate. One of the essays in it is a mordant derogation of George W. Bush. This isn't accomplished by discussing five public issues on which the critic differs from Bush, effecting demonization. Such public questions are given here and there, but only as background matter, and the passing point is made that he is worse than his father. ("While some describe the second Bush presidency as a restoration, it is in at least equal measure a repudiation. The son's harder-edged conservatism explicitly rejects the old man's approach to such issues as abortion, taxes, and relations with Israel.") But the author of this 10th Anniversary Celebration of Bushwhacking coolly rises from all such political passions, preferring just to leave it that Bush is—the temptation is to write, "sort of dumb," but Jacob Weisberg doesn't say that. He prefers just plain dumb.



    On the matter of the president's uttering sentences that are garbled, Weisberg can't be argued with. But a difficulty with language can be attributed to many public figures, paradoxically, even to such as have proven skills. The young Dwight David Eisenhower, for instance, actually wrote military manuals when he served under General MacArthur, who was a fussy overseer and a guardian of holy prose. And of course we know that en route to the White House, Ike served as president of Columbia University. But it remains true that some of his improvised spoken language was as impenetrable as the Rosetta Stone. After his answer to the question, What would he do if the Soviet Union again laid siege on Berlin? someone made a wisecrack to the effect that resourceful Soviet cryptographers would have given Khrushchev absolutely contradictory accounts of what President Eisenhower threatened. It was for many years insisted upon by detractors that Ronald Reagan was basically illiterate. That myth is receding, however reluctantly. For one thing, it runs up against the extraordinary letters by President Reagan to divers people on all subjects. Yet it is correct that if the assignment is to put together from Reagan press conferences structureless sentences with conflicting emphases, the job can be done.



    Weisberg reproduces a few sentences from Bush that establish the claim of verbal clumsiness. But Weisberg won't settle for that. His thesis is that Bush is incompetent to think and speak, and that he elected to settle with that incompetence because of laziness, since thinking consumes intellectual calories.



    Now there is a problem here, and Weisberg ignores it. It is that Bush has confronted in public contests nimble opponents. You would not do combat with the waspish Ann Richards, former governor of Texas, if you could help it. Ms. Richards is one of the sharpest tongues in town (it was she who said that the senior Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth). Bush not only survived the encounter, he defeated the wasp.



    George Bush met in public debate Al Gore, an experienced debater, and walked away with immunity, as he would do four years later in his encounters with John Kerry. Weisberg doesn't take on the question of Bush being accepted at Yale, and achieving enough credits to graduate. It requires skills not generally associated with idiocy to maneuver so as to win the nomination of a national political party, and then an election; not once, but twice. Mr. Weisberg's premise — that to do this does not require intelligence, thoughtful planning, and marginal lucidity — has one wondering, but not about deficiencies in Bush. There manifestly aren't such in Weisberg in the matter of articulateness, so you find yourself playing with the derivations of it all. 1) You can't be stupid and become president. 2) You can be articulate and be stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Anonymous4:27 PM

    Very timely TT.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Anonymous4:27 PM

    I don't think Bush is stupid because of his poor command of the english language, (albeit a fine indicator) TT.

    Moses was famous for being an "unfortunate speaker".

    Why do you think Aaron had to do his talking for him whenever he was in front of large audiences?

    I wouldn't call Moses "stupid".

    I think Bush is stupid, because of the stupid things he does.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Anonymous4:28 PM

    Stupid is as stupid does


    Forrest Gump

    ReplyDelete
  77. Anonymous4:33 PM

    Freedom Fan stated"Fascism- a political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition."

    Shall we continue, if your little meddlesome inquisition is concluded.

    That is precisely what I see with this ruffian in the White House, President Bush repeatedly pushes for a centralized autocratic government with an omnipotent and unfettered Executive Branch, he most certainly exalts nation over the individual, this is clearly evidenced by the despicable sods willingness to sacrifice our freedom, for as he states the greater good of the nation.

    President Bush's assaults on our freedoms, the Constitution, particularly the fourth and sixth Amendments are quite clearly a conscious move toward dictatorship.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Anonymous4:36 PM

    Newly in the Minority, G.O.P. Shows Signs of Division on Iraq and Domestic Policies

    CARL HULSE
    New York Times
    Published: January 14, 2007
    WASHINGTON

    After years of rock-solid party discipline and fealty to President Bush, Congressional Republicans have suddenly fractured in their new role as members of the minority, with some prominently deserting the White House on Iraq and others bolting from their leadership on popular domestic issues.

    “We have got a lot of free agents,” said Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, referring to the Republican backlash over the president’s proposal for a troop increase in Iraq.

    Facing as much internal party dissension as he has seen since taking office, Mr. Bush invited Republican leaders of the House and Senate to his Camp David retreat this weekend to plot strategy only days after his plan for a troop buildup ran into scorching Republican resistance on Capitol Hill. While Republican unrest about Iraq was the most visible party division, others were starkly reflected in the ease with which House Democrats pushed through initial elements of their 100-hour legislative program with substantial Republican backing.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Thu, do you ever post anything without the words "sod" and "ruffian"?

    Again, my take on Thu is that his persona seems forced.

    ReplyDelete
  80. Anonymous4:41 PM

    Republicans strangely enough don't act like they're used to being in power. They seem to believe that this is what the people want, so they go along with it.
    Too bad the Democrats don't do the same when Republicans overwhelmingly win.
    Even when we were in power we were always second and third guessing ourselves.
    In the senate our leadership has ALWAYS been weak. Lott got walked all over and so did Frist.
    We need someone who can rule with an iron fist like the Dems did for decades.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Anonymous4:42 PM

    We heard you the first time TT.

    Who cares?

    ReplyDelete
  82. Anonymous4:43 PM

    Oh well, you guys are getting what you wanted. Hope most of the voting population wants it too or '08 could be interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Anonymous4:45 PM

    Of course we don't have a good pres candidate either. I personally like Newt, but he's as divisive as Hillary and neither could likely win.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Anonymous4:45 PM

    Don't know much about Romney although at this point he's as likely as any.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Anonymous4:47 PM

    And I REALLY don't see McCain getting through the Republican primaries. Maybe if he runs as an independent?

    I won't vote for him, but maybe he has enough bipartisan following.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Worf, historically speaking, those who raise the most money the earliest tend to get the nomination of their party, which is not something I'm thrilled with, but if you go by those metrics, it looks like McCain versus Hillary.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Anonymous4:51 PM

    If that happens TT, I'll be in France with Alec Baldwin...

    ReplyDelete
  88. Anonymous4:53 PM

    Oh wait. He didn't go did he?...LOL

    ReplyDelete
  89. "Voltron said...
    If that happens TT, I'll be in France with Alec Baldwin...

    4:51 PM"

    I hear you. I don't care for either one.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Anonymous4:55 PM

    Freedom Fan stated"As I asserted in Conservative v. Liberal World Views - Part I, the essence of Conservatism is the celebration of the individual's free will. So attainment and protection of freedom are central to the Conservative philosophy. Therefore fascism and all forms of tyranny have the exact opposite goal from that of the Conservative. Ironically, it is the Conservative who typically honors the sacrifice of military heroes and patriots responsible for the total destruction of Hitler and similar fascist and racist tyrants."

    Another rather interesting hypocritical tirade, if the essense of Conservatism is the celebration of free will and the attainment and protection of freedom, pray enlighten me as to why it is so easy for you to sacrifice those vital freedoms, why you must be daft, for you do it as easily as you rise from sleep or make a bowel movement.

    You do not so much as flinch, as with the mere stroke of a pen, President Bush smugly desecrates the Constitution and sacrifices our freedom, as well as violates manifold laws and international treaties or rules of civility.

    He spies on our citizens without a warrant, he destroys Habeous Corpus, he like a typical tyrant advocates for torture and indefinite imprisonment based on hearsay.

    In Conclusion sir you state Conservatives honor the sacrifice of our military hero's, is that a fact sir, then why is it that many veterans are denied medical coverage, why in time of war has President Bush cut the Veterans budget rather than augmented it, why are many soldiers relegated to several tours of Iraq while multitudes of able bodied war supporters cheer on the war from the safety of their own domiciles.

    The preceding 6 years have seen the powers of tyranny and misrule grow unfettered, fortuitously the Democrats have retaken Congress and we can hope for accountability and oversight as mandated by the Founding Fathers of this great country.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Anonymous4:57 PM

    A game of clay kittens anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  92. Anonymous5:00 PM

    Mucho hillfolk fun!...

    ReplyDelete
  93. Anonymous5:01 PM

    TT said...

    it looks like McCain versus Hillary.

    Maybe.

    But I would'nt rule out Brownback and I wouldn't rule out Russ Feingold.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Anonymous5:02 PM

    I am not a fan of Hilary whatsoever.

    I think she'd do better than Bush, but my dog could do better than Bush.

    I used to like John McCain, but he seems to have forgotten who he is, or was.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Anonymous5:06 PM

    Well Well, quite clearly you sods want to engage in anything but defending your Conservative principles, and as is oft the case, my opponent Freedom Fan has fled once again, perhaps he shall return when the bell tolls 3:00AM on the East Coast to boast and feign omnipotence when he can do so unchallenged such as cowards oft do.

    Good evening St Worfeus Ignatius and Votron, till we meet again, once again this sham you call debate has concluded.

    ReplyDelete
  96. Anonymous5:08 PM

    Later Thu.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Solly Thu, but I was locked out again. Damn that WR.

    Thanks for your eloquent and specific debating points which I shall destroy shortly.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Anonymous5:16 PM

    Damn! Ya all playin "clay kittens" now or what?

    Oh well. I gotta run for a bit. Catch ya later!

    ReplyDelete
  99. Anonymous5:23 PM

    Technically challenged fan said...

    Solly Thu, but I was locked out again. Damn that WR.


    First, (and you know I had to ask, after your little spelling bee earlier), what the hell does "solly" mean?

    Could that be one of those "typo's" you were busy mocking us all on earlier today?

    Secondly, what do you mean you were "locked out"? Were you getting the "COMMENTS DISABLED" message that we've all complained about for so long? (that mysteriously stopped as soon as we threatened to continue to delete right wing bloggers posts each time whoever was doing it, did it)

    If so WHY are you blaming it on ME?

    ReplyDelete
  100. In Conclusion sir you state Conservatives honor the sacrifice of our military hero's, is that a fact sir, then why is it that many veterans are denied medical coverage, why in time of war has President Bush cut the Veterans budget rather than augmented it, why are many soldiers relegated to several tours of Iraq while multitudes of able bodied war supporters cheer on the war from the safety of their own domiciles.
    -Thu

    Veterans are not denied medical coverage as far as I know; they are entitled to CHAMPUS benefits and may attend Veterans Administration Hospitals for free. If you are not just blowing smoke, please provide a link.

    As far as "cutting the Veterans budget", it is extremely rare that a politician ever reduces government spending of any sort, so I'm certain that you are engaging in word games which pretend that when benefits do not rise as much as someone proposes, then there is supposedly a "cut". Solly but we're kinda hep to that farce by now, pal.

    Regarding "many soldiers relegated to several tours of Iraq", I would like to see R.O.T.C. recruiting once again allowed on all our nation's campuses; how about you?

    Your dig about "multitudes of able bodied war supporters cheer on the war from the safety of their own domiciles" is simply a variation of the bogus "chicken hawk" slur, which was eloquently eviscerated by Jeff Jacoby who concludes:

    And whether you have fought for your country or never had that honor, you have every right to weigh in on questions of war and peace. Those who cackle "Chicken hawk!" are not making an argument. They are merely trying to stifle one, and deserve to be ignored.
    -Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist

    ReplyDelete
  101. Anonymous5:33 PM

    Damn you're a slow debater FF.

    I'll leave you for now so you can "catch up" from being "locked out" by us meanies, (does anyone have reverse deja vu?) so you can take a few hours to post a few hundred words.

    I know you like it better that way.

    Maybe you can wait till 3:00 EST, when you can really have a great debate.

    ReplyDelete
  102. First, (and you know I had to ask, after your little spelling bee earlier), what the hell does "solly" mean?
    -WR

    Solly, I think you already know. Technically, one has not accidentally misspelled a word if intentional. But feel free to mock away.

    Secondly, what do you mean you were "locked out"? Were you getting the "COMMENTS DISABLED" message that we've all complained about for so long? (that mysteriously stopped as soon as we threatened to continue to delete right wing bloggers posts each time whoever was doing it, did it)
    -WR

    No, I was getting "web page not available" or some such. However, the other night when you were complaining about me posting when you were sleepy, I got that "comment has been saved and would be posted after review by blog owner". Of course they never were. This was a mere coinkydink undoubtedly.

    If so WHY are you blaming it on ME?
    -WR

    Obviously because you are the Blog Czar. No actually I was only teasing. Only a dishonorable fool would seriously blame someone without any proof. You would never do that, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  103. Anonymous5:46 PM

    Spelling Bee Champ said...

    Solly, I think you already know. Technically, one has not accidentally misspelled a word if intentional. But feel free to mock away

    So you're saying that you spelled it on purpose that way?

    Kinda like I told you I meant to say empirical, NOT imperial earlier today?

    Never mind that maybe I was making a pun on the conservative assertation of so called "facts", that they are pushing in the classrooms today, a topic I have been hammering on ALL WEEK.

    Never mind all that.

    Instead, focus on the one mistake I made, of forgetting to put quotation marks around my pun.

    Instead, you assumed what I meant to say, and spent how many needless posts with one liner insults to that point?

    So since you did that for me, and of course helped Lydia's blog by inserting a series of mindless one liner insults which are sure to drive off all but the most stalwart of bloggers, and cast the blog in a less than erudite light to anyone from the koufax's who happen to visit, it is only decent that I return the favor.

    So you "clearly" "meant" to say sorry, and you spelled it with two "l's".

    Ha

    Ha

    Ha

    ReplyDelete
  104. Anonymous5:50 PM

    Computer Scientist said...

    No, I was getting "web page not available" or some such

    Wow.

    Don't be too precise there Cloe.

    But if it DID say page not available, sounds like a technical problem on your end, doesn't it?

    I'd try clearing my web cache and rebooting is good too. Might be a DNS issue.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Anonymous5:52 PM

    Hint.

    404 errors, or any 400 errors for that matter are usually client related.

    (404 is commonly associated with "page cannot be displayed")

    ReplyDelete
  106. You do not so much as flinch, as with the mere stroke of a pen, President Bush smugly desecrates the Constitution and sacrifices our freedom, as well as violates manifold laws and international treaties or rules of civility.

    He spies on our citizens without a warrant, he destroys Habeous Corpus, he like a typical tyrant advocates for torture and indefinite imprisonment based on hearsay.

    -Thu

    Have the Supreme Court and Congress both been disbanded?

    Last time I checked the U.S. federal government still had three branches of government which serve as checks upon on another.

    If the President has committed any crimes, I feel certain that he will be held accountable, especially now with a Democratically controlled Congress. I also feel certain that dishonorable libs will try to demonize Dubya with bogus charges, similar to the way libs on this site routinely have done to their Conservative opponents.

    Similarly, if the President has done something unconstitutional, I feel confident that the Supreme Court will rule accordingly.

    But I still don't trust any of the bastards in government, which is why I am an avid gun owner. So I vehemently oppose any attempts by libs to confiscate privately owned firearms in order to reduce us into subjects at the mercy of power-hungry politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Anonymous5:58 PM

    Bill Gates said...

    Only a dishonorable fool would seriously blame someone without any proof. You would never do that, huh?

    No.

    And I never did.

    I never blamed anyone inspecific for being locked out, other than it always happened when I was mocking one of you, and I mentioned every time it happened, Johnny was there.

    But I never blamed anyone specific, like you have been blaming me.

    So I guess that makes you a, what was it again...?... a "Dishonorable Fool"?

    ReplyDelete
  108. Anonymous5:58 PM

    Sounds about right.

    ReplyDelete
  109. No, I was getting "web page not available" or some such

    Wow. Don't be too precise there Cloe. But if it DID say page not available, sounds like a technical problem on your end, doesn't it?

    I'd try clearing my web cache and rebooting is good too. Might be a DNS issue.

    -Worf

    I did not take a picture so I can't be more precise. The problem only occurred when attempting to access the LC blog; everything else was fine. It happened with both IE and Firefox. Clearing the cache, rebooting, etc. failed to fix it. This has happened twice before -- once a few days ago.

    Then it just miraculously starts working again. I don't know why this happens but as a fair-minded person I don't just start blaming the blog owner without evidence.

    However, I do think that someone changed the blog settings the other night to block my posts. All that would be necessary is to flip a switch in the blogger settings.

    Also I am confident that my comments have been deleted for no good reason by someone as recently as today.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Anonymous6:09 PM

    Well, it certainly sounds like you've got some problems there.


    :|



    Good luck with all that.

    ReplyDelete
  111. Anonymous6:10 PM

    Anyway you're way too slow for the Blog Czar.


    I'll bbl when you've had a chance to post more of your brainfarts.

    ReplyDelete
  112. They awake to a world, where evolution has weeded out the intelligent among us, in favor of the dull, and slow witted ... While the more intelligent members of society limited and even restricted their procreation activities, the more common, less intelligent members of society ... were busy cranking out "young-uns" by the dozens.
    -WR

    Yes, apparently this brilliant movie Idiocracy is based upon the wisdom of hitler in his fascinating novel Mein Kampf.

    ReplyDelete
  113. ...And then there was the sex. The foul, endless supply of mindless, loveless sex. Starbucks coffee had become a place for the male population to get a "hand job", and H and R Block featured tawdry hookers to help prepare ones taxes.

    It was a seedy, corrupt, mindless, lifeless, foul and ignorant society, where the lowest common denominator had become the standard for all.

    -WR

    Sounds kinda like PP's ideal world.

    ReplyDelete
  114. And just because enough of the people were able to out vote the Diebold voting machines this time around, does not mean we are on our way to a national elevation of higher thought, or wisdom.
    -WR

    Yes all, of the brilliant folks I know, believe in the goofy Diebold conspiracy theory.

    But it is somewhat amazing that none of these uber-brilliant folks are able to actually prove anything, or Diebold would be put out of business instantly, and the Republican party would be permanently destroyed.

    ReplyDelete
  115. It is meant as a wake up call to anyone who would start a family, write a book, or put anything back into society that represents a peice of themselves, or their lives work.
    -WR

    Wow, I didn't realize you were such an over-achiever, Worf. You've made all these contributions to society and become a spelling champ to boot. Impressive.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Anonymous6:35 PM

    Facist Fan said...

    Yes, apparently this brilliant movie Idiocracy is based upon the wisdom of hitler in his fascinating novel Mein Kampf.

    No Zeigfreid.

    Hitler weeded out the mentally handicapped and disabled.

    This movie and my post, is about the dumbing down of the entire population.

    Kind of hard to persecute the entire population there slappy.

    I realize you're probably one of the hillfolk I spoke of, but do try and squeeze out a coherent thought if only intermittently.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Anonymous6:36 PM

    Special Fan said....

    But it is somewhat amazing that none of these uber-brilliant folks are able to actually prove anything,

    Thats because you're dumb.

    If you were smart, you would know that over 90 percent of computer crimes, leave absolutely no evidence of any kind.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Anonymous6:37 PM

    Just like most of your posts leave no evidence of intelligence, of any kind.


    BBL when you've passed some more gas.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Hey Worf, know anything about embedding a .wav file into your blog?

    I wouldn't want it to loop because that would be distracting, just play once when the page was loaded.

    I got this cool clip from The Simpsons where Willie the scottish janitor is teaching the French class.

    He says: "Bonjour, ya cheese eatin surrender monkeys!" in his heavy scottish brogue...

    It's really a riot.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Lifes too short to be serious all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Anonymous7:08 PM

    Oh sure Volt.

    Please send us an executable file to insert into our website, by all means.

    :|


    I do think Lydia should have her web page play the theme to TCFC, but I don't know the legalites there.

    ReplyDelete
  122. I meant for me to insert into MY blog...LOL

    I was just asking "in general" for my own information.

    ReplyDelete
  123. I didn't figure you for a 'Simpsons' guy anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  124. Undereducated, overtly relgious seedy populations breed like caged rabbits, raising a large crop of thicknecked. cornfed offspring, who are as dumb as the hillfolk parents who made them, and being raised in their environment of hate, misinformation and squalor...
    -WR

    Wow, worf seems to favor disparaging references to "hillfolk" and "hillbillies".

    I always find it fascinating that leftists who endlessly celebrate their own tolerance seem to have none -- especially when it comes to hardworking rural folks with traditional values. So if someone likes country music, speaks with a twang, or votes Republican they assume this somehow represents a lack of intelligence.

    Self-anointed lib intellectuals fancy themselves to be infinitely smarter than us lesser beings.

    Libs congratulate themselves for being "open-minded" yet search desperately to grasp an explanation for how someone could possibly hold a political viewpoint different from themselves.

    Thus the lib explanation when the majority of folks vote Republican is that there must be voter fraud, although they can never actually demonstrate it. For example, these "enlightened" folks still cling to the Diebold myth as the explanation for why George Bush was twice elected. How could electing Bush possibly be what the majority wanted?

    Similarly, liberals nurture the bogus notion that the U.S. Supreme Court put Bush into office illegally, although all they did was make certain that the explicit voting procedures, enacted by the Florida legislature, were followed and not ursurped by the corrupt Florida Supremes. The votes in Florida were endlessly recounted by various independent folks for months after the election and every time the result was the same: Bush won.

    Liberals seem unable to accept the explicit free will of the majority of Americans. For this reason, each of us should own at least one firearm and plenty of ammo.

    Liberals employ activist judges to circumvent the will of the people by discovering that the results of our popularly passed petitions are somehow "unconstitutional".

    These activist judges ignore the clear wording of the Constitution and invent rights nowhere to be found in the Constitution in order to perform social engineering. They claim that the Constitution is a "living, breathing" document, meaning subject to change at their whim without due process. Judges, sitting in liberal northern California's 9th District, routinely invent law which then must be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.

    The fact is that the majority of Americans do not believe that destruction of personal freedom, as liberals seek to transfer more and more power to the government, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that confiscatory taxation, sacrificed to build a stodgy gray bureacratic empire, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that the murder of viable unborn infants represents "progress".

    We don't believe that a steady march to emulate the over-regulated, stagnant, socialist "utopia" of Europe, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that outlawing bogus "hate speech" on campus represents "progress".

    We don't believe that it represents "progress" to allow the gay lobby to transmogrify the traditional meaning of "marriage" and undermine the family, simply to gratify their own sense of self-pride. We don't believe that allowing, gay scoutmasters to sleep over on camp outs with our little boys, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that being too frightened to criticize cartoons of Muhammad represents "progress".

    We don't believe that the ACLU's jihad, to stamp out every hint of religious expression in public places, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that it represents "progress", when the federal government presumes the right to dictate minimum wages or set prices of goods and services in a free market economy.

    We don't believe it represents "progress", when union goons go on strike causing bankruptcy and joblessness while driving labor into foreign countries, as goofy talking heads like lou dobbs throws a tantrum on TV.

    We don't believe that shovelling vast piles of money to trial lawyers, who file frivolous lawsuits whenever someone spills hot coffee on her crotch or imagines episodes of racism, represents "progress".

    We don't believe that racial and gender discrimination under the guise of "affirmative action", represents "progress".

    This "book review" is really a thorough demonstration of the utter contempt which elitist liberals hold for the wisdom of us common folks. The truth is that we common folks are not too stupid to understand where you libs want to lead us; we just refuse to go.

    So you self-anointed "intellectual" elitist cretins may kindly shove your "progress" where the sun don't shine, y'all.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Anonymous8:10 PM

    Jethro Bodine said...

    Wow, worf seems to favor disparaging references to "hillfolk" and "hillbillies".

    Thats right Jethro.

    So did the most successful emmy nominated situation comedy on American telivision that spanned two decades, and was the most popular situation comedy of its day.

    In fact, in they just recently made a movie based on the television show, by the same name.


    But do feel free to beat the war drum, and draw up your hillibilly constituents to prove whatever point you're trying to make.

    In fact, you can start with that hillbilly Queen of yours, Frau Coulter.

    Tell her to bring the moonshine.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Great minds think alike I guess FF. I just posted a comment at our blog on the same topic only with a slightly different take...

    ReplyDelete
  127. Anonymous8:13 PM

    Jed Clampett said...

    I always find it fascinating that leftists who endlessly celebrate their own tolerance seem to have none -- especially when it comes to hardworking rural folks with traditional values

    I am rural folk you moron.

    And my everyone in my family, other than myself, is "blue collar", and I don't have a problem with their intelligence.

    Theres a difference between "rural hardworking folk" and hillbillies.

    The fact that you can't tell the difference, points to your being the latter.

    ReplyDelete
  128. Anonymous8:15 PM

    Travis Twit said...

    if someone likes country music, speaks with a twang, or votes Republican they assume this somehow represents a lack of intelligence.

    I listen to country music you twit.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Anonymous8:18 PM

    Dr Oppenheimer said...

    these "enlightened" folks still cling to the Diebold myth as the explanation for why George Bush was twice elected.

    No we don't you chucklehead.

    The Diebolds weren't even being used in 2000.

    Don't you remember the famous "hanging chad"?

    But thanks for helping to prove my point.

    ReplyDelete
  130. And actually Worf, "The Beverly Hillbillies" often showcased the depth of Jed's wisdom in dealing with many of the 'elitist' attitudes of the day.

    Do you think Mr. Drysdale or his wife routinely came off as intelligent compared to Jed?

    ReplyDelete
  131. Anonymous8:25 PM

    Voltron said...
    And actually Worf, "The Beverly Hillbillies" often showcased the depth of Jed's wisdom in dealing with many of the 'elitist' attitudes of the day


    Oh yea.

    Like when Jed bought the Golden Gate bridge?

    Or whenever he "showcased" his nephew's "6th grade edeeekation"?

    And of course, there was that timeless, classic pearl, weeelllllll doggies.

    Like freakin Ward Cleaver there, huh?

    ReplyDelete
  132. Anonymous8:26 PM

    Course, he did invite the Drysdales over for a party in the "Ceeement Pond".

    Wonder how those trout withstood the chlorine?

    ReplyDelete
  133. Anonymous8:28 PM

    Voltron said...

    Do you think Mr. Drysdale or his wife routinely came off as intelligent compared to Jed?

    Well gee, I don't know.

    But one thing I clearly remember, is Drysdale was a "republican".

    A fact he stated on several occasions.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Anonymous8:28 PM

    Perhaps that had something to do with his being portrayed as less than erudite?

    ReplyDelete
  135. Well, he was a simple man. Trusting, and thrust into a world where one's word was not one's bond. He can't be held accountable for that.

    But in the underlying social commentary, his morals often won the day. His ability to call a spade a spade if you will.

    Like I said, did Drysdale look good compared to him?

    ReplyDelete
  136. Well, one more cigarette and I'm toast. Y'all got about 10 minutes to fascinate me then I'm gone....LOL

    ReplyDelete
  137. Anonymous8:36 PM

    Voltron said...
    Well, one more cigarette and I'm toast.


    See?

    :|

    And you guys don't believe in natural selection.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Anonymous8:38 PM

    Voltron said...
    Well, he was a simple man. Trusting, and thrust into a world where one's word was not one's bond. He can't be held accountable for that


    See?

    No accountability on the conservative side of the house.

    And therein lies the problem.

    stupid is as stupid does

    Gump

    ReplyDelete
  139. Great minds think alike I guess FF. I just posted a comment at our blog on the same topic only with a slightly different take...
    -Volt

    Yes I read it; great comment.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Actually Worf, although I hate to admit it where he might see it, I agree with something Carl said on the subject.

    I don't neccessarily feel religion and science are incompatible. Maybe science is merely describing the method of God's creation.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Anonymous8:44 PM

    Voltron said...

    I don't neccessarily feel religion and science are incompatible. Maybe science is merely describing the method of God's creation.



    I've written literal treatises saying the exact same thing in here, more than 20 times.

    In fact, I just wrote a lengthy dissertation the other day, discussing creationism in the mormon church.

    ReplyDelete
  142. You feel he should be held accountable for being trusting?

    I kinda think those who tried to scam and con him should be held accountable.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Anonymous8:44 PM

    Just 3 days ago I wrote,


    The Bible tells us that God created our bodies.

    It doesn't tell us how
    .

    ReplyDelete
  144. Well maybe it was you I was agreeing with then. That puts my mind at ease. I was really worried about agreeing with Carl....LOL

    ReplyDelete
  145. Anonymous8:48 PM

    Voltron said...
    You feel he should be held accountable for being trusting?


    Absolutely.

    In any city in America, ignorance of a law or statute, is not considered a defense.

    Voltron said...

    I kinda think those who tried to scam and con him should be held accountable


    Of course they should.

    But that in no way negates the stupidity in handing the guy who calls you on the phone to tell you you just won a million dollars, your credit card number so he can pay the "service fees" on your winnings.




    Stupid is as stupid does


    The Gumpmeister

    ReplyDelete
  146. Anonymous8:50 PM

    Voltron said...
    Well maybe it was you I was agreeing with then


    Most likely.

    I even went into length on the Parable of the Talents, explaining that God did not give us these big fat brains, to not use them.

    ReplyDelete
  147. As Ann Coulter says: religious folks may or may not choose to believe in evolution, but for secular progressives, belief in evolution is essential. This is why it is vital for libs that creationism be banned from education.

    ReplyDelete
  148. So I guess Jed should've been put in jail for buying the Golden Gate Bridge, in the cell right next to the guy that sold it to him?

    ReplyDelete
  149. Yes Worf, I forgot to applaud you for standing up to BG the other day when you were quoting to him from Ann's book "Godless"....LOL

    ReplyDelete
  150. Anonymous8:54 PM

    Voltron said...
    So I guess Jed should've been put in jail for buying the Golden Gate Bridge, in the cell right next to the guy that sold it to him?


    No.

    And I didn't say that. I say that people should be held accountable for their stupidity.

    He lost his money. He was stupid. We tell him he's stupid for doing it. Don't buy any more bridges from guys who start a conversation with 'psssst, hey bud'.

    And we send him on his way.

    ReplyDelete
  151. It does appear you agree with her about secular humanism being a religion in it's own right...

    ReplyDelete
  152. Anonymous8:57 PM

    Coulter Fan said...
    As Ann Coulter says: religious folks may or may not choose to believe in evolution, but for secular progressives, belief in evolution is essential.


    Which is why I call her an inbred hillbilly.

    Because she thinks the matter of evolution, or any science for that matter, is based on "belief".

    In science we use empirical data (theres that pesky word again)to determine the validity of a theory. If you took science, and paid attention, you'll know that scientific theory is better than all the belief systems in the world.

    Evolution is not a matter of belief. W

    ReplyDelete
  153. Anonymous9:00 PM

    We can see it in hybrids, changes to species, etc.

    We have actually seen evolution's hand on species of plants, birds and mammals.

    You can base your life, like your hillbilly queen, on "belief".

    I prefer to look at the evidence at hand.

    ReplyDelete
  154. Anonymous9:01 PM

    Voltron said...
    Yes Worf, I forgot to applaud you for standing up to BG the other day when you were quoting to him from Ann's book "Godless"....LOL


    Thats right, keep laughing on that one.

    I wouldn't wipe my ass with her "book".

    ReplyDelete
  155. Gee, and I thought you were going to let that one slide by...LOL

    ReplyDelete
  156. Anonymous9:05 PM

    What I can't understand Volt, and maybe you can help, is how someone professing to be "smart", can't see the slippery slope of bringing religion into the science classroom?

    For thousands of years, it was religious belief systems that contained, restricted and censored scientific discovery, and advancement in medicine.

    Now, in the year 2007, we have religious people who want to step back to the dark ages, and once again merge scientific knowledge, with religious belief systems, which when complete, will not be science at all.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Anonymous9:07 PM

    A central lesson of science is that to understand complex issues (or even simple ones), we must try to free our minds of dogma and to guarantee the freedom to publish, to contradict, and to experiment.

    Arguments from authority are unacceptable.


    Carl Sagan

    ReplyDelete
  158. Anonymous9:09 PM

    A man should look for what is, and not for what he thinks should be.


    Albert Einstein

    ReplyDelete
  159. I don't really know the answer Worf. I think we both agreed that perhaps science is a way of understanding HOW God created the universe. But I think faith is important for moral values as well.

    It doesn't seem to be totally inconsistant to say God created the heavens and the earth, and in science class we'll teach you how we believe he did it.

    Further faith is just that, faith. It can't be proven or substantiated by it's very nature.

    ReplyDelete
  160. Anonymous9:15 PM

    Before God we are all equally wise, and equally foolish.

    Albert Einstein

    ReplyDelete
  161. Because she thinks the matter of evolution, or any science for that matter, is based on "belief".

    In science we use empirical data (theres that pesky word again)to determine the validity of a theory. If you took science, and paid attention, you'll know that scientific theory is better than all the belief systems in the world.

    Evolution is not a matter of belief.

    -WR

    Actually I have a degree in Biology. Coulter's right, there is no "proof" of evolution. We see different life forms in different periods of time. We see incremental changes over tens of years. We see extinction of species.

    But we have never observed the creation of an entirely new species.

    The likelihood of the sequence of random beneficial events necessary to lead to creation of man is astronomically improbable.

    I may believe evolution occurs, but it is only a belief. Creationism is an equally valid belief.

    So maybe you're the hillbilly, Jethro.

    ReplyDelete
  162. Anonymous9:18 PM

    Voltron said...

    It doesn't seem to be totally inconsistant to say God created the heavens and the earth, and in science class we'll teach you how we believe he did it.

    It is not inconsistent.

    It is consistent with the bastardization of science for thousands of years.

    Only recently has mankind grown smart enough to seperate the two.

    Now, it looks like a few throwbacks want to take us back a few thousand years in evolution, and allow their religious belief systems to make idiots out of us all.

    I am surprised at you.

    ReplyDelete
  163. Anonymous9:22 PM

    Throwback Joe said....
    I may believe evolution occurs, but it is only a belief. Creationism is an equally valid belief.



    :|

    You're an idiot. And I just wasted a dozen posts on your dim mind.

    You're a throwback, lost in a sea of contradictions and fairytales, and you're not worth my keystrokes trying to drill some light into that skull of yours.

    There is NO scientific data WHATSOEVER that God even exists, much less created anything.

    There is AMPLE empirical evidence that evolution is how we "evolved".

    For example, believing we descended from monkey's is no great strech upon reading one of your posts.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Anonymous9:22 PM

    The two are not even in the ballpark dr Angley.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Anonymous9:24 PM

    General Urko said...

    But we have never observed the creation of an entirely new species.

    Really?

    Then what do you call the Donkey?

    ReplyDelete
  166. Anonymous9:26 PM

    Jane Goodall said...

    Actually I have a degree in Biology

    I'd ask for my money back.

    ReplyDelete
  167. Anonymous9:28 PM

    But please keep "believing" and disbelieving in science, and be sure to teach it to your young uns.

    That way my kids will be sure to get jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  168. Anonymous9:29 PM

    But in the meantime we will fight you on every turn, to keep you and your lowbrow brood from bastardizing our science classes with YOUR religious beliefs.

    And if you don't like it, LEAVE.

    ReplyDelete
  169. Here's something I read once, I couldn't find the original but this basically captures it.

    Held meaning for me, maybe not anyone else.

    "Long ago in the land of israel there was this jewish rabbi and a nonbeliever. The jew tried to convince the man that there had to be a god, for the universe could not have been an accident.

    Everything has a creator, So after a little while the the nonbeliever went to get them some wine, and in front of the rabbi was a paper and some ink.

    This rabbi was an incredible artist, he could draw beautiful pictures extremly fast. So he drew up this amazing picture and purposely tipped the ink bottle over so it looked like it fell onto the paper.

    When the man came back he said, "Wow, look at that amazing picture!, Did you draw that?"

    "No " the rabbi replied, "Suddenly a gust of wind came into the room and spilled the ink bottle onto the paper and this picture formed out of the ink.

    "Thats nonsense!" Said the man. "It could not have been an accident, There has to be a creator, And you're the only person here"

    "Exactly" Replied the rabbi."If a simple picture like this could not be done out of nothing, How does such a complex unverse exist? It must have a creator as well!""

    ReplyDelete
  170. And I might point out that there is a conflict between two of your heroes.

    Sagan may have been an atheist, but Einstein was not.

    ReplyDelete
  171. Anonymous9:33 PM

    I'm going to bed soon, so you should do better in your debate FF, but I wanted to be sure to thank you once again, for publically proving the entire point of my article.

    I could'nt have done it without you.

    ReplyDelete
  172. One of Einstein's best quotes was "God does not play dice with the Universe."

    ReplyDelete
  173. I'm afraid I too must retire.

    Have a good one.

    ReplyDelete
  174. But we have never observed the creation of an entirely new species.

    Really? Then what do you call the Donkey?
    -WR

    I believe you mean the mule, a cross between a horse and a donkey, which is sterile.

    Also your belligerent attitude is not consistent with the humility required of a scientist. Rather it is consistent with an emotionally held belief system. That in turn, proves my point.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Anonymous9:37 PM

    Volt said...

    Sagan may have been an atheist, but Einstein was not.

    A. Sagan wasn't an atheist persay. He just didn't have any data one way or the other. A hard agnostic at best.

    B. The fact that Einstein believed in a higer power in his later years, is a fact I have argued in this blog extensively, and as recently as last week.

    You attribute to me positions I've never taken, and it sounds like you think I am an atheist.

    I am not.

    In fact, I posted a few months ago in here, that I believe in a higher power, that I usually call God.

    ReplyDelete
  176. And the Donkey isn't exactly a "new" species. It's simply a cross breed of two existing ones.

    ReplyDelete
  177. It didn't evolve. It was created.

    ReplyDelete
  178. I'm going to bed soon, so you should do better in your debate FF, but I wanted to be sure to thank you once again, for publically proving the entire point of my article.
    -WR

    You're welcome.

    After reading your article and my comments, I'm pretty sure your readers will be convinced that liberals are really not arrogant elitists, but rather humble, tolerant champions of the common man.

    ReplyDelete
  179. Anonymous9:41 PM

    Mulehead said...


    I believe you mean the mule, a cross between a horse and a donkey, which is sterile


    Thats right. You caught another typo. Considering I am typing 10 posts for every one of yours, and talking to two of you, I am sure you can offer a pass. If not, feel free to chalk up a point for yourself. That should put you at somewhere around 10 to the negative.

    Now as for the fact that the mule is a "hybrid", is not at issue. The fact it you said we have seen no new species created. Well, we created the Mule, along with all sorts of plants and fish.

    Sure its an evolutionary shortcut, but it still demonstrates that I'd be looking for a refund on that biology degree.

    ReplyDelete
  180. Good point FF. I missed that. Must be sleepy.

    Good Night all.

    ReplyDelete
  181. Anonymous9:45 PM

    Humble Hank said...

    but rather humble, tolerant champions of the common man.


    I never claimed to be either.


    On the other hand, if you are presenting the most stiffnecked, imperial, monarchistic president who ever darkened the Oval Office, "humble", well.....once more thanks for proving my point.

    ReplyDelete
  182. But the mule did not evolve on it's own. It HAD a creator, US. And since it can't reproduce it isn't a VIABLE species either.

    ReplyDelete
  183. Anonymous9:47 PM

    Voltron said...
    It didn't evolve. It was created.


    I never said it did.

    You are getting sleepy I guess, if you think I did.

    Go back and READ what your lil buddy Giligan said.

    Giligan said...
    But we have never observed the creation of an entirely new species.


    See? You just said it was "created".

    Well Giligan disagree's with you skipper. Better set him straight.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Anonymous9:49 PM

    Voltron said...
    But the mule did not evolve on it's own. It HAD a creator, US. And since it can't reproduce it isn't a VIABLE species either.


    Well if you have a biology degree from the same school as your buddy, I'd likewise ask for my money back.

    Evolution is not about the "creation" of new species.

    It is about the ADAPTATION of existing species, which evolve to meet the conditions for survival, over long periods of time.

    ReplyDelete
  185. Anonymous9:50 PM

    :|


    Maybe if you two got together with other students who graduated from that same school, and file a class action lawsuit.

    ReplyDelete
  186. I'll let FF clarify his thoughts for himself, but I believe he meant we've never seen the purely natural "evolution" of a totally new species without human intervention.

    But I'm guessing.

    I shouldn't have given you guys that 10 minutes. I am tired.

    ReplyDelete
  187. Anonymous9:51 PM

    One hour of examination and any jury in the land would refund your tuition.

    ReplyDelete
  188. Anonymous9:52 PM

    Voltron said...
    I'll let FF clarify his thoughts for himself, but I believe he meant


    See?

    There you go with that "belief" thingy again.

    Thats what keeps getting you guys into trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  189. And you DO have some rather strong OPINIONS for an objective bystander.

    Not a good stance for a scientist.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Anonymous9:53 PM

    He said No new species were ever "created".

    You confirmed the mule is "created".

    And since before we created it, there were no mules, I would say you have made my case for me on that small point, rather well.

    ReplyDelete
  191. Anonymous9:56 PM

    Voltron said...
    And you DO have some rather strong OPINIONS for an objective bystander.



    These are not my opinions. Men much smarter than I can ever hope to be laid the foundations for these "scientific discoveries", and I merely "learned" them like all the lucky students with whom I attended school.

    Lucky, because you guys hadn't gotten to our science teachers back then, to muddy their science, with your "belief systems".

    ReplyDelete
  192. This movie sounds like Karl Roves campaign strategy, course you need the fear mongering to go with the dumbing down of America, that piece of crap Rove tries to appeal to the lowest common denominator

    ReplyDelete
  193. Well I really do have to go, but it's been an interesting discussion.

    I must practice the art of extrusion and then it's bed time...

    ReplyDelete
  194. Anonymous9:58 PM

    My opinion is simple

    You don't want to "believe" in science, which is the examination of tangible facts, and exchange it for your own "beliefs" in things which there is absolutely not one shred of tangible evidence for, then fine.

    I'm down with that.

    Just don't bring it into our classrooms.

    Teach it in your religious classes, teach it in religious schools, but keep it out of our classrooms.

    Our kids are dumb enough.

    ReplyDelete
  195. Anonymous9:59 PM

    Alright, goodnight Volt. It was a good discussion, thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  196. Francis Crick and James Watson discovered the DNA double helix which contains all information necessary for creation of life. They probably understand the origin of life better than anyone, yet they remain staunch atheists.

    Crick himself was quoted as saying, ‘An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.

    Crick reasoned that life could not have evolved from non-living chemicals under any conceivable earth conditions. But the idea of a creator was unacceptable, since it would go against his atheistic faith.

    To overcome the huge hurdles of evolution of life from non-living chemicals on earth, Crick proposed, in a book called Life Itself, that some form of primordial life was shipped to the earth billions of years ago in spaceships—by supposedly ‘more evolved’ (therefore advanced) alien beings.

    Although he tried to solve the problem of the source of intelligence for the creation of DNA without God, Crick only succeeded in pushing the problem into outer space where, of course, it cannot be tested. After all, if such alleged aliens, in turn, were not created by a greater intelligence than themselves, then how did they evolve from non-living chemicals in the first place? Moreover, how could these benevolent extraterrestrials presume to know what the outcome of evolution would be, with its undirected processes of time and chance? Another insurmountable problem for Crick is that evolution is supposed to have been occurring for the last 3.5 billion years. How could any intelligent race plan for, and expect to be around to see the results, some billions of years later?

    Crick later acknowledged the mounting problems and futility of his ideas when he was reported as saying, ‘Every time I write a paper on the origin of life, I swear I will never write another one, because there is too much speculation running after too few facts … .

    -Designed by aliens?
    Discoverers of DNA’s structure attack Christianity


    Evolution is a belief system, nothing more. Creationism is an equally valid belief system (which is often viciously attacked by arrogant elitists because it is an affront to their own smugly-held beliefs.)

    ReplyDelete
  197. Granted. And now we know that a "creator" is required...

    Goodnight....LOL

    ReplyDelete
  198. Anonymous10:02 PM

    P.S

    I hope everybody goes out and rents the movie, IDIOCRACY, and actually watches it.

    Whatever your beliefs, I think you'll be well entertained, and you might come away with a little more knowledge, than when you went in.

    At least give it a chance, before you condemn it.

    ReplyDelete
  199. Anonymous10:04 PM

    FF, it is 1:00 AM here, but of course you knew that.

    Please try to keep it to your own comments, and not post 20 page white papers by your neocon hired scientists, or whoever wrote what you posted.

    It is late, and if you want to bury your folly, fine, but I don't have time to read someone elses work.

    Try to come up with an argument on your own once and a while.

    I do.

    ReplyDelete