"John McCain can talk all he wants about Paris and Brittney, but I don't have time for that mess..."
Until just then?!?
Hey Bobo, Paris called... she wants to know if you'd like to be her Vice President*?
All this is enough to make one wonder who's the oddest ball in the Bobo clan?
John McCain knew what he was up against as a prisoner in North Vietnam, but he never met anyone like Bobo.
*Not to be confused with an actual Vice President
]]>"John McCain doesn't know what he's up against!?!"
Thus spake Bobo Obo yesterday
Was it only yesterday that I said he was acting like a 7-year-old?
So is he regressing, or did I only think he was seven because he'd been the editor of the Harvard Law Review?
Pardon me, sir, is that elevator going down?
Aides say that McCain would be scared... if he knew what he was up against.
And it would seem that McCain isn't the only one who doesn't know what he's up against...
Bobo - to know him is to blow him - off.
]]>It occurred to me that whether or not Bobo becomes President, he's inspired a series of children's books that may be long-running/ Barack could be the new Babar... or maybe even take over for the old one like the way they do it for James Bond.
Anyway, the point of all this is, I don't want to miss out on an opportunity, so I'm pitching my own idea. What do you think about a swan who turns into an ugly duck?
Maybe because he swam through an oil slick?
Or because he spent twenty years being tutored by an anti-swan minister?
Your input is welcome. Your claim on royalties isn't.
]]>I didn't see it, but apparently Barack-O had his lips handed to him by John McCain over the weekend at the Rick Warren conference.
I couldn't watch because I can't stand having to endure even a glimpse of Obama's hideous face anymore, and I'd rather listen to a cat screeching while running my fingernails down a blackboard than to hear Bobo's voice, but that's just me, I know.
So the one clip everyone's talking about, and which I have heard, has the uniquely repulsive Bobo explaining that he doesn't know at what point a life becomes a life because such a determination is "above my pay grade."
No elaboration required by me... or him.
Except... did he know the nature of the event he was attending?
And I didn't hear this, but apparently Bobo criticized Clarence Thomas for a lack of experience? That's an impressive display of the audacity of audacity if ever there was one. So if he did say it, I'm now formally prepared to declare that Obama's our first candidate for President who's also a punk.
But the best part of all this didn't even happen at the conference. It happened on Meet The Press, and if you thought there was a small earthquake on Sunday morning, it was just Tim Russert turning in his grave. Because on the program, Andrea Mitchell was "merely speculating" that McCain either had advance knowledge of Warren's questions or he heard Bobo's answers because McCain came off as - so well prepared.
Or in other words, Bobo was a Dodo. And poor old Andrea was just trying to carry the Dems' water when it broke all over her like that scene from Flashdance.
I'll pause here and give you time to picture that.
See, Warren put the same questions to each candidate and B.O. went first. McCain was in the green room without a monitor. Bobo's people are now alleging that the monitor he was without was human rather than electronic, not based on any evidence, but merely because McCain answered the questions so much better when it was his turn.
This, of course, plays into my theory that whenever a Democrat charges a Republican with... well.. anything, it's not true, and you know when I say that, I'm no fan of Republicans. It's just that of the two parties, Republicans are the adults. In fact, they should change the names to the Adult Party and the Children's Party.
I said a while back that Obama is 46 and acts like a sixteen-year-old, but this latest charge - that McCain won so he must have cheated - is one a seven-year-old would make.
And that's exactly what we've been witnessing - a guy (I won't call Obama a man) reverting to form - the restyling of the Presidential seal being the most visible example of it. The reason this is so concerning is, of course, that we could possibly have the first boy-leader since what, King Tut? And if I had to choose, I'd take Tut - in his present state!?!
So Besides being the Rottenest Man Who Ever Ran, Bobo could be the first Punk President, and if you disagree, you're the rottenest citizen there ever was.
]]>I just heard about a children's book starring America's newest (and best) superhero. It's apparently not Bobio's third autobiography, but it must certainly be based on a true story...
How about some quotes...?
"Even God himself talks to Barry while he's in church on Sunday, telling him: "Look around you. Now look to me. There is hope enough here to last a lifetime."
Inspired yet? If your answer is no, then you're not a kid anymore.
But maybe you're still young at heart, so how about this one:
"Barack smiled, tears rolling down his cheeks. Suddenly he knew for certain hope would last long enough for him to make a difference."
Well, not if I can help it!
Jim Jones is alive and well and living as a semi-black meterosexual in Fantasyland.
"Even as a boy, Barack knew he wasn't quite like anybody else..."
Sane?
Bobo didn't write the book, but doesn't it perfectly mimic his style - creepy? Although I admit I may not be in the right state of mind (and grace) to receive thes message and understand it, so I'm hoping someone from Mensa is reading this and will deign to explain it all?!?
Product Description
Ever since Barack Obama was young, Hope has lived inside him. From the beaches of Hawaii to the streets of Chicago, from the jungles of Indonesia to the plains of Kenya, he has held on to Hope. Even as a boy, Barack knew he wasn't quite like anybody else, but through his journeys he found the ability to listen to Hope and become what he was meant to be: a bridge to bring people together.This is the moving story of an exceptional man, as told by Nikki Grimes and illustrated by Bryan Collier, both winners of the Coretta Scott King Award. Barack Obama has motivated Americans to believe with him, to believe that every one of us has the power to change ourselves and change our world.
It's called "Son of Promise, Child of Hope"
Son of bitch.
]]>I know that most scientists don't believe in "global warming," but the ones who do are so stupid that it's starting to give science a bad name.
There's an ad running right now that not only lays out the case for "global warming," it reflects the minds of "scientists" who lobby on behalf of it, and the first thing that came to mind when I saw the ad is, no wonder they want to say this is a settled issue...
Because it's anything but.
In the ad, a distraught Sharon Lawrence (whom I used to like) pleads with us to save the Polar Bear. From what? Lawrence claims they're endangered and that they are having trouble getting food because of a lack of arctic ice. It's unclear how that works in practice, but the bigger problem is that there's no lack of arctic ice. Reportedly there's a lot more there now than there has been in recent summers, and that alone should have shut up Ms. Lawrence. And as far as preserving animals, isn't that why God created zoos... and cameras?
More importantly, it should have stood the argument for warming on its head, because a lessening of arctic ice was the only thing anyone could point to as a manifestation of his claim that the planet was in danger of overheating.
And the problem with that claim itself is that a lack of ice doesn't mean the planet is warming, only that the arctic could be, and even then, it assumes that warming is bad, when in fact warming is wonderful, and I can prove it.
Recently, some nut claimed that a four degree rise would threaten humans with extinction. Preposterous. I've lived through a 122 degree day in Phoenix, and I'm still here. So the entire world would have to warm an awful lot to be uninhabitable. Maybe humans couldn't live in Phoenix then, but Edmonton would be lovely - the new Phoenix, in fact. Furthermore, it wouldn't be long before people figured out how to re-inhabit the Valley of the Sun , although they probably would choose not to return to Tuscon, and boating down a boiling Colorado would be like a floating sauna and would capture big tourism bucks.
But the best part is that a lot of critters might become extinct and there's nothing anyone could do about it.
last week, right here on this blog, Mr. Mensa stated flatly that anyone who doesn't believe in "global warming" is a fool, or words to that effect. When given the chance to make his case and to provide one bit of evidence that was irrefutable, he practiced what he preached and evaporated.
That's because it's SETTLED! Sci-guys don't need no stinkin' facts... which is good, because they don't have any.
Not one.
And even if they did, they'd have to prove or at least demonstrate that warming was man-made... that it was bad... and that there's something we could do about it that didn't have the potential to do more damage. That's a supersized order, and unlike in fast food, in science, it's unfillable.
But now I said I'd prove that global warming was nothing to be concerned about. In fact, it's something we can look forward to. Subconsciously, people already are, and its simple to see. What's the fastest growing city in America?
That's right, PHOENIX! And Las Vegas is right up there too, as are other desert areas. So even under the worst case scientist/idiot scenario, people will be delighted, not dying of dehydration as they hope. Sure we can't garden much in summer, so we garden in the other eight months of the year... and they can't do that in Cleveland... at least not until the great promises offered by global warming materialize.
So the great irony is that we should pray that the few so-called scientists who believe warming is nigh are right. Then we should acknowledge them, thank them, and shoot them... before they have a chance to spoil the paradise that Earth will become....
]]>Is there anyone who's more representative of the Democrat Party than John Edwards? And is there anyone who's behavior is more emblematic of Democrats? So today he came right out and admitted that he'd had the affair about which rumors have been swirling, and he said so now... because he got caught with his pants down. No, not literally, but it was that close.
He says the baby which inconveniently appeared around nine months later is not his. We won't take him at his word, but only because he'd given his word that he hadn't had an affair in the first place. Otherwise, we would. But if the baby wasn't his, why was he recently caught visiting the mother? Because he certainly couldn't still be having sex with that moman?"
Mr. Haircut further claims that he started the affair when his wife's cancer was in remission, and that Elizabeth is aware of it. Was it a reward for his attentiveness when she first became ill... "Oh Johnny, you need a break now, why not have that affair you always wanted?"
Johno says this all happened in 2006. Let's see, what else was he doing then... preparing to run for President?" Do you think he got any tips from Bill Clinton?
And perhaps even more important, remember all the attention Republicans got from the media in recent years for far less grievous offenses? I bet the media is now going to hound Edwards like you couldn't believe... although that would also hurt Elizabeth, so maybe they'll try to restrain themselves this once?!?
]]>Last week, Bobo Obama said the single stupidest thing ever uttered in any campaign in the history of the universe - that if people would just inflate their tires, we'd save as much oil as we could gain from new drilling.
You don't have to know anything about oil, cars, or air to understand how patently absurd that is. In fact, "patently absurd" is charitable when you consider that Bobo is a Harvard grad and the smartest half-black person on the planet.
Then Barama goes and compounds his idiocy this week by a factor of infinity, saying that all the experts agree with him - no, not that his stunningly stupid, but that we can save all the oil we need to save if people would just make sure they weren't driving around on flat tires. James Taranto said of Bobo's advice - his "answer to inflation is inflation."
And if we assume that Bobo is right and every expert on tire pressure does agree with him, what does that say about experts?
Basically it says what I've been saying - that an expert's opinion doesn't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world.
I knew this day would come, folks, I just never thought it would be this soon.
For decades, wackos like Bobo have been saying amazingly stupid things about the environment, the economy, planetary warming, and probably every other thing their tiny minds cause them to talk about, and people have basically been too busy living their lives to notice, so when you asked the average guy. it was "environment=good, oil companies - bad...
Until "green" choices and restrictions began to materially affect people in their pocketbooks. Suddenly, drilling in "pristine" areas=good, Bobo-like pronouncements - bad. And it goes a lot further than that.
Did you see where Whole Foods earnings are way down? That's because people are discovering that there's no economic justification for the cost of organic tomatoes any more than there's economic justification for organic Bobos. Both are luxuries we can't afford, and the fluffiest sort of luxuries at that.
So people are turning their backs on the environmental wackos, the warmalarmists, biofuels, and pretty much (hopefully) anything that isn't material to a decent life. Hopefully, the only place you'll see the wackos in years to come is in zoos.
There's a delightful article out of England today about all of this. It basically says that the free market is the best environmental regulator, and incentives from government rather than punishments, taxes and restrictions are what's needed for a free people to regulate their own environment.
Meanwhile, back in America, Bobo was apparently addressing a question from a 7-year-old girl, and I say "apparently" because I've only heard Rush Limbaugh reporting on this, and he only played Bobo's response, not the little brat's question, which leaves open the possibility that there are mitigating circumstances. But it's worth reporting because even if Bobo wasn't directly and immediately responding to the kid, what he said is noteworthy in itself.
Wacko Baracko, apparently in response to a child's hopeful question about why he's running for President, didn't say that he's doing it because he loves his country or anything that would cause a young girl's heart to soar, he tells her that he's running because America isn't what it once was.
That's right, young lady, your country SUCKS! I'm going to try to save it for you.
So when was it better, Bobo? Every little girl and her parents want to know.
If this doesn't convince you that Obama is the Rottenest Man Who Ever Ran, you're the rottenest citizen there ever was.
]]>Pity the poor Paxie. At some point, and with my urging, it apparently dawned on him that there was no practical way of extricating himself from the mess he'd created, and that the longer it went on, the worse he'd look. That's because I had all the trump cards, both on the issues and the location, and while he didn't know the former going in, any idiot would realize the latter.
But Paxie's not just any idiot, he's Mensa trained.
So should one feel sorry for a self-declared genius who feels the need to cite dubious credentials and accomplishments in a pathetic attempt to bolster his credibility when his arguments failed to do that for him and left him in the unenviable position of finding a face-saving way out after I told his more than once what I was doing?
I know he said he was playing me too, but hey, I said it first, I play everybody like him, and I was specific in what I was doing. The best Paxie could come up with was an afterthought that this was a practice exercise for him.
And indeed it was. I indicated as much myself when I told him that he would never encounter anyone else like me.
So with the intent to keep him talking and expose the lie that he was too busy to engage - post after ever-loving post, I knew, and he didn't, that the more he wrote the worse it would get for him because a) he wasn't as intelligent as he fancied himself to be and b) being a liberal, see "a" above.
No liberal position is sustainable, and no support for a liberal candidate is rooted in rational thought.
So how much worse is it when a self-acclaimed Mensun not only supports one. but spouts group-think rhetoric about issues and the opposition?
And to any people on the right reading this, some of you may think Paxie's an otherwise nice guy. I mean, even late in the game, he tried to help with what he perceived as a real request in my joke about a Vista boot disk. That made me feel badly for a second, but I'm telling you, it's what lies beneath.
And aside from Paxie's embrace of all things liberal (what his towering intellect has deduced to be "The Way"), it's all wrapped and capped in supremely smug arrogance - he knows, I don't... and he just thought he'd drop in an tell me.
In fact, it's just the opposite, and I say that not from the same position of smug arrogance (which I have), but with the real knowledge that Paxie's arguments are only sustainable in Liberaland. And in that regard, I have to think that another liberal nut finally got to him by private message and said essentially what I've been telling him - that the more he writes, the worse he looks and that he can't possibly win here if for no other reason than the fact that I get the last word.
Which I always take with respect to the world's Paxies.
He could have done what Bobo wants to do in Iraq - declare victory and go home, but I wonder how many people would think he actually won? And since he surely wondered about that too, and since he seemed to be inordinately insecure for a genius, was that really a viable course?
Then again, geniuses may be, by nature, insecure since they probably feel the need to constantly prove themselves. I mean, how should I know?
But that in turn would also explain why credentials and the pursuit of them has a higher priority for him than cultivating logical, rational thought.
And I want to mention something that has had me laughing behind the scenes... Paxie went to public schools, so he knows nothing about Catholic schools, but that didn't stop him from assessing their relative standing vis-a-vis NEA indoctrinated schools. But that's not the really interesting part...
I mentioned that I was in the -honors class-. Paxie later commented that being on the honor roll may be relatively meaningless if the school I attended was somehow inferior to a public school (stop laughing,m that's not even the joke)
See, even I didn't catch it immediately. It was subtle and only in rereading Paxie's comment did I realize that he was utterly lacking in both knowledge and reference point to what I was talking about.
There's a huge difference between what I was referring to and Paxie's only understanding of "honor roll." I wasn't talking about being on a list of achievers, I was talking about being immersed, for four years, with others whom the school, by testing and individual evaluation, determined to be above average. Think of it as Mensa, but with far more intensity and maturity.
In other words, there were three levels for students, and for the most part like associated with like - only other honors students would be in honors classes. But the honors list included all students such that the actual grades were less indicative of intelligence. And I know this firsthand because I took a non-honors class - because I was lazy. And both I and my parents literally had to fight the administration for permission going so far as to go down and make the demand in person.
I'd like to tell you that when I took regular geometry that I automatically got the highest grade in the class... so luckily for me, I can. But the important thing is that I experienced the difference in teaching and discipline, and I returned to honors algebra & trig as a junior.
But I digress. The point is that Paxie has never in his life experienced such an environment. It could be brutal, and you didn't speak your mind unless you were fairly certain that all your ducks were in a row. Logic was paramount, and no one had even taken a logic course to that point, but if a duck strayed, you paid, and there were people a lot smarter than I would would be happy to set one straight.
And Paxie is not in their league... or even mine, and I don't say that to be cruel or self-serving, I'm merely stating something he doesn't know. He assures us that he's had some wonderful discussions with some very intelligent people. That, of course, begs the question: how many of his discussion partners would say the same about him?
I sure wouldn't, but then I wouldn't choose to be a part of any discussion that would include him... or me either for that matter!?!
That's because I know what I'm up to. I tell it the way I see it (like it is), you read and digest it, and unless you are certain that...
a) you have superior information
b) you know what this is really all about...
Please do us both a favor and stifle yourself.
That is, of course, unless you're a Paxie. Then you're exactly what I'm looking for - clueless, humorless, believing you know more than I, and willing to take most everything here at face value.
And I have no hesitation whatsoever in making disclosures about my actual purposes here. I know from long experience that the wacko left can't resist, and I try to exploit that when and as much as I can. And unlike Paxie, I have no qualms about abruptly shifting gears and including him out, as I think Yogi once put it.
So Paxie chose the correct option, Option B - just fail to return - let anyone crazy enough to read all this decide who got the better of whom. From what I can gather, he thought he was in a commanding position and that by just bowing out, he wouldn't be diminished further... forever. No matter that he'd already been diminished beyond my wildest expectations, and I think even those who would think he got the better of me could agree with that - because how much could he diminish me, anyway?
Because my words speak for themselves, for better or worse, and I have no concerns or expectations that anyone will take me seriously. I mean they should because I'm right more often, but I'd rather be out shooting liberals as opposed to arguing with them. Only that war hasn't been declared yet, and I live in a death penalty State in the meantime.
I told a friend here that my eyes lit up when Paxie started out saying that he was so busy. I was determined both to get him to read as many of my words as possible and to make him feel compelled to respond - which would not only lay waste to his "busy PhD pursuitist" disclosure, it would severely inconvenience him and leave him wondering how someone so brilliant could ever have gotten himself into this.
Now if he came back and said I didn't inconvenience him... well, we'll deal with that when it happens.
I think now that its indisputable that he'd gotten enormously more involved than he'd ever anticipated. So he claimed to be glad for the experience, saying that it refreshed his memory (not to mention his skills), about the many, many people like me he's encountered.
Which would, first of all, make him a perennial sucker if he's right, but that's his problem, nor mine. Mine was how to keep him in that state. And as for encountering a lot of people like me, I know that's just a poorly thought-out attempt to justify his participation, but were it to be true, calling him a sucker may be too kind. and even if he had encountered a string of mes, how does taking the time to tell me make him look better?
The fact is, he hasn't... because I haven't. And I've been searching nonstop for fifteen years. I even have a 24-hour tip hotline - which I man, not because I have too much time on my hands, but because I'm concerned that I'm the only one who would recognize another me.
I had a partner who complimented me, and I wish you could have seen what that was like for our adversaries, but we split because he wasn't enough like me when he needed to be - and he thought liberals were human.
And aside from Burt, while I've met some great people (and there's more on Vox than anywhere else), there hasn't been anyone who can think fast enough, who's funny, who understands that appearances can be deceiving, who realizes that liberals have literally nothing to offer to any dialogue, and who can be vicious on demand.
I came to the Net expecting to find where all the smart and funny guys hung out. I'm still looking. Maybe they're all working? So I decided that I could either give up or make my own way. For all those years, Burt and I, and then I alone staged an environment that seems relatively normal because on any given day, it is. But all you have to do is to look around here and you can see that things may be closer than they appear. I'm not here to be a pundit, though I engage in it almost daily. I'm not here to motivate anyone. I'm here to amuse myself.
And one way I do that is by attracting the occasional Paxie who, btw, thinks HE is unique, but in fact he's not only not unique, he's not even special. He's John with lipstick on. Hey, a poem!?! I never cease to amaze myself.
Meanwhile, the quest continues for a rational liberal...
I just hope Paxie inflated his tires before leaving... ?!?
]]>Well, Paxie, I just finished your "Lost Passages," and they are indeed lost, if you get my drift. I'll be brief(er) than I have been heretofore (ha-ha) because all the goodwill I was feeling has evaporated thanks to your coarseness masquerading as civility.
So let's go to the videotext...
"As I said in my original comment, these studies aren't conclusive. They need to be duplicated."
(Spit-take) That's like that definition of "insanity." You know the one I mean, I'm sure, what with your continuing to pay Mensa dues!?!
"Yet, I think they are enough to indicate that you shouldn't assume all liberals are 'stupid.'"
The error is yours in assuming that "stupid" is the opposite of "intelligent." It goes like this:
All liberals are Stupid.
All Mensa members are stupid.
You're both.
Therefore -
Jesus GOD!
" it is at least likely that they were conducted under proper scientific conditions to remove the affect of researcher bias."
Assumes facts not in evidence.
"the researchers who published these articles might be conservatives."
Wanna bet?
"Since they seem quite intelligent, they are probably liberals, based on the results of their own studies."
Have you ever considered doing stand-up? The only thing in question there is who got the grant?
"The president does... Anyone who still doesn't believe in global warming just has their head in the sand, but that's a different topic"
Man, what I would give to be around when you discover how wrong you are.
And that would be a whole lot of heads - even more than those whose heads would remain in th hot air if the latest tabulation of scientists is to be believed. But this reminds me of how people like to compare this to flat-earthers. It's more akin to the time when people actually believed the Earth was flat. Pity those enlightened souls who didn't, eh?
And that's now the second time you've made a reference to Bush. It's almost as if you think he carries some weight with me?.
"Catholic schools do tend to perform better than public schools, which is not surprising since they also tend to have lower student-to-teacher ratios."
In fact, it was exactly the opposite, and uh, you also have to pass an SAT-like test to get in. But I'm more interested in that fact that I was right about your public schooling.
"However, it does not necessarily follow that your Catholic high school was one of the ones that performed higher than the average public school."
Irrelevant. it's not about how any entire school performs.
"Therefore, it also doesn't necessarily follow that being an honors student at your particular high school means that you are exceptionally smart."
Utterly and totally illogical. You've engaged in flawed reasoning (and you didn't know it) to arrive at a possibly valid point.
And now let's look at this as one:
"it also doesn't necessarily follow that being an honors student at your particular high school means that you are exceptionally smart... I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I believe you're intelligent"
Then the latter renders the former irrelevant - and worse, superfluous.
"I simply don't believe that you have much in the way of critical thinking skills."
I assure you, I do nothing but think critically... especially where liberals... and now Mensans are concerned, which had been previously off the radar since all of you were somewhere out there...
"You approach every topic with bias and prejudice,"
What a biased and prejudiced thing to say. And completely irrelevant since you do the same, you just frame yours differently.
"discount any opposing evidence out of hand,"
Do not. I merely discount irrelevant and nonsensical "evidence." There is no one more open-minded than I, and if anyone claims otherwise, I'll punch his face in.
"and readily engage in ad hominim attacks,"
Illogical in what you assume that demonstrates. For example, Al Gore does the same thing, and you wouldn't accuse that fat con man of being biased and prejudiced, would you?
Kidding, I'm sure you would.
"all signs of a person with an undisciplined mind,"
Another terribly biased comment, and it assumes facts not in evidence. I'll have you know I've done extensive self-examinations (I won't say where), and I can state conclusively that my entire demeanor is due to extreme prejudice against idiots of the sort who engage in, among other things, amateur psychology. I mean even the pros aren't competent to engage in it.
"despite your assertion that the "Brothers" taught you such discipline."
You're engaging in substitution. The brothers did teach discipline, and I did learn it, but that doesn't mean I always employ it. but either way, it's always conscious, so... you see, I'm disciplined either way!?!
"I didn't presume anything. The phrase to which your responding is a quote from the article to which I linked. That's why there are quotation marks around it."
Oh how I pray that "your" was a typo, because it's like one of the biggest factors in guaging stupidity that currently exists.
Anyway, well then, I presumed that you presumed it because most people submit quotes when they agree with them
"As for "societal coarseness," you are the best example of that that I've seen."
Thank you, it took practice... and discipline. I was once very shy, but I finally realized, enough is enough.
However, there's is a small problem with your observation... it assumes that I was one who either caused the problem (which you seem to agree exists) or advanced it, when mine is simply a reaction to it. I just want to use language young people today can understand. My mother brought me up right, I assure you.
" STDs are a huge problem in society, but their spread is not caused by liberal thinking."
(Spit-take) Although in a sense, that's true... it's people acting on liberal thinking who spread them.
"It's caused by promiscuity and a lack of prophylactic precaution"
Oh I LOVE that! Prophylactic Precaution. There must be something to Mensa after all.
And.. this arose spontaneously? You know, like evolution? And matter?
"which is in turn promoted by ignorance."
Aka, liberal thinking.
"As it happens, I have been married and monogamous for fifteen years,"
Forgive me for asking, but do both involve the same woman?
"and yet the some of the most conservative people I know are also the most promiscuous."
Anecdotal and self-serving. Assumes facts not in evidence... and possibly that you're a voyeur.
"You are making wild leaps in logic"
Please see your comment immediately above - you should be doing logic leaps in the Olympics.
"by linking liberal thinking with STDs, which only adds credance to my original comment."
Shows and abrupt termination in reasoning and a lack of spell checking. STDs are not a result of liberal thinking, they are due to ignorance? Yet they correlate with the rise in permissiveness? And were people less ignorant 50 years ago? If so, why? If they were just as ignorant, why were there so many less STDs. Plus you're adding your own extra credence which isn't allowed here.
This seems to indicate that you're biased, closed-minded, short-sighted and fearful of basic facts and truths... which lends credence to the conclusion I have reached about liberals
"Smart people sometimes do dumb things,"
They often do dumb things, You're proving that by the moment here...
"Mensa... there are a lot of strange people in it."
If it's not, that should be their slogan!
"They are all intelligent"
Proving my point.... dumb strange, you say potato...
"but they don't all know how to use their intelligence"
My God, I just felt a tingle up my leg.
"Many Mensans have Formula One race cars for brains,"
I'd use a somewhat more basic characterization involving bodily functions.
"There is not a one-to-one correlation between IQ and political orientation, which is what your post implies."
Huh? How did I imply that? In fact who even brought up IQ? You're still assuming that stupidity is the absence of intelligence. In fact, in the study I referenced elsewhere, the authors didn't reference IQ. They measured knowledge levels. You aren't implying that people with high IQs automatically know more about any subject that less intelligent people, are you?
"I joined Mensa because my wife wanted me to"
Oh that's just too good. The little woman made you do it, did she? You don't want me to expand on that, I'm sure.
"and I humored her."
Save this. Soon you'll look back and realize how pathetic that reads. I actually felt a little sorry for you for a second.
Then I remembered, being a liberal, you have no shame...
"I stay in Mensa because...
Stop it, you're killin' me!
"I enjoy the company"
LOL!
"I don't know if you have friends, but if you do, you'll understand."
And even if I don't!?!
"I personally think Mensa is a silly organization"
ROFL. So it's really inertia that keeps you in it!
"they stand for nothing other than getting people of like intelligence together. On the other hand, I've had rather amazing discussions with my fellow Mensans"
So I guess you'd call it all a happy accident? And may I ask, what is the IQ differential that causes you to regard someone else's input in a discussion as inconsequential? And do people submit their scores at the conclusion of each comment so others will know how seriously to regard them?
And I would love to hear the subject of one of those amazing discussions, not to mention sit in on one. I bet I;d come away wishing I watched My Dinner With Andre again instead.
"I mentioned my affiliation with Mensa only to disprove your implication that all liberals were stupid."
Then the prosecution rests, Your Honor.
"You have turned that around to mean that since Mensans are stupid, I am, in fact, stupid."
Your Honor, defendant has turned around my words to say something that the record shows I never said... In fact, defendant is stupid independent of Mensa. But let the record show that though Mensonians are decidedly not unintelligent, their synapses do seem to frequently misfire. It could be that with so many brains, thoughts don't know which route to take.
But yes, if all Menophytes are stupid, and you are one as you claim, then you are, de facto, stupid.
"You certainly have a right to that opinion"
Wow, thanks. Do I also have the right to an opinion that, for example, homosexuals are deviants?
"if you believe that high IQ, academic and professional success, financial security, and a stable, happy life are signs of low intelligence. I have all of these things. I am not bragging"
No, not at all. Just taking inventory?
Now, Straw Man Alert:
"I'm simply telling you that being a liberal doesn't preclude you from these things"
What has that got to do with anything whosoever in the entire history of this discussion" Other than to assuage your insecurity, that is?
"You're proud that you spend your time baiting people into arguments?"
Well, yes... and when it hooks someone like you, I often pose for pictures.
But see, no one made you come here. So you're telling me that you're weak, which is something I already knew. I mean, you don't see me hanging around your blog, do you?
You know, I should do that though. I bet I'm missing the boat. I bet I'd learn a lot about Mensa and success... and peer review.
"It seems a pretty sad way to spend your time, actually."
Writing that sentence is a pretty sad way to spend time. I mean, that's a "get a life" knockoff, and I feel the same way about Mensa, which probably saps a lot more time because your wife made you do it, and now you can't quit.
So really, your comment was merely an indirect way of building yourself up. making you feel better about your own choices. Was it conscious or subconscious. I'd guess the former.
Everyone is just trying to get through, and all of it, this, your amazing Mensaroom experiences, your PhD quest, it's all meaningless.
Besides, I have specifically said a number of times that I don't want to hear from people. I write, you read, it ends there. So you've brought all this on yourself because, as you indicate, you couldn't resist... just as I expect will happen with the next you.
"I don't really know why I felt like doing it today."
That doesn't sound very Mensa-like. Mensa-LITE, maybe?
Then by all means, let me tell you why you're here. You felt you had a killer point and you wanted to put me in my place. But you couldn't do that, so you rationalize that you did and that I just wouldn't hear you. That allows your psyche to get out unscathed... or does it? On the one hand, you know you'll never encounter the likes of me elsewhere, but you'll also be wondering how you could have committed such an amazing faux pas here being the genius that you are.
"People like you are too full of hate to think rationally,"
You wish. That's simply another rationalization constructed for your own internal needs. In fact, other than George Bush, Bob Melvin, and all liberals, I don't hate anybody. Besides, there's no reason why one can't be filled with hate and still think rationally. True they may have moments of severe irrationality, not unlike you have here, and hatred itself can be very rational.
And you call yourself a psychologist?
Although you just reminded me of Andy Griffith in No Time For Sergeants:
"Hey, I got a uncle I hate. He always wants to wrassle with the mule, and he gets all wore out, and the mule gets all wore out...... no, come to think of it, I don't hate him either."
"therefore any sort of discussion is pointless."
Well, I wouldn't say pointless, I mean at least one of us enjoyed this one!?! You're just unhappy that you didn't get the payoff you sought - but which you didn't define going in. Your mistake... and terribly undisciplined.
"I guess I felt I needed to vent, for which you have been very helpful."
That's what I'm here for. OK, so if I understand you, and there's absolutely no reason i should, you're not unhappy that you were suckered in?
"Go on baiting people into one-sided arguments based on fallacious premises."
LOL!!! Oh I will, and I love the qualifiers!!!
"If it allows you to believe you've done something useful during the day so that you can sleep at night, so be it."
Again assumes facts not in evidence. I have no interest in doing anything useful here. I mean, conservatives know what liberals are and they're too weak to be me. And I can't convert any liberals who frequent blogs and forums because they merely use them to reinforce their views. In fact, very few liberals in real life are capable of seeing the light. The only person I ever converted was my little mail order bride, and with her, all I said was, "STOP IT or I'm sending you back."
That said, if you know how to create a Vista boot CD, call me and all is forgiven.
Your possible new best friend,
Ted
]]>