Professor Says Liberals Are Smarter Than Conservatives

Using only a portion of the quote is splicing. You knew that, of course, but you've resigned yourself to lying and making shit up in order to prevent Obama from getting elected again.

I'd expect nothing better from ya, Frank. Just don't sound all offended when the DNC does the same thing.

The DNC and their LMSM media outlet distort 24/7 (aka Tea Party/Colorado Shooter) but that's not the issue here at all. Again, here what's Obama said, here's the key sentence.

"If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

here's the entire paragraph,

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

How does his saying the government built the Internet strengthen your case?

Oh, so you do get the context! He's saying that people don't build something without the help and support of others - be that a teacher, a guy building roads, or research developed outside his own head.

But you, being a rightwing hack, like to act like the comment about "you didn't build that" was in reference to the business, not the roads, bridges etc...Because that's the kind of crumbs the far right is left to fight for.

Is English not your first language, that could explain where you went wrong?

First, roads and bridges aren't build by unicorns or the Keebler elves, construction companies build those!

Second, he was plagiarizing Liz "Cherokee" Warren's Manifesto which had the same fictional, Neo-Marxist narrative.

"You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did."

Third, this is the EXACT quote where "that" refers to the business, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." It cannot refer to the roads and bridges because in the next sentence Obama credits government for building the Internet, totally knocking the props out from under your argument, Context Boy
 
Cut for content. Read the full post at Cameron Harris


Colorado Watchdog recently analyzed the political contributions of employees at 27 publicly supported campuses. What they found was truly astonishing, but one professor’s explanation is even more surprising.

The group found that University of Colorado employees gave Barack Obama $38,335 while only giving $6,550 to the Romney campaign. Colorado State faculty gave $13,175 to Obama while not a cent was given to Mitt Romney.

It has long been an accepted fact that academia is glaringly more biased towards liberal politicians and policies. These campaign numbers reinforce that claim, but many wonder why.

One professor thinks he has the answer.

Drew Westen, professor of Psychology at Emory University, feels that this data “confirms his sense that academics are smarter than everyone else.” Now I don’t think that many of us would take any issue with this claim. Academics devote their entire lives to the quest for knowledge, and they are most likely far superior to the majority of the rest of us in intelligence.


The next claim that Dr. Westen makes is the one that is disturbing and quite ridiculous.

Dr. Westen goes on to say: “That suggests that people who think logically and have been selected for intellect are more convinced by Democrats than Republicans. Perhaps that’s not a surprise when you take into consideration that Republicans defy basic math by arguing that you can cut deficits by throwing public employees out of work, which cuts the number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue), or that you can increase revenue by cutting taxes to the rich. Democrats tend to believe in science, e.g., they don’t believe in angels or Satan, but they do believe in evolution.”

One question, is this professor a liberal or conservative? ;)
 
The DNC and their LMSM media outlet distort 24/7 (aka Tea Party/Colorado Shooter) but that's not the issue here at all. Again, here what's Obama said, here's the key sentence.

"If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

here's the entire paragraph,

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

How does his saying the government built the Internet strengthen your case?

Oh, so you do get the context! He's saying that people don't build something without the help and support of others - be that a teacher, a guy building roads, or research developed outside his own head.

But you, being a rightwing hack, like to act like the comment about "you didn't build that" was in reference to the business, not the roads, bridges etc...Because that's the kind of crumbs the far right is left to fight for.

Is English not your first language, that could explain where you went wrong?

First, roads and bridges aren't build by unicorns or the Keebler elves, construction companies build those!

Indeed! And they build them with....wait for it now...


Public money!



"You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did."

Third, this is the EXACT quote where "that" refers to the business, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." It cannot refer to the roads and bridges because in the next sentence Obama credits government for building the Internet, totally knocking the props out from under your argument, Context Boy
Ms. Warren was correct as well. Obama made it clear that society and government plays a role in fostering successful business - just like Mr. Romney and anyone with a brain has said many times in the past.

But that assumes people have brains....
 
Cut for content. Read the full post at Cameron Harris


Colorado Watchdog recently analyzed the political contributions of employees at 27 publicly supported campuses. What they found was truly astonishing, but one professor’s explanation is even more surprising.

The group found that University of Colorado employees gave Barack Obama $38,335 while only giving $6,550 to the Romney campaign. Colorado State faculty gave $13,175 to Obama while not a cent was given to Mitt Romney.

It has long been an accepted fact that academia is glaringly more biased towards liberal politicians and policies. These campaign numbers reinforce that claim, but many wonder why.

One professor thinks he has the answer.

Drew Westen, professor of Psychology at Emory University, feels that this data “confirms his sense that academics are smarter than everyone else.” Now I don’t think that many of us would take any issue with this claim. Academics devote their entire lives to the quest for knowledge, and they are most likely far superior to the majority of the rest of us in intelligence.


The next claim that Dr. Westen makes is the one that is disturbing and quite ridiculous.

Dr. Westen goes on to say: “That suggests that people who think logically and have been selected for intellect are more convinced by Democrats than Republicans. Perhaps that’s not a surprise when you take into consideration that Republicans defy basic math by arguing that you can cut deficits by throwing public employees out of work, which cuts the number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue), or that you can increase revenue by cutting taxes to the rich. Democrats tend to believe in science, e.g., they don’t believe in angels or Satan, but they do believe in evolution.”



"Perhaps that’s not a surprise when you take into consideration that Republicans defy basic math by arguing that you can cut deficits by throwing public employees out of work, which cuts the number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue), or that you can increase revenue by cutting taxes to the rich."

This comment "cuts number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue) is the really dumbest statement which totally discredits all the rest!

Where does this idiot think the revenue used to pay public employees comes from?
I mean this idiot must believe that if the ENTIRE work force was "public" employees
the public employees pay say 40% of total pay in taxes!
Where will the other 60% come from?
Or for this idiot and those on this board..
The pie is made up of $1,000 coming into the public works project every year.
The employees take 30% as payroll and of $300 pay back 40% or $120 in taxes..
WHERE will the other $880 come from for the next year?

This academic's total ignorance of taxes,revenue etc. is totally appalling and at this point makes the entire article a big JOKE!!!
 
Oh, so you do get the context! He's saying that people don't build something without the help and support of others - be that a teacher, a guy building roads, or research developed outside his own head.

But you, being a rightwing hack, like to act like the comment about "you didn't build that" was in reference to the business, not the roads, bridges etc...Because that's the kind of crumbs the far right is left to fight for.

Is English not your first language, that could explain where you went wrong?

First, roads and bridges aren't build by unicorns or the Keebler elves, construction companies build those!

Indeed! And they build them with....wait for it now...


Public money!



"You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did."

Third, this is the EXACT quote where "that" refers to the business, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen." It cannot refer to the roads and bridges because in the next sentence Obama credits government for building the Internet, totally knocking the props out from under your argument, Context Boy
Ms. Warren was correct as well. Obama made it clear that society and government plays a role in fostering successful business - just like Mr. Romney and anyone with a brain has said many times in the past.

But that assumes people have brains....

THESE bridges,Roads, POLICE, ALL PAID NOT with government making a product selling the product! NO!
THEY paid for it with TAX MONEY from the people and businesses!
TAX MONEY is NOT created! IT is calculated on most cases as a percentage and
then literally the person/business writes a check and PAYS a portion of THE TAX PAYER's
MONEY!!!

Do YOU have any IDEA how much money comes into the Federal Government AS TAXES?
Go to this web site if you are NOT too LAZY and if you really want the FACTS!!!

Federal Revenues by Source
 
Cut for content. Read the full post at Cameron Harris


Colorado Watchdog recently analyzed the political contributions of employees at 27 publicly supported campuses. What they found was truly astonishing, but one professor’s explanation is even more surprising.

The group found that University of Colorado employees gave Barack Obama $38,335 while only giving $6,550 to the Romney campaign. Colorado State faculty gave $13,175 to Obama while not a cent was given to Mitt Romney.

It has long been an accepted fact that academia is glaringly more biased towards liberal politicians and policies. These campaign numbers reinforce that claim, but many wonder why.

One professor thinks he has the answer.

Drew Westen, professor of Psychology at Emory University, feels that this data “confirms his sense that academics are smarter than everyone else.” Now I don’t think that many of us would take any issue with this claim. Academics devote their entire lives to the quest for knowledge, and they are most likely far superior to the majority of the rest of us in intelligence.


The next claim that Dr. Westen makes is the one that is disturbing and quite ridiculous.

Dr. Westen goes on to say: “That suggests that people who think logically and have been selected for intellect are more convinced by Democrats than Republicans. Perhaps that’s not a surprise when you take into consideration that Republicans defy basic math by arguing that you can cut deficits by throwing public employees out of work, which cuts the number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue), or that you can increase revenue by cutting taxes to the rich. [B]Democrats tend to believe in science, e.g., they don’t believe in angels or Satan, but they do believe in evolution.”[/B]

Please Please...PLEASE make it^^ part of the Democrat's national platform. I can't wait to hear the response from Rev. Wright and Jesse Jackson.
 
Last edited:
Sounds about right.

This sounds right to you?

Dr. Westen goes on to say: “That suggests that people who think logically and have been selected for intellect are more convinced by Democrats than Republicans. Perhaps that’s not a surprise when you take into consideration that Republicans defy basic math by arguing that you can cut deficits by throwing public employees out of work, which cuts the number of taxpayers (and hence reduces tax revenue), or that you can increase revenue by cutting taxes to the rich. Democrats tend to believe in science, e.g., they don’t believe in angels or Satan, but they do believe in evolution.”

Seriously?

So we can't cut the deficit by not paying a person $30,000-$100,000 from tax revenues because we wouldn't recieve a fraction of the money we are spending back in taxes? Do you know how stupid that is? That isn't the least bit logical. Let's completely ignore the false assumption that the public employee wouldn't be able to find a private sector job. He is seriously suggesting that not paying alot of money is going to hurt the deficit because we wont get alittle money back. That's completely insane.

Let's say we tax Federal emplooyees at the highest rate. We are still paying 2/3s more out than we get back in taxes for every federal employees.

If that sounds right to you, I recommend you go take some basic math courses. Because only a stupid person would think paying more money than you recieve is going to make the deficit better.
 
It has been a mystery to conservatives why an intellectual approach to politics leads to the left because they cannot accept the obvious conclusion, conservative politics requires a willingness to accept too many fallacies and never question them. It is not precisely a question of intelligence but a measure of authoritarian following behavior.

If you think paying more money than you take in is going to fix deficits, while doing the opposite wont eliminate deficits, you aren't intellectual in the least.
 
Basic common sense has nothing to do with conservative politics, and more to do with accepting that the world sucks and there is nothing we can do about it other than to find the best way to cash in.

What on earth do you understand about basic common sense?
 
Using only a portion of the quote is splicing. You knew that, of course, but you've resigned yourself to lying and making shit up in order to prevent Obama from getting elected again.

I'd expect nothing better from ya, Frank. Just don't sound all offended when the DNC does the same thing.

The DNC and their LMSM media outlet distort 24/7 (aka Tea Party/Colorado Shooter) but that's not the issue here at all. Again, here what's Obama said, here's the key sentence.

"If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

here's the entire paragraph,

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

How does his saying the government built the Internet strengthen your case?

Oh, so you do get the context! He's saying that people don't build something without the help and support of others - be that a teacher, a guy building roads, or research developed outside his own head.

But you, being a rightwing hack, like to act like the comment about "you didn't build that" was in reference to the business, not the roads, bridges etc...Because that's the kind of crumbs the far right is left to fight for.

So you have to LIE about the context when it's provided to you? What is wrong with your freaking people?

Is it so damn difficult to admit that Obama said something really stupid and out of touch with people?
 
Sounds about right.

Cutting public employees does not reduce tax revenue.

Tell me if 100% of youR pay is made with money collected from others via taxes and I lay you off how did tax revenue decrease?

If a "society" consisted of 100 people making 1000 a month and each of them paid 100 a month in taxes the total monthly tax revenue would be 10,000.

Now if you were hired as the only public employee for that "society" and were paid 1000 a month the total tax revenue decreases to 9000 a month.

Now if you pay the same 100 a month in taxes as the other 100 members of the "society" then the total monthly tax revenue is 9100.

If we fire you the total tax revenue increases to its original 10,000 a month.

So tell me how does firing public employees decrease tax revenue?
 
It has been a mystery to conservatives why an intellectual approach to politics leads to the left because they cannot accept the obvious conclusion, conservative politics requires a willingness to accept too many fallacies and never question them. It is not precisely a question of intelligence but a measure of authoritarian following behavior.

Yeah?

Can you explain this comment to me in your own words, "If you've got a business -- you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

Well I could but you do not believe in the concept of social responsibility so why bother?

I love this, man, honestly.

In one post you make the claim that those who oppose your political views do so due to "authoritarian following behavior", and then in the very next post explain that your own point of view cannot be properly explained unless one -believes- in the concept of social responsibility.

Following authoritarian dogma = following authoritarian dogma

It kills me that someone so obviously enlightened managed to overlook this similarity.
 
Sounds about right.

Cutting public employees does not reduce tax revenue.

Tell me if 100% of youR pay is made with money collected from others via taxes and I lay you off how did tax revenue decrease?

If a "society" consisted of 100 people making 1000 a month and each of them paid 100 a month in taxes the total monthly tax revenue would be 10,000.

Now if you were hired as the only public employee for that "society" and were paid 1000 a month the total tax revenue decreases to 9000 a month.

Now if you pay the same 100 a month in taxes as the other 100 members of the "society" then the total monthly tax revenue is 9100.

If we fire you the total tax revenue increases to its original 10,000 a month.

So tell me how does firing public employees decrease tax revenue?

Since PUBLIC Employees are PAID by taxes collected...:eusa_whistle:
 
Sounds about right.

Cutting public employees does not reduce tax revenue.

Tell me if 100% of youR pay is made with money collected from others via taxes and I lay you off how did tax revenue decrease?

If a "society" consisted of 100 people making 1000 a month and each of them paid 100 a month in taxes the total monthly tax revenue would be 10,000.

Now if you were hired as the only public employee for that "society" and were paid 1000 a month the total tax revenue decreases to 9000 a month.

Now if you pay the same 100 a month in taxes as the other 100 members of the "society" then the total monthly tax revenue is 9100.

If we fire you the total tax revenue increases to its original 10,000 a month.

So tell me how does firing public employees decrease tax revenue?

Since PUBLIC Employees are PAID by taxes collected...:eusa_whistle:

Exactly. Those supposedly oh so smart liberals are trying to count dollars twice.
 
I've had enough conversations with "conservatives" on this board where they simply choose to ignore recent history (ie. tax receipts from 2001-2003) that I believe, yes, generally speaking, liberals are more intelligent.

If anyone would like a demonstration, give me a "conservative" point on an issue and I can fully explain their position. They will be unable to explain the liberal position.
 

Forum List

Back
Top