Fear not; many of my views are liberal; but I have doubts that this is the best way - at least for now.. I simply am not convinced of either approach - thats why I am an independent.. And if one wishes to be "complete", he must walk among the masses.
I wonder if you didn't click on the wrong "LuckyDan" post. I think you might be replying to my comment that liberalism is America's default position. That's the only way your suggestion that I fear it makes sense. It's like when homosexuals tell me I might be gay.
In either case, no. I'm a con. And I wouldn't want to live in a world that didn't feature among it's top attractions pretty girls with bouncing boobies and twitching round bottoms.
I despise liberalism, but I don't hate libs. At least not the ones who can't help themelves. Those who have the brainpower to know better . . . that's where it gets prickly.
I'm getting so tired of low-blows like these...Originally Posted by LuckyDan
Ted Kasczynski (i.e. the Unabomber), had an IQ of 162. He was pretty smart. We should all become Anarcho-primitivists then! Albert Einstein, on the other hand, had an IQ of between 160 and 180. He might have been even smarter. But guess what: he was a socialist. So now we need to be socialist anarcho-primitivists, in order to correspond to the most intelligent faction of political thinkers. But there is a contradiction here, you see? Anarcho-primitivism is opposed to socialism, by definition. You see the point I am getting at, right?
I'm sorry to tell you this, but intelligence is distributed fairly evenly among the liberal and conservative population. Political leaning has little to do with intelligence. Adopting the view that you are the only one who is right and everybody else is wrong and stupid, is a trait of an ideologue. Comments like these are the kinds of things that reduce the quality of the forum because they make people less open to discussion, and more open to crude insults and flame wars.
I don't know. But in actuality, I don't think that it matters.Originally Posted by LuckyDan
Last edited by JustinS; 01-07-12 at 03:02 AM.
You mentioned a psycho and a physicist, as if they are one and the same. Both smart, yes, but neither representative of the popululace I am talking about. I am concerned with those libs who are above the Jerry Springer watchers, but who cannot see that Chomsky and Zinn are full of ****.
Last edited by LuckyDan; 01-07-12 at 03:06 AM. Reason: to include justin's edit
Whether or not Chomsky and Zinn are full of **** is your opinion, not necessarily everybody else's. Kasczynski was not a psycho, considering that he was never declared insane. But whether or not somebody is liberal or conservative has little to do with intelligence. More with upbringing, if you ask me.Originally Posted by LuckyDan