• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which VP is more intelligent?

Which VP is more intelligent?


  • Total voters
    36
I'd be happy to see your definition of american liberalism

income redistribution in the guise that way too many people aren't smart enough to take care of themselves seems to be the main theme

And you keep with the demonization. Hint: if you want a discussion, don't make all sort of insulting comments about the other side.
 
And you keep with the demonization. Hint: if you want a discussion, don't make all sort of insulting comments about the other side.

the poster in question is fairly articulate and intelligent--one whom I have defended against improper right wing attacks in the past-I assume he can tell me his definition of what hie thinks is liberalism's main tenet

and yes liberalism has to assume that most people need a nanny state
 
the poster in question is fairly articulate and intelligent--one whom I have defended against improper right wing attacks in the past-I assume he can tell me his definition of what hie thinks is liberalism's main tenet

and yes liberalism has to assume that most people need a nanny state

Actually it does not, that is just your faulty perceptions.
 
if you think that other people need to have others make important life choices for them don't you espouse liberalism as it is defined in the USA

how can one be an American liberal without believing that most Americans need the government to tell them what to do?

Well, you're assuming I'm (by your definition) an American liberal. I'm my own person, and if I can see a way to get something done using the private sector rather than government, I'd take that option, but sometimes, government is the best solution to a problem.
 
Actually it does not, that is just your faulty perceptions.

prove they are faulty-you cannot. for your politics to have relevance you have to assume most people need a nanny government. social security is based on the assumption that most people weren't smart enough to save for their retirement. mandatory health care is based on the assumption that most people aren't smart enough to budget health insurance. Gun control is based on the assumption that people cannot be trusted to own guns.

liberalism as practiced by the American left is a claim that most americans need government direction and guidance in their lives
 
I'd be happy to see your definition of american liberalism

income redistribution in the guise that way too many people aren't smart enough to take care of themselves seems to be the main theme

There's a hell of a lot more to liberalism than income redistribution
 
Well, you're assuming I'm (by your definition) an American liberal. I'm my own person, and if I can see a way to get something done using the private sector rather than government, I'd take that option, but sometimes, government is the best solution to a problem.

well your profile says liberal and from California--SO I assume it was reasonable to take you at your word. but you normally are an articulate poster-what is your definition of american liberalism?
 
prove they are faulty-you cannot. for your politics to have relevance you have to assume most people need a nanny government. social security is based on the assumption that most people weren't smart enough to save for their retirement. mandatory health care is based on the assumption that most people aren't smart enough to budget health insurance. Gun control is based on the assumption that people cannot be trusted to own guns.

liberalism as practiced by the American left is a claim that most americans need government direction and guidance in their lives

Not really. As Redress said, you're just demonizing liberalism.

Most people can take care of themselves while some (the elderly, disabled, etc) cannot, and need help at times. Our current economic crises is because the American people spent more than they made, and didn't save, and even then, social security is a safety net for people. Mandatory health care is to address the obvious foundational problems with our health care industry, and gun control is to make it harder for psychos to get guns.
 
well your profile says liberal and from California--SO I assume it was reasonable to take you at your word. but you normally are an articulate poster-what is your definition of american liberalism?

To be frank, I've never really thought about it. I've always just considered what I've thought, and what people around me thought, and I really suck at drawing large conclusions from huge amounts of data. Redress could probably give you an answer; I can't.
 
Congratulations. You just said the fat girl has a wonderful personality.

That proves absolutely nothing.
 
Which VP do you think is more intelligent? Joe Biden or Dick Cheney?

I don't think this should be a difficult question. I still think the only reason Biden got the nod was as part of a secret agreement with Obama to drop out of the race. Obama needed the Dem voters who were more sexist than racist, but they were all going for Biden. Obama knew he wasn't going to win in the three-way. Also, imagine what would have happened if Biden had won in 2008 and enacted his plan to divide Iraq into three weak nations among cultural landmarks and then leave it. We would be back in there already fighting WW3.
 
Not really. As Redress said, you're just demonizing liberalism.

Most people can take care of themselves while some (the elderly, disabled, etc) cannot, and need help at times. Our current economic crises is because the American people spent more than they made, and didn't save, and even then, social security is a safety net for people. Mandatory health care is to address the obvious foundational problems with our health care industry, and gun control is to make it harder for psychos to get guns.

gun control is a complete failure and why did libs ban EVERYONE from owning certain types of guns (its already illegal for crazies to own any type of gun if they were adjudicated mentally incompetent)
 
Joe Biden has a much greater emotional intelligence.

what silly psychobabble. Biden is a gaping asshole of everwidening proportions
 
gun control is a complete failure and why did libs ban EVERYONE from owning certain types of guns (its already illegal for crazies to own any type of gun if they were adjudicated mentally incompetent)

Basic gun control is absolutely necessary, and it'd be good if we could prevent guns above a certain caliber from being in public hands without special permits. For example, I'd rather not see my neighbor walking around with an M60, or something as powerful as that; a good idea would be requiring a special permit for guns that can penetrate body armor.
 
Basic gun control is absolutely necessary, and it'd be good if we could prevent guns above a certain caliber from being in public hands without special permits. For example, I'd rather not see my neighbor walking around with an M60, or something as powerful as that; a good idea would be requiring a special permit for guns that can penetrate body armor.

hunting bows penetrate the standard police vest
 
I wouldn't mind seeing regulation on that then. And I wouldn't mind seeing better standard issue vests as well.

this appears to be an issue you really aren't up on
 
this appears to be an issue you really aren't up on

I'm speaking in a general sense. I could do some research on the topic, and talk about specific points, but I'm not in a debate about gun control, I'm currently in one about the broad idea of liberalism, and before that, a comparison between Cheney and Biden.

And I really don't want to get into a debate I need to do serious research for.
 
prove they are faulty-you cannot. for your politics to have relevance you have to assume most people need a nanny government. social security is based on the assumption that most people weren't smart enough to save for their retirement. mandatory health care is based on the assumption that most people aren't smart enough to budget health insurance. Gun control is based on the assumption that people cannot be trusted to own guns.

liberalism as practiced by the American left is a claim that most americans need government direction and guidance in their lives

Not only are you demonizing liberalism, but you are claiming HOW liberals define their position on issues. Sorry. You are in NO position to do that. Everything I see above is nothing but an extreme version of an issue and an assumption that you cannot prove.
 
Hitler was more intelligent than Dick & Joe combined. Doesnt mean thet he was GOOD. And Im NOT saying Dick wasnt good or Joe wasnt good. Im saying intelligence with WISDOM is quite important.
 
Last edited:
Hitler was more intelligent than Dick & Joe combined. Doesnt mean they he was GOOD. And Im NOT saying Dick wasnt good or Joe wasnt good. Im saying intelligence with WISDOM is quite important.

It's like the appeal to popularity logical fallacy. Person A is more intelligent than person B, therefore person A is better than person B. Completely illogical.
 
It's like the appeal to popularity logical fallacy. Person A is more intelligent than person B, therefore person A is better than person B. Completely illogical.

I agree. The argument IS illogical. Ive met people that are VERY intelligent in IQ and a total fool regarding social engagement. Plus common sense. A good leader has Common Sense, Creative, Wisdom and Knowledge.
A good secondary scientist that performs basic tasks must be only... intelligent.
 
I agree. The argument IS illogical. Ive met people that are VERY intelligent in IQ and a total fool regarding social engagement. Plus common sense. A good leader has Common Sense, Creative, Wisdom and Knowledge.
A good secondary scientist that performs basic tasks must be only... intelligent.

A good leader doesn't necessarily have to be a genius, but he needs to surround himself with the best people. That's a better determinant for a good leader than IQ.
 
Back
Top Bottom