Are Republicans Stupid, or Do They Think We're Stupid?

[Anonymous]

They are no stupid - they are smart. Smart enough to realize that half the population is too dumb or too lazy to fact check their statements.

[Anonymous]

We have such short memories. We forget, forget, forget. They know it and they will exploit it. It's like Stalin air brushing the purged party members out of official state photos. People forget so why not reimagine history in whichever way benefits you most?

Yes, I am comparing them to Stalin. They have the same intellectual integrity.

[Anonymous]

Wow - pat yourself on the back. Great find. I guess Democrats have never made incorrect statements (cue Joe Biden please).

Not sure of the purpose of this other than to bash Republicans. Also, Guliani issued a clarification that you forget to mention:

The Mayor’s spokesman says that the remark “didn't come across as it was intended” and that Giuliani was “clearly talking post-9/11 with regards to Islamic terrorist attacks on our soil.”

Provide 3 names of who you think are the current leaders of the Democratic party and I'm sure I can find something they have said that is inaccurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow - pat yourself on the back. Great find. I guess Democrats have never made incorrect statements (cue Joe Biden please).

Not sure of the purpose of this other than to bash Republicans. Also, Guliani issued a clarification that you forget to mention:

The Mayor’s spokesman says that the remark “didn't come across as it was intended” and that Giuliani was “clearly talking post-9/11 with regards to Islamic terrorist attacks on our soil.”

Provide 3 names of who you think are the current leaders of the Democratic party and I'm sure I can find something they have said that is inaccurate.

Perhaps you can find inaccuracies, but Democrats are not as adept at the smear campaigns based on total fabrications in the same way the Republican party has been in recent years.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Provide 3 names of who you think are the current leaders of the Democratic party and I'm sure I can find something they have said that is inaccurate.

Three current Democratic leaders are Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid. Please find all three of them making an inaccurate statement in similar terms about a major event in American history.

Also, even after his clarification, Guiliani is still wrong. He is ignoring the attack at Los Angeles Airport that killed 3 people. Also, note that the word "Islamic" never appeared in his original statement. That was added in his clarification because it allows him to ignore the anthrax attacks. I guess if you are not killed by a Muslim, your death has no political value to the former Mayor.

It is interesting that not one Republican has stepped up to offer even minor criticism of Guiliani, Matalin, or Perino. I guess they are happy with this type of leadership.

[Anonymous]

This will probably get me barred from the site, but here goes. Jeff, I think it's lame that you, as the site administrator, posted a thread in which you make an ad hominem attack on a large portion of your readership. The title of your post is unnecessary. I don't usually read the political discussion (I saw your post by using the recent topics feature, which I just discovered), so you might post like this all the time. However, I generally think your additions to the discussions here are thoughtful and well said. This one (or at least the title) was, to repeat myself, lame.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:This will probably get me barred from the site, but here goes. Jeff, I think it's lame that you, as the site administrator, posted a thread in which you make an ad hominem attack on a large portion of your readership. The title of your post is unnecessary. I don't usually read the political discussion (I saw your post by using the recent topics feature, which I just discovered), so you might post like this all the time. However, I generally think your additions to the discussions here are thoughtful and well said. This one (or at least the title) was, to repeat myself, lame.

First, there is almost nothing you can say to me or about me that will result in you getting kicked off the site. Next, I did not engage in an ad hominem attack. I posed a question. A question, I will point out, you did not bother to address. So, let me ask that question more directly to you? Why would three leading Republicans make largely the same obviously incorrect statement? Furthermore, why is the lack of truthfulness of their statements of such little concern to you that you didn't even bother to address it?

I had a discussion with a conservative friend recently that was a bit of an eye-opener. I had mentioned a recent UN report and she said she didn't trust the UN and didn't believe anything the UN reported. I referred to several media reports that supported the UN's conclusion. She said she didn't trust the media either. I then described analysis provided by a known expert. She didn't trust him either. She then started quoting things said by Sarah Palin and a couple of other Republicans. I then realized that my friend had no real interest in knowing what was true or factual. Rather, she was approaching issues from an emotional standpoint rather than an intellectual one. This is essentially the Sarah Palin phenomenon in a nutshell. Almost nothing she says is true, yet her supporters love the way that she says it. They don't care about the accuracy of her statements because emotionally she appeals to them. The false statements by Guiliani, Matalin, and Perino suggest that this "say something that sounds good even if it's not true" tactic spreading fairly widely in the Republican party. That's something that bothers me. Not because I think the people making those statements are stupid, but because their willingness to make them suggests that they think we are stupid. More specifically, since their statements are aimed at their followers rather than detractors like me, they think their own supporters are stupid. I am simply amazed at their supporters willingness to be treated as such.

[Anonymous]

Everyday and with every post, we fall more and more in love with you, Jeff. Signed, Rosie O'Donnell and Whoopi Goldberg OXOXO

[Anonymous]

Jeff, what makes you think your truth is more valid than someone else's? I have worked for the UN and I can tell you that what you refer to as the truth (UN findingsn media report) is a limited set of facts presented to reach a conclusion that is not necessarily valid at all. The competencies of the people are questionable, the methodologies are suspect, and importantly, the information which is missing is unknown.

I am a democrat, by the way. And I abhor fear mongering, which is the tactic of republicans. But I also think that you (Jeff) are tremendously biased. When have you brought the democrats to task? When have you presented objectively a wide range of positive and negative facts about a democratic position (for example, I remember a long thread about the democratic health care position at some point)?

I started to turn off from the political discussions because they are never issue discussions. They are, as the forum suggests, political.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Jeff, what makes you think your truth is more valid than someone else's? I have worked for the UN and I can tell you that what you refer to as the truth (UN findingsn media report) is a limited set of facts presented to reach a conclusion that is not necessarily valid at all. The competencies of the people are questionable, the methodologies are suspect, and importantly, the information which is missing is unknown.

I am a democrat, by the way. And I abhor fear mongering, which is the tactic of republicans. But I also think that you (Jeff) are tremendously biased. When have you brought the democrats to task? When have you presented objectively a wide range of positive and negative facts about a democratic position (for example, I remember a long thread about the democratic health care position at some point)?

I started to turn off from the political discussions because they are never issue discussions. They are, as the forum suggests, political.

Where did I say that I considered my truth more valid than someone else's simply because of a UN report? I said that I referred to a UN report which was supported by press articles which in turn were supported by the opinion of a subject-matter expert. The topic also happened to be one which I know quite a bit about. Would you put more validity in that collection of information, or a statement by Sarah Palin?

Of course I am biased. Every individual is biased. I am not sure why that has any bearing at all on this discussion? Or, are you also part of the "Bush kept us safe crowd" who thinks 9/11 occurred during the Clinton administration?

As for when I have brought Democrats to task, perhaps you missed this thread which I started:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/83321.page

I'm still waiting for someone to answer the question about why the Republican base is so willing to put up with leadership that apparently thinks they are idiots. Unfortunately, it seems people would rather attack me as lame and biased.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:
I had a discussion with a conservative friend recently that was a bit of an eye-opener. I had mentioned a recent UN report and she said she didn't trust the UN and didn't believe anything the UN reported. I referred to several media reports that supported the UN's conclusion. She said she didn't trust the media either. I then described analysis provided by a known expert. She didn't trust him either. She then started quoting things said by Sarah Palin and a couple of other Republicans. I then realized that my friend had no real interest in knowing what was true or factual. Rather, she was approaching issues from an emotional standpoint rather than an intellectual one. This is essentially the Sarah Palin phenomenon in a nutshell. Almost nothing she says is true, yet her supporters love the way that she says it. They don't care about the accuracy of her statements because emotionally she appeals to them. The false statements by Guiliani, Matalin, and Perino suggest that this "say something that sounds good even if it's not true" tactic spreading fairly widely in the Republican party. That's something that bothers me. Not because I think the people making those statements are stupid, but because their willingness to make them suggests that they think we are stupid. More specifically, since their statements are aimed at their followers rather than detractors like me, they think their own supporters are stupid. I am simply amazed at their supporters willingness to be treated as such.

NP here. To be fair, I know leftists like this. (Guys, the US and Israel did NOT sabotage the World Trade Center. Grow up!) What I find chilling though is that there isn't a prominent leftist politician who is as high profile and who has great support among the grassroots activists the way Palin does on the right. It's still scary that she could have been second in line to the presidency.

[Anonymous]

I think that the point is when the same 'mistake' is made twice. Yes, Richard Reid was the same as the undie bomber. No one had predicted that type of attack. However, once it happened we were well warned. The Bush administration, and subsequently the Obama adminstration (who like all successors came in swearing to do one better) had / have a responsibility to do one better. We are now fairly warned about these types of undie bombers ( I will include that horrible psychologist an an example of the depressingly off-kilter undie bomber type) and need to stop them before they get on planes/ or shoot up recruiting/processing stations. The Obama administration currently is charged with that responsibility. Also, as silly as the statements of those Republicans OP posted are-- the time limit is also up on blaming these oversights on the last guy. Failing to connect the dots on the psychologist and the undie bomber shows there is a current 'dot-connecting' problem and this administration needs to get on it--not as a matter of partisan politics but as a matter of implementing better systems to protect Americans from the roving undie-bombers out there.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
NP here. To be fair, I know leftists like this. (Guys, the US and Israel did NOT sabotage the World Trade Center. Grow up!) What I find chilling though is that there isn't a prominent leftist politician who is as high profile and who has great support among the grassroots activists the way Palin does on the right. It's still scary that she could have been second in line to the presidency.

Exactly. On the left there are some as you describe, but mainstream liberals denounce them and distance themselves from that group. On the right, those who should be fringe elements are promoted. A few years ago, the Democratic-led US Congress voted to denounce Move On because someone (not a Move On employee) submitted a video to a video contest that compared Bush to Hitler. Move On's only connection to the video was that they were holding the contest. Yet, the US Congress voted to denounce the organization. Now, Tea Partiers routinely compare Obama to Hitler and Republican politicians rush to get their support. Where are the Republicans who will denounce and distance themselves from their party's crazys?

[Anonymous]

I will. I denounce and distance myself from my party's crazies. I am still a Republican though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will. I denounce and distance myself from my party's crazies. I am still a Republican though.

Yay! What we need are more moderate Republicans to make their voices heard and to do as the PP has done.