Question For Heck

[Chicopee John]

In your humble opinion, do you believe any political/social - by definition - is dumb?

 

I haven't been spending much time here but the media et al oftentimes paint Conservatives ad dumb - despite, oftentimes, advanced degrees in areas such as Medicine and Law - while Liberal counterparts are painted with a completely different broad brush.

 

Maybe it is my sensitivities speakinr here.

 

Is Newt Gingrich 'dumb' or not?

 

Barbara Bachmann - dumb or not?

 

Perry from Texas - dumb or not?

 

Dick Armey - dumb or not?

 

Etc.

 

On the flip side, please provide a listing of Liberals who - in your opinion - are dumb?

 

Thanks

[VaporTrail]

In your humble opinion, do you believe any political/social - by definition - is dumb?

 

I think you accidentally a whole word there. What is the subject of this sentence?

 

I'll bite. Successful conservative figureheads, typically, aren't dumb. The fact that they pander to the social conservatives (the worst voting bloc in the country, imo) is usually why they say stupid shit (see below). I'd argue that social conservatives are stupid because they put so little value into education and science and insist on the presence of religion in politics.

 

 

What a badass, he's not ashamed to be a Christian. You hear that? He's not ashamed to be part of the majority that pretends like they're being persecuted for their beliefs. Ridiculous. The people that lap this trash up? They're the idiots I believe you're referring to.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Dumb isn't always the best word.

 

Michelle Bachmann has shown a complete inability to process information, or to discern fact from fiction, or conspiracy theory from reality, or what someone tells her on the street from what is true. Is that dumb? If it's not, it's certainly a relative. She's a hard worker and has some political skill, but there's no question that she's not some sort of intellectual heavyweight. Honestly, her opinions would fit in better on message board like this one. I find the idea that she's a somewhat powerful Congresswoman and ranks high on a committee that deals with questions she obviously knows next to nothing about, and is also running for president, and even garnered a bit of a following at one point, to be a sad commentary on where our politics are today.

 

Rick Perry has yet to show any proof that he's got the type of brain you need to run anything other than Texas. He's also inarticulate and lazy. You'd think someone running to be the leader of the free world would at least take the time to learn a few things to say about the issues that face a president. But he won't even do that. So is Rick Perry dumb? I'd say in the grand scheme of things, probably not. Is he smart? I don't see any evidence of that. Is he able to process the complexity of the issues facing this country? That seems highly, highly unlikely. He's a man who seems to have gotten by on his charisma.

 

Dick Armey and Newt aren't dumb. For the most part, I just don't think they want the kind of country that I do. But they're both practiced Washington pols who know how the game is played.

 

You want dumb Democrats? Patrick Kennedy was famously dense. Maxine Waters is a hack and not that bright. Cynthia McKinney was crazy.

 

But if you're asking me if I find Republicans to be less intelligent than Democrats, on balance, the answer would be yes. I think the Republican Party has largely gone into a closed information loop, has become detached from reality, and it's not good for them or the country. As dumb as Patrick Kennedy is, he's light years smarter and more competent than, say, Sarah Palin, the Republican Party's nominee for VP in 2008.

 

Who are these Republicans with advanced degrees that everyone is calling dumb? Also, Michelle Bachmann has an advanced degree, so perhaps that's not the best barometer.

 

I get the point you're making - Republicans are often characterized as being dense more than Democrats. I'd say that's true, and I'd also say that they've earned that distinction, particularly lately. As retired Republican Senator John Danforth, a truly honorable guy if there ever was one in Washington, recently said, "I've been watching some of these Republican debates and they're just terrible. Terrible. It's embarrassing for me as a Republican to watch this stuff. ...It doesn’t have anything to do with the republican party that I was a part of. This is just totally different. And all of these people who are saying this, y’know, and claiming that, y’know, they’re for all this stuff, they also sort of ostentatiously say, “Oh, we’re very religious people. We really, we’re just very pious, Christian people.” They were for torture, and electrocution of the people on along the border and all of that. That doesn’t have anything to do with, is contrary to the Christianity that I understand."

[Chicopee John]

I hear you, Heck. Thanks for the reply.

 

I am not a fan of Michelle Bachmann but she does have intellectual capacity. Seems like somebody with her background should be able to synthesize information and make an 'educated' response. Maybe she is singing to the choir. Maybe studies like hers are brushed aside because of the fact she went to ORU and the field of study she got involved in.

 

"Michele Marie Amble was born in Waterloo, Iowa "into a family of Norwegian Lutheran Democrats";[9] her family moved from Iowa to Minnesota when she was 13 years old.[10] After her parents divorced, Bachmann's father, David John Amble, moved to California, and Bachmann was raised by her mother, Jean (née Johnson), who worked at the First National Bank in Anoka, Minnesota.[10][11] Her mother remarried when Bachmann was a teenager; the new marriage resulted in a family with nine children.[12]

 

She graduated from Anoka High School in 1974 and, after graduation, spent time working on a kibbutz in Israel.[13] In 1978, she graduated from Winona State University with a B.A.[1]

 

In 1979, Bachmann was a member of the first class of the O. W. Coburn School of Law, then a part of Oral Roberts University (ORU).[12] While there, Bachmann studied with John Eidsmoe, whom she described in 2011 as "one of the professors who had a great influence on me".[14][15] Bachmann worked as a research assistant on Eidsmoe's 1987 book Christianity and the Constitution, which argues that the United States was founded as a Christian theocracy, and should become one again.[12][14][15] In 1986 Bachmann received a J.D. degree from Oral Roberts University.[1] She was a member of the final graduating class of the law school at ORU, and was part of a group of faculty, staff, and students who moved the ORU law school library to what is now Regent University.[16]

 

In 1988, Bachmann received an LL.M. degree in tax law from the William & Mary School of Law.[2][17] From 1988 to 1993, she was an attorney working for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).[18] She left her position with the IRS to become a full-time mother[19] when her fourth child was born.[20]

[heckofajobbrownie]

Intellectual capacity is a pretty broad term. Yes, she's a functioning adult, but if she ever says something useful or even the least bit insightful or displays working knowledge of a complex issue - and I'm talking about anything at all - please let me know.

 

And again, who are these Republicans that the media is painting out to be dumb that you don't think deserve it?

[Chicopee John]

Intellectual capacity is a pretty broad term. Yes, she's a functioning adult, but if she ever says something useful or even the least bit insightful or displays working knowledge of a complex issue - and I'm talking about anything at all - please let me know.

 

And again, who are these Republicans that the media is painting out to be dumb that you don't think deserve it?

 

Michelle Bachman

Newt Gingrich

Herman Cain

Wis. Governor

Mitch McConnel

John Boehner

 

The list goes on and on, Heck.

 

Because somebody has a different opinion than 'yours', it doesn't mean they lack intelligence.

 

I oftentimes believe Liberals create the illusion of complexity in order to portray themselves as the 'intellectual elite' and by dumbing down the opinions of others that simply do not believe many issues have to be made to sound complex when - oftentimes - the solution IS 'simple'.

 

PS Was Ted Kennedy 'smart'? Or just somebody who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, a huge machine behind him and acted the part?

 

I know we are treading on opinions here.

 

However, you oftentimes cite educational background as a sign of intelligence and just now you called somebody with a JD degree as well as a Masters in Tax Law an intellectual lightweight.

 

See the contridictions?

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, not at all. It's merely a piece of evidence that suggests something, but it's not proof of intelligence. Not everyone who goes to college is smart. Not all tax attorneys are smart. Not all politicians are smart.

 

Honestly, if you're angry that people think Michele Bachmann isn't an intellectual heavyweight and lacks the requisite knowledge and wisdom and analytical capability to be president, you're going to be angry for a long time. Because she's not that bright. Because she isn't. If you whisper something to her that isn't true, she'll say it on national TV. If you watch her perform in House hearings, she continually embarrasses herself. I'm not sure this is the person you want to go to bat with in the "she's really smart, really she is" game.

 

And yes, Kennedy was smart, and one of the most effective legislators in US history. The fact that he was born rich or famous doesn't have anything to do with his intelligence. If you think he merely "acted the part" over his 40 year career in public life, you don't know much about Ted Kennedy.

 

As for your list, here's my guess at their intelligence, on a scale of 1 to 10:

 

Michelle Bachman: 3

Newt Gingrich: 7

Herman Cain: 5

Wis. Governor: I have no idea, but I don't hear many people calling him "dumb" anyway. They oppose his policies by and large.

Mitch McConnell: 7

John Boehner: 6

 

But your opinion may vary. I generally don't look to politics when I'm looking for examples of brilliance.

[Westside Steve]

But I remember a few years ago well quite a few actually, a guy I used to work with told me that he thought the definition of intelligence is how intelligent other people thought you were.

 

I will disagree though; I do believe all tax attorneys are smart.

There is definitely a learning capacity the discipline and the ability to get through whatever courses and remember what ever you need to remember just to get the degree. Sure, some are smarter than others.

WSS

[Chicopee John]

I'm more amused than angry, Heck.

 

Like I said, I'm not a fan of Bachman but I do believe she is intelligent. I'm not the one to drag out number of college degrees, number of recognitions, etc. to establish one's 'intelligence'.

 

I simply find it amusing you rated one of those I threw out as high as a 7.

 

FWIW, being an effective Senator (Ted Kennedy) really doesn't establish intelligence. You already pointed that out.

 

I believe Ted Kennedy was a product of a system and, the fact is, basically flunked out of college and it took him more than a couple attempts to pass the bar. The fact he passed the bar - probably the only one he ever did pass without stopping in for a few - demonstrates he has some intelligence.

 

I lived the first 38 years of my life in MA and know more than a little bit about the Kennedy mystique.

 

Any way, I believe you've demonstrated your bias throughout this thread.

 

Mission accomplished.

[osusev]

Really?

 

A question that was framed to establish a bias of someone's perception of the IQ of conservative politicians?

 

Mission Accomplished?

 

You have to be kidding, the moment Heck put any value on any individual lower than your PERCEIVED sense of what you think is "fair" you "accomplished" your mission.

 

IF you were trying to understand or find an objective outcome than you can not be the sole arbiter of what is "fair".

 

The core problem with "conservative" candidates being painted as "dumb" is usually based around positions surrounding Global warming and Evolution.

 

When you take contrary positions to well established scientific Theories........ you are setting up yourself as having a questionable lack of understanding of basic fundamental principles of reason.... "flat earthers"

 

Its CLEAR that neither party holds any sort of claim of having more intelligent operatives than the other.

 

There are clearly intelligent individuals from both parties that have PHD's, Rhodes Scholars,etc as well as there are clearly some individuals who show low levels critical/analytical thinking.

 

 

I have met a lot of people over the years that range from nuclear physicists, MD's, engineers, lawyers, etc that have accomplished scholastic and professional achievements that are vertically intelligent in a specific domains.

 

I have also seen those same individuals show some astonishing inabilities in other areas that are quite low..... One of the most intelligent individuals I have ever met does not have a high school education and yet is extremely successful.

 

He has multiple holdings and has built up many different businesses in different fields and yet has none of the formal accolades. He shows an astonishing range of quantitative ability in almost everything, yet he looks like a hill jack, speaks like a truck driver and has the attention span of a sparrow.

 

You cant ask a question like you did and then hold judgement on an issue that has very little way of being objective. The only thing you accomplished was to show you had a bias against any answer Heck would have put forth because of your opinion.

[Chicopee John]

>>You cant ask a question like you did and then hold judgement on an issue that has very little way of being objective. The only thing you accomplished was to show you had a bias against any answer Heck would have put forth because of your opinion.

 

To be fair and balanced, Heck:

 

Nancy Pelosi

Harry Reid

Joe Biden

Charles Rangel

Barney Frank

[Westside Steve]

Heck, where do you put rhe big O?

And why?

WSS

[osusev]

I think to get a better idea of what the 1-10 scale represents may uncover a little more detail John is looking for.

 

What does 1 represent? 5? 10?

 

I want to throw out a suggestion:

 

Lets assume you must be of at least slightly below average intelligence to become a government rep.

 

1: as a basis should be defined as below average intelligence (but smart enough to attain a college degree at any community level college by just not failing)

 

2: Community college 3.0 + GPA

 

3: Average State college 2.0-2.5 GPA

 

4: Average State college 2.5-3.0 GPA

 

5: Average State college 3.0+ GPA

 

6: Private to Ivy league school 2.0-3.0 GPA graduate

 

7: Private to Ivy league school 3.0 -3.5 GPA graduate

 

8: Private to Ivy league school 3.5-4.0 GPA graduate

 

9: Elite engineering school (MIT/CMU level) average graduate

 

10: Genius

 

This is just a suggestion, but one I am interested seeing anyones perception of the two cross sections John put forth. I think its a great question of measuring perception.

[heckofajobbrownie]

You want me to rate these people on their intelligence?

 

Nancy Pelosi 6.5

Harry Reid 6

Joe Biden 6

Charles Rangel 5.5

Barney Frank 8.5

 

Does this confirm my bias, too?

[VaporTrail]

Heck, for the sake of consistency, would you rate the intelligence of everyone who posted in this thread, yourself included? I'm just trying to get a grasp of your scale, but I've got many of the same questions that sev brought up.

[calfoxwc]

I suppose that Obamao will be rated as "brilliant" ... a nine on that ten scale.

 

But he continually says stupid things. Wouldn't that mean he doesn't "process information" better than

 

Bachmann?

 

I mean, do we have to post his saying he was in Asia, when he was actually in Hawaii? Yes, you ignore that.

 

Do we have to bring up the "57 States" thing again?

 

And, Obamao did it again, saying he was in one place, when he was actually a different place.

 

My God, how does this bias thing work? One dumb statement immediately categorizes a conservative you don't like...

 

but many dumb statements by a lib you DO like, and they are still brilliant.

 

Sure. That's just par for the corrupt thinking course.

[osusev]

You want me to rate these people on their intelligence?

 

Nancy Pelosi 6.5

Harry Reid 6

Joe Biden 6

Charles Rangel 5.5

Barney Frank 8.5

 

Does this confirm my bias, too?

 

Heck are those based on my scale? IF so I dont know a ton about Barney Frank, I am intrigued and going to look up some stuff tonight.

[heckofajobbrownie]

No, it's entirely subjective.

[Chicopee John]

No, it's entirely subjective.

 

Thanks, again, for your response Heck.

 

I wouldn't say you proved me wwwwwwwwwwwww......................rongggggggggggggggg.

 

One snapshot doesn't define a trend!

 

PS This thread has taken some strange twists and turns. Like I said before things don't always need to be THAT complicated.

[Westside Steve]

No, it's entirely subjective.

 

And that's fair enough.

My own perception may very a bit but what the hell.

I'd say it takes a great deal of intelligence to get through any complicated or extremely disciplined advanced college course.

Some people have more of a knack for learning things than others.

Thats intelligence and it is measurable.

In the music world we call it talent. Anybody that spends an hour a day practicing will learn to play an instrument probably fairly well, but there will be a few who really become good.

 

Again Heck, where do you put the president, and why?

WSS

[VaporTrail]

Michelle Bachmann has shown a complete inability to process information, or to discern fact from fiction, or conspiracy theory from reality, or what someone tells her on the street from what is true. Is that dumb? If it's not, it's certainly a relative. She's a hard worker and has some political skill, but there's no question that she's not some sort of intellectual heavyweight. Honestly, her opinions would fit in better on message board like this one. I find the idea that she's a somewhat powerful Congresswoman and ranks high on a committee that deals with questions she obviously knows next to nothing about, and is also running for president, and even garnered a bit of a following at one point, to be a sad commentary on where our politics are today.

 

So what earned her the 3 intelligence points?

[osusev]

Obama (D) 7-8

 

Dick Armey ranges ®6-8

 

Barney Frank (D) 7-8

 

Newt Gingrich ® 6-8

 

Michelle Bachmann ® 3-5

 

Nancy Pelosi (D) 3-5

 

Harry Reid (D)3-6

 

Joe Biden (D) 3-5

 

Charlie Rangel(D) 5-8

 

Rick Perry ® 4-5

 

Ron Paul ® 7-8

 

* I went thru each list at random so as not to just look at one party

* I used my scale in defining the values

* college quality was the biggest driving factor sourced from Wikipedia

* tighter ranges are based on my confidence in rendering an opinion

 

Now that I am done, for me it seems like my perception is that both parties pretty much have parity (based on my subjective opinion)

 

Just for fun..

Palin 1-3

Bush Jr 3-6.5

Clinton 7-9

Reagan 5-7

Carter 9

Bush Sr 8-9

[heckofajobbrownie]

So what earned her the 3 intelligence points?

 

Because obviously there are people who can't even do what she does. There are people who are less educated, who possess no real knowledge at all.

 

If we were just talking about the 535 members of Congress, I'd say she'd rank in the bottom 50. But she'd also have some company.

 

Congress is all over the place. You have people who are really bright and exceptionally talented in certain areas, and you have lots of competent people, and then you have some total whack jobs who you wouldn't trust to babysit your pets.

 

What most of all of them have is drive. It's very exhausting being a member of Congress. It's a real shitty job, with part of virtually every day spent on the phone asking people for money. It takes a particular personality type.

 

Say what you want about Bachmann, she is a pretty tireless woman. And relentlessly kind in person, from what people tell me.

[Westside Steve]

Hey Sev.

Your criteria don't look all that bad but I think your overlooking the fact that there are a lot of other things that determine whether or not you make it into an ivy league college.

Not to mention the fact that desire and drive really count a lot as far as whether or not you get a degree and how good your grades might be. There are probably a lot of people with a genius iq who attend cleveland state or don't apply themselves all that much or don't go to college at all.

But you probably need more brands to major in engineering at mit than you do for theater at akron u.

WSS

[osusev]

Hey Sev.

Your criteria don't look all that bad but I think your overlooking the fact that there are a lot of other things that determine whether or not you make it into an ivy league college.

Not to mention the fact that desire and drive really count a lot as far as whether or not you get a degree and how good your grades might be. There are probably a lot of people with a genius iq who attend cleveland state or don't apply themselves all that much or don't go to college at all.

But you probably need more brands to major in engineering at mit than you do for theater at akron u.

WSS

 

I could not agree more, however I did not want to get lost in the weeds of a subject matter that already is pretty murky... "IQ" is by itself subjective and I dont believe that there is a way to measure and define the different abilities in humans.

 

I dont want to go too much into that subject because it is just so large, I was just trying to get something simple and sort of objective.

 

In one of my posts in this thread I referenced an individual that I know personally that did not attend any level of formal higher education. I stand by my opinion that his abilities are well into "genius" or would be graded by the current methodologies and tests into that definition. He could easily attend any school in the U.S. but frankly learns on his own at a frightening speed. He does not care for any formal paper accolades or the methodology of seminar/lab/session to homework/project to quiz/testing.

 

He learns in more of an experiential method, and supplements from published data..... now that is not the way most people can but for him and I suspect a lot of other more "hands on" leaning individuals this works.

 

Either way, I stand by my subjective opinions and think the range of intelligence in either party is pretty equal.

[VaporTrail]

I could not agree more, however I did not want to get lost in the weeds of a subject matter that already is pretty murky... "IQ" is by itself subjective and I dont believe that there is a way to measure and define the different abilities in humans.

 

I dont want to go too much into that subject because it is just so large, I was just trying to get something simple and sort of objective.

 

In one of my posts in this thread I referenced an individual that I know personally that did not attend any level of formal higher education. I stand by my opinion that his abilities are well into "genius" or would be graded by the current methodologies and tests into that definition. He could easily attend any school in the U.S. but frankly learns on his own at a frightening speed. He does not care for any formal paper accolades or the methodology of seminar/lab/session to homework/project to quiz/testing.

 

He learns in more of an experiential method, and supplements from published data..... now that is not the way most people can but for him and I suspect a lot of other more "hands on" leaning individuals this works.

 

Either way, I stand by my subjective opinions and think the range of intelligence in either party is pretty equal.

 

 

What does your friend do? He sounds awesome.

[heckofajobbrownie]

The Ivy Leagues are hardly the only repository of intelligent life in America. You can find lots of very highly educated stupid people in Cambridge, believe me.

[Chicopee John]

The Ivy Leagues are hardly the only repository of intelligent life in America. You can find lots of very highly educated stupid people in Cambridge, believe me.

 

It's probably a lot more difficult to NOT find one.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Well, I wouldn't say that.