I'm saying that he clearly had some influence given his position. Is he doing the reporting? No. Is he advising on the types of stories that would generate some money? My guess is yes. If he had no involvement in the process then the CEO wouldn't have any need to resign. But she did.

 

They know they're being targeted by the Republicans right now, and this was a quick way to absorb some of the blow herself.

 

I think the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that he had influence over ME/ATC before disparaging their journalistic integrity because of some slightly hyperbolic statements by someone in charge of another department to a fake Muslim organization.

So basically anyone who questions the almighty science is uneducated? Anyone who believes in creationism is unintelligent?

Yes

No, I still think you need to explain how the VP of fundraising exerted influence over editorial control of NPR's news programs. Just saying "VP's pal around, of course he did!" doesn't really count.

 

Of course not...but pretending he had no influence at all is silly. While it would be impossible to list specifics (and you know this), sticking your head in the sand and pretending there was no way he had influence as a money raiser isn't smart, either.

So basically anyone who questions the almighty science is uneducated? Anyone who believes in creationism is unintelligent?

 

Anyone who actively and routinely denounces and derides science and rejects evolution in favor of creationism is anti-intellectual, yes.

They know they're being targeted by the Republicans right now, and this was a quick way to absorb some of the blow herself.

 

I think the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that he had influence over ME/ATC before disparaging their journalistic integrity because of some slightly hyperbolic statements by someone in charge of another department to a fake Muslim organization.

 

That first part makes no sense. She's not a politician. She's a business executive. If he had no influence she could have said "he's just a lowly executive with his own thoughts and opinions. We clearly don't agree with him."

 

And slightly hyperbolic statements? Come on man, he flat out called a huge group of people gun-toting racists.

Anyone who actively and routinely denounces and derides science and rejects evolution in favor of creationism is anti-intellectual, yes.

 

I don't think calling them anti-intellectual is proper in this case. I know some VERY smart people who are very religious...it doesn't make them anti-intellectual as much as, IMO, it makes the purposefully ignorant, in that they are choosing to "ignore certain things", because, to them, their faith means that much to them.

 

Calling them stupid, IMO, is equally ignorant.

So basically anyone who questions the almighty science is uneducated? Anyone who believes in creationism is unintelligent?

 

No, not all Creationists are unintelligent. Some are intelligent but ignorant. Some are intelligent but religiously crazy.

 

I don't think calling them anti-intellectual is proper in this case. I know some VERY smart people who are very religious...it doesn't make them anti-intellectual as much as, IMO, it makes the purposefully ignorant, in that they are choosing to "ignore certain things", because, to them, their faith means that much to them.

 

I think it is. Rejection of evolution and belief in creationism requires the rejection of the best-known system for understanding the world around us in favor of emotional beliefs. Keep in mind how many of them campaign to get evolution out of schools or, at the very least, creationism put in. It's anti-intellectual at its core.

 

Calling them stupid, IMO, is equally ignorant.

 

I didn't. I don't think, for instance, that Kurt Wise is a stupid man.

And slightly hyperbolic statements? Come on man, he flat out called a huge group of people gun-toting racists.

 

There's a lot of gun-toting racists who hate the President and have adopted the Tea Party label.

There's a lot of gun-toting racists who hate the President and have adopted the Tea Party label.

 

There are gun toting racists that are Liberal Democrats, too. You just don't know any...but that doesn't meant they don't exist.

Anyone who actively and routinely denounces and derides science and rejects evolution in favor of creationism is anti-intellectual, yes.

 

Nice, continue to define elitist for me. And you people wonder why there's such a divide in this country?

 

And I don't listen or read any of those people you've mentioned, but I've never gotten the sense that they're anti-science generally, just against some particular set of issues. But regardless, that doesn't make the unintelligent. I'm guessing Beck is an extremely intelligent guy to get where he is.

I think it is. Rejection of evolution and belief in creationism requires the rejection of the best-known system for understanding the world around us in favor of emotional beliefs. Keep in mind how many of them campaign to get evolution out of schools or, at the very least, creationism put in. It's anti-intellectual at its core.

 

Exactly what I said. And it's called ignorance.

Nice, continue to define elitist for me. And you people wonder why there's such a divide in this country?

 

And I don't listen or read any of those people you've mentioned, but I've never gotten the sense that they're anti-science generally, just against some particular set of issues. But regardless, that doesn't make the unintelligent.

 

I didn't say it makes them unintelligent.

 

But rejection of evolution is anti-intellectual. Period. It requires active denial of well-established knowledge in favor of emotional and religious beliefs. Throw that in with them always targeting science for cuts, mocking or ridiculing funny-sounding research programs and the routine derision of "elites" trying to tell them what's what when they can just follow their "common sense" and you've got a pretty strong base of anti-intellectualism.

 

 

I'm guessing Beck is an extremely intelligent guy to get where he is.

 

You don't need to be intelligent to basically rip off the plot of Network.

Exactly what I said. And it's called ignorance.

 

Ignorance implies that they aren't aware of the knowledge. Or that they aren't willingly and actively ignorant, choosing to remain uninformed instead of pursuing knowledge in an intellectual manner.

With the way you guys have responded i'd agree with elitist part. More importantly, I'm not denying there aren't morons out there, but I dispute that the party/movement is a bunch of unintelligent hillbillies, or that they're any dumber than the left.

 

Never said that, never would.

 

I don't think calling them anti-intellectual is proper in this case. I know some VERY smart people who are very religious...it doesn't make them anti-intellectual as much as, IMO, it makes the purposefully ignorant, in that they are choosing to "ignore certain things", because, to them, their faith means that much to them.

 

Calling them stupid, IMO, is equally ignorant.

To me, purposefully ignorant, and expecting others to be the same, is the same thing as anti-intellectual. That was my point. Its not about smart versus dumb/

 

There are gun toting racists that are Liberal Democrats, too. You just don't know any...but that doesn't meant they don't exist.

 

I'd imagine that's a pretty rare duck since anti-racism is sort of a key part of being a liberal and being anti-gun is pretty common. But I'm sure there's plenty of racist, gun-toting Democrats.

 

Look, it's not like everyone who disapproves of Obama is racist. But there are a lot of racist people pissed at Obama, and they get wrapped up in the main anti-Obama movement, which is the tea party.

Never said that, never would.

 

 

To me, purposefully ignorant, and expecting others to be the same, is the same thing as anti-intellectual. That was my point. Its not about smart versus dumb/

 

This shows most of us are simply arguing semantics at this point. When people say intelligent vs anti-intelligent, I personally read that as the SAME as smart vs dumb.

Nice, continue to define elitist for me.

 

I'll give it a shot. You're elitist when you think your particular view of the world is more important than well established facts that are universal across all cultures. Just because you happened to be raised by parents of a certain religion doesn't make the world view of that particular religion more important than other religions or actual science which transcends all of them.

I'd imagine that's a pretty rare duck since anti-racism is sort of a key part of being a liberal and being anti-gun is pretty common. But I'm sure there's plenty of racist, gun-toting Democrats.

 

Look, it's not like everyone who disapproves of Obama is racist. But there are a lot of racist people pissed at Obama, and they get wrapped up in the main anti-Obama movement, which is the tea party.

 

My point was this sort of garbage exists on both sides.

 

There a lot of racist people that voted for Obama and love Obama for no reason other than he's black, they know nothing of his politics, nothing of his history, and care nothing of how educated he is. These ignorant types exist on both sides.

I'll give it a shot. You're elitist when you're slightly better at everything, can get better seats, have a better car, or know better people.

 

Fixed.

This shows most of us are simply arguing semantics at this point. When people say intelligent vs anti-intelligent, I personally read that as the SAME as smart vs dumb.

 

Who's saying that? You and jenks keep bringing in these terms.

This shows most of us are simply arguing semantics at this point. When people say intelligent vs anti-intelligent, I personally read that as the SAME as smart vs dumb.

No one said that either - or at least I didn't. Intellectual is not the same as intelligent, they are two different words with two different meanings.

 

Purposefully ignorant versus anti-intellectual, sure, I'll agree that semantics. But intelligence is a different thing.

 

Who's saying that? You and jenks keep bringing in these terms.

 

Oh, nevermind.

My point was this sort of garbage exists on both sides.

 

There a lot of racist people that voted for Obama and love Obama for no reason other than he's black, they know nothing of his politics, nothing of his history, and care nothing of how educated he is. These ignorant types exist on both sides.

 

Ok, even if I concede this equivalence to you, doesn't that just mean the gun-toting racists statement wasn't really all that bad, just a little hyperbolic and otherwise inconsequential?

No one said that either - or at least I didn't. Intellectual is not the same as intelligent, they are two different words with two different meanings.

 

Purposefully ignorant versus anti-intellectual, sure, I'll agree that semantics. But intelligence is a different thing.

 

Fine, that's what I meant...sorry it got lost in translation here.