Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - How these gibbering numbskulls came to dominate Washington

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

How these gibbering numbskulls came to dominate Washington
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:00 pm Post subject:

daskalos wrote:

Your dismissal of FDR and JFK as intellectuals shows your Freudian Slip, I'm afraid.

No, not "my dismissal." And it does not show what you want to make it show; rather, it just means that I follow the dominant historiography on these two points and do not wish to contest each and every conclusion that historians have reached. I also think you fall for the publicity and the myths that you want to believe on these two figures -- and consequently miss the actual men. For example...

Quote:

The New Deal reflected [FDR's] complex personal background. Born an only child to a socially prominent Anglo-Dutch family in upstate New York, Roosevelt never had to struggle for money, status, security, or dignity. Like many young men of patrician roots, he viewed self-made millionaires and industrialists as unscrupulous. Roosevelt had an easy self-assurance that disarmed almost everyone he met. Although not a deep thinker, he relished fiery intellects and recruited them as his advisers. His broad but undisciplined mind sought practical solutions rather than detailed theoretical analyses of vexing social problems. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes succinctly described Roosevelt as "a second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament."

Cited in standard undergrad text and background reader: Present Tense: the United States since 1945, 3d ed.

Also check out G. Vidal's Washington, D.C. on JFK.

caniff

Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map

Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 10:23 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Quote:

Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes succinctly described Roosevelt as "a second-class intellect, but a first-class temperament."

This is true. Eleanor was the brains behind the whole operation.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 11:03 pm Post subject:

Yes, she was the one.

Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:13 am Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Kuros wrote:

Its the GUARDIAN. As much as I like to take potshots at the British, we cannot possibly stain their whole society with the one-sided dreck from the Guardian editorial pages.

I see two processes here: (1) this British writer is playing on sweeping antiAmerican stereotypes that originated at least as early as G. Greene's Quiet American; and (2) you are objecting to my stereotyping British elites through this British-elite mouthpiece. All we seem to have here, and all over this messageboard, is a collection of essentialized stereotypes, one after the other.

And actually, you are right. There are other British elites, people such as A. Badger and C. Andrew in the historical profession, for example, who I know for a fact do not share these views, such as this writer's, G. Greene's, or C. Hitchens's, to cite but three, one iota.

But my point remains as valid as this writer's, a guy who condemns us as ignorant and stupid based on a selective review of presidents, a C. Hitchens-like disdain for religion, and some Americans' scientific-knoweldge shortcomings. This is an ignorant and stupid article, Kuros. And it might be more significant than that. Someone wrote it, an editorial staff and an assistant managing editor, or whatever the British call them, reviewed and approved it, the Guardian published it, and millions of eager Britons eagerly bought it and gobbled it up.

What does this say about them?

I was astounded that anyone thought fit to elect a goon like Dubwa. The Brits used to laugh their heads off about Ronnie Reagan in the 80s, but Dubya has made him look an intellectual giant! And again I was very surprised (though by now I shouldn't be) that Palin could even have been considered for a VP. They are not the creation of British whim and prejudice, Gopher. They're your homegrown political elite.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:42 am Post subject:

mises wrote:

It said "in particular fundamentalist religion". Sure, maybe that doesn't make you stupid, but you have to be dead stupid to believe it.

Juregen wrote:

Not religion per se. the stress is on Fundamental religious believe.

Fundamentalist take the word of God as finite and see no reason to explore any further. The role of man is set est voila, no one knows any better.

Modern Society thrive on asking questions and changing perspectives, otherwise defined as growth. Fundamentalists will fight against any change imaginable.

The OP's article wrote:

One theme is both familiar and clear: religion - in particular fundamentalist religion - makes you stupid.

Yeah, I was right.

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:13 am Post subject:

Well, really, I'm just trying to be polite. Kuros, head on over to your local mega church this Sunday. Take a look around you. Stupid people from wall to wall, just waiting to open their wallets and close their minds.

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 8:04 am Post subject:

mises wrote:

Well, really, I'm just trying to be polite. Kuros, head on over to your local mega church this Sunday. Take a look around you. Stupid people from wall to wall, just waiting to open their wallets and close their minds.

Since most American people consider themselves to be religious, and a large percentage think of themselves as "born again," any politician who wants to be elected has to support the right to freedom of religion, attend church, have recognized ministers as public supporters, and at least appear to be a God fearing Christian as a matter of personal belief.

Privateer

Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Location: Easy Street.

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:25 am Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

But my point remains as valid as this writer's, a guy who condemns us as ignorant and stupid based on a selective review of presidents, a C. Hitchens-like disdain for religion, and some Americans' scientific-knoweldge shortcomings. This is an ignorant and stupid article, Kuros. And it might be more significant than that. Someone wrote it, an editorial staff and an assistant managing editor, or whatever the British call them, reviewed and approved it, the Guardian published it, and millions of eager Britons eagerly bought it and gobbled it up.

What does this say about them?

It says they watch the spectacle of American politics on TV and can't believe their eyes?

The point of the article is that candidates deliberately try to appear stupider than they are in American politics in order to increase their appeal. I think it's just another way in which politicians avoid talking about many important political issues, because in actuality there is so little real political choice. It's either extreme right wing or somewhat less extreme right wing (although it's still worth going for the less extreme).

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:50 am Post subject:

mises wrote:

I'll take it you've got no scientific studies to support OP's article's claims.

Quote:

The point of the article is that candidates deliberately try to appear stupider than they are in American politics in order to increase their appeal. I think it's just another way in which politicians avoid talking about many important political issues

That's true. Its also true that candidates DO talk about the issues especially when they are trying to get specialists to back their proposals. We haven't seen a sitting President do this in awhile because Dubya never employs this tactic.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:52 am Post subject:

Big_Bird wrote:

They're your homegrown political elite.

No, they are not. In many ways, they are mere frontmen. Elected officials do not necessarily represent America's political elite. Look to prestigious institutions such as the Council on Foreign Relations for that. As far as elections go, look to the so-called spin doctors.

In any case, this entire thread and all that it represents returns to the snobbish elitism that I will continue to scorn here. Who do you people think you are?

Last edited by Gopher on Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:54 am; edited 1 time in total

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:53 am Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

They're your homegrown political elite.

Big Bird and her article are two years too late. Obama is not anti-intellectual on any level.

Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:56 am Post subject:

Agreed. Not only not anti-intellectual but also clearly possessing a curious, outward-focused mind. No stereotype ever holds, Big_Bird. Also will add other elite institutions that influence Washington. I already cited CFR. Add ABA, who plays a role in Supreme Court nominations, for example, and AMA, among others.

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

mises wrote:

I'll take it you've got no scientific studies to support OP's article's claims.

I haven't, and won't, look. But you can be sure that there are "studies" that would point to both sides. Anyways. Check out the mega church near you.

Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:50 pm Post subject:

Kuros wrote:

Gopher wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

They're your homegrown political elite.

Big Bird and her article are two years too late. Obama is not anti-intellectual on any level.

I think the writer of the article recognises very well that Obama is not a village idiot. But you are ignoring that it is possible RIGHT NOW for someone like Sarah Palin to be proffered up as VP. And that is quite amazing.

Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

Posted: Tue Oct 28, 2008 3:51 pm Post subject:

Gopher wrote:

Who do you people think you are?

Bloody marvelous! Twisted Evil

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe