Conservatives are often presented as being somehow less-than-brilliant. On MSNBC recently, Janeane Garofalo asserted, "The limbic brain inside a right-winger, or Republican, or Conservative, or your average white-power activist... the limbic brain is much larger in their headspace than in a reasonable person, and it's pushing against the frontal lobe, so their synapses are misfiring.... It is a neurological problem that we are dealing with."
Yet when the positions of Conservatives and Liberals in the modern world are compared, it is clearly evident that Liberalism is wholly composed of anti-intellectualism. Every single logical error known to man is duplicated continuously by liberals.
Garofalo herself is an example. She has nothing meaningful to say about any political issue whatsoever, so she simply practices the attack against the man error, called in philosophy the error of the ad hominem attack. She assumes, with no evidence other than her own prejudices, that those who disagree with her are retarded with swollen brains, racists, violent, and irrational.
Yet she offers nothing other than constant slander to prove her points.
Further, these "brilliant" liberals are known for their own personal incompetence (Carter, Clinton, and now Obama), hardly the mark of intelligence.
Liberalism constantly pleads two inconsistent sides of the same issue. This is never more clearly in evidence than in every single assertion made by feminists.
Feminists simultaneously offer that women are capable of anything that men can do. Then they demand affirmative action and governmental subsidies so that women can get busy doing what men are already doing.
Feminists simultaneously offer that women are incapable of lying about sexual violence, then demand that evidentiary standards for such allegations be lowered because, too often, when a woman makes an allegation her allegation is wholly unsubstantiated or contains volumes of contradictory testimony.
Even economically, this very week Barack Hussein Muhammad bin Obama demonstrated his utter comfort with inconsistency when he urged "fiscal responsibility" by demanding that his cabinet find a way to cut $100 million from its operating budget. This, after he singlehandedly has proposed enough spending in less than 100 days in office to double the entire federal budget, built from the year 1776 to the end of the Bush administration.
John McCain and George W. Bush spent much of the time period from 2001-2008 warning Congress that Democratic initiatives enacted under Bill Clinton to lend mortgage money to minorities who could not afford to buy homes had the potential to wipe out the American economy. Democrats like Barney Frank and Charles Schumer actively argued that Republicans were wrong in their warnings, and Barack Obama conveniently ignored such warnings. Today, of course, Democrats say that the meltdown was George W. Bush's fault.
Finally, Democrats are the masters of the "Big Lie" concept of Goebbels, who said, when he was a Nazi propagandist, "Tell a lie big enough, long enough, and people will believe it." Perhaps the greatest illustration of this is the continued warbling of ignorant libs that there was "no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq." Of course, it is a long-established fact that sarin gas was found in Iraq, and sarin gas is a "weapon of mass destruction."
So given that all of the evidence and logic is on the side of Conservatives, I once thought that Democrats were merely liars - that nobody was as stupid as they constantly pretend to be. But then today I ran across this quote from one of the Godfathers of Liberalism in America. And this quote, coupled with the 100-year history of liberalism in America, simply makes me think that Liberalism/Marxism/being a Democrat/whatever is simply an intentional, morally-culpable excursion into utter stupidity.
William O. Douglas was a Supreme Court Justice for nearly 37 years (the longest-serving justice ever), retiring in 1975. He is widely regarded as the greatest liberal legal mind of his age. University of Chicago president Robert Maynard Hitchens called Douglas "the most outstanding law professor in the nation" before his appointment to the Supreme Court.
Yet, what was Douglas' view of his own "decision making" from the bench?
"At the constitutional level where we work, 90 percent of any decision is emotional. The rational part of us supplies the reasons for supporting our predilections."
Did you catch that?
Mr. Brainy, excuse me, JUSTICE BRAINY, said, "I come to my liberalism honestly. I make up my mind based on my emotions then I just use my mind to figure out some way to justify what I already want to do." One of the leading "intellectuals" of the liberal movement admits - well, he admits he isn't really an intellectual. He just "feels" things. He is led by his emotions, not his mind. Sort of like your average 17-year old girl.
Perhaps it is not the Conservatives who are the anti-intellectuals, Ms. Garofalo?