View Poll Results: Which Democrat has the highest IQ?

Voters
15. You may not vote on this poll
  • Harry Ried

    1 6.67%
  • Hillary Clinton

    9 60.00%
  • Ted Kennedy

    2 13.33%
  • Howard Dean

    3 20.00%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 52
  1.    #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I guess this is a good example for a highly stupid and denigrating POST. (Note I did not say anything about you in general, and nothing about people who voted for Bush.)
    Thanks for playing Highly Stupid and Denigrating Posts
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    What you mean is spelled Democrat, not democrat.

    So what you are saying is that there is no Democrat with an IQ above 99? I guess this is a good example for a highly stupid and denigrating POST. (Note I did not say anything about you in general, and nothing about people who voted for Bush.)
    Most of your posts fall into this category Clulup. Get off your high horse. You're the most condescending, denigrating SOB in this forum. Give us a break. The difference between you and me, is I'll come right out and call you an ***, where you like to hide your attacks behind your intellectual ramblings.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Most of your posts fall into this category Clulup. Get off your high horse. You're the most condescending, denigrating SOB in this forum.
    If most of my posts fall into the category of denigrating, it should be easy for you to show some nice examples where I denigrate whole groups of people (such as all Democrats or Republicans or Americans), and not just criticize certain policies and actions (based on arguments and solid data).
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    If most of my posts fall into the category of denigrating, it should be easy for you to show some nice examples where I denigrate whole groups of people (such as all Democrats or Republicans or Americans), and not just criticize certain policies and actions (based on arguments and solid data).
    I'm not speaking policies or politics. I'm talking about your attitude when replying to people. Outside of AFLAC, you are the master of

    If someone disagrees with your view, you seems almost personally offended.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    I'm not speaking policies or politics. I'm talking about your attitude when replying to people. Outside of AFLAC, you are the master of

    If someone disagrees with your view, you seems almost personally offended.
    Quotes, examples please... if "most of my posts" fall into the categrory "denigrating", it must be really easy for you to find examples, no?
    If someone disagrees with your view, you seems almost personally offended.
    Again, please show some examples, the more convincing, the better. Hopefully I can learn something...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  6. #26  
    Review the Climate or Evolution/Watchmaker threads...examples like this
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...3&postcount=31

    or the first sentence here.
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...0&postcount=62
    Always the sarcastic tone of your rebuttals.

    I wonder if I could search your posts with ? Probably easier than going through 3000 individual posts...


    Okay, maybe not "Most", since "Most" of your posts are in AFLAC, I'll correct myself.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Review the Climate or Evolution/Watchmaker threads...examples like this
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...3&postcount=31
    Let me see, here I wrote
    "I guess also in the case of evolution you know better" ... "BobbyMike read "The Blind Watchmaker", which details the basic mechanism of evolution: random mutation and directed selection. I guess it is fair to assume that he knows evolution is not just random."
    This is what you call denigrating? Sorry, I think very few people would call this a denigrating statement. Besides, the statement is also factually correct.
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    or the first sentence here.
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...0&postcount=62
    Always the sarcastic tone of your rebuttals.
    Ok, here I wrote
    You seem to be under the impression that the calculations behind evolution have not been thoroughly tested and thoroughly thought through in theory as well as tested and checked in nature... Clearly, you totally underestimate the processes on which science is based on.
    You call that denigrating or condescending, specially towards a whole group of people? Besides, I am sure Shopharim, to whom this was directed, knows very well how I meant what I wrote. We have opposing views on many things, but we get along very well.

    Since those seem to be the worst examples of me being denigrating you could find, I tend to think you are either very touchy, or your claim about me being denigrating in many post (most posts, as you originally said) does not hold water.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Let me see, here I wrote This is what you call denigrating? Sorry, I think very few people would call this a denigrating statement. Besides, the statement is also factually correct.Ok, here I wrote You call that denigrating or condescending, specially towards a whole group of people? Besides, I am sure Shopharim, to whom this was directed, knows very well how I meant what I wrote. We have opposing views on many things, but we get along very well.
    Once again, I must spell it out for you, I am speaking of your tone with PEOPLE YOU REPLY TO. Not groups of whole people. This is twice I've said that now in this thread. Perhaps it is because I should be asleep right now, that I am not making myself clear?


    You somehow left off the last sentence:
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Sorry if it sounded rude, that was not my goal.
    Why did you apologize? (The apology wasn't even directed at Shop, so why he was brought in is a mystery.) That is common of your rebuttals. That arrogant, "I'm better and know more than you" attitude that you say we Americans (or at least some of us) seem to have also consumes you.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Since those seem to be the worst examples of me being denigrating you could find, I tend to think you are either very touchy, or your claim about me being denigrating in many post (most posts, as you originally said) does not hold water.
    I never said these were the worst, just the first I came across, before realizing, why the Hell am I going to review 3700 posts of yours? You're not that important to me...

    I know your attitude. I'm sure most others that you have disagreed with know of this as well.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    That arrogant, "I'm better and know more than you" attitude that you say we Americans (or at least some of us) seem to have also consumes you.
    First you claimed most of my statements are denigrating, without being able to show a convincing (IMHO) example. Now you bring up something new, that

    (A) I claim Americans have the attitude "I'm better and know more than you" and
    (B) that I have the same attitude?

    Regarding (A): That's just a new unfounded accusation of yours, or can you provide examples?
    Regarding (B): ditto. I don't feel that I am better than others. Maybe I do know a bit more about evolution, biology in general, global warming, and that stuff. After all, it's not my fault that this was my subject. I readily provide sources for the things I claim, usually they hold water.

    There really isn't a link to things like "all Democrats have an IQ below 100"...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  10.    #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    There really isn't a link to things like "all Democrats have an IQ below 100"...
    Ummm...clu. That's not the topic of this thread. That was a post by santa. You bit. Instead of going on and on, pm santa and ask him to cite his source
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    That story took place six years ago. It seems old and boring to me by now, are you planning to whine about it forever?
    Yes, when libs bring it up first. The story may be old, but I just saw the picture for the first time yesterday!
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    First you claimed most of my statements are denigrating, without being able to show a convincing (IMHO) example. Now you bring up something new, that

    (A) I claim Americans have the attitude "I'm better and know more than you" and
    (B) that I have the same attitude?

    Regarding (A): That's just a new unfounded accusation of yours, or can you provide examples?
    Regarding (B): ditto. I don't feel that I am better than others. Maybe I do know a bit more about evolution, biology in general, global warming, and that stuff. After all, it's not my fault that this was my subject. I readily provide sources for the things I claim, usually they hold water.

    There really isn't a link to things like "all Democrats have an IQ below 100"...
    Regarding (A) and (B): I was able to think of an example in under 10 seconds and find it in the following outtake from clulup post regarding Americans:

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    For instance, you take yourself far too importantly (Bob-C and his illusions about the size of SBC and Verizon are just one example). Most Americans know little about the outside world and therefore think they are the only ones who do things right.
    The link to the thread is http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...901#post601901

    The synopsis is:

    - nudist claims the US is being passed in the tech/telecommunications industries by other countries. I think Taiwan may have been one.
    - I point to companies such as Microsoft, IBM, Verizon and SBC as being the leaders in their respective industries and all being American companies.
    - Clulup claims Vodafone is largest telco company in the world.
    - An argument ensues.
    - Clulup posts one of his "reliable" sources from Forbes and points at one of Vodafone's numbers calling me clueless.
    - After a few days of my not checking the website, Clulup asks if I missed the post and reiterates my cluelessness.
    - After 5 seconds of looking at Clulup's reliable source entitled Forbes 500 largest companies, I notice that one column on his "supporting evidence", has Verizon ranked roughly 300 spots higher than Vodafone at 29 largest company in the world making it the largest telco. Another column coveniently "overlooked" by clulup has Verizon listed with $2.7B in profits vs Vodafone's $15B in losses.
    - I post a reply pointing all this out circling the columns of clulup's sources so that he can properly interpret the evidence that he dug up and pointed to when calling me "clueless".
    - Clulup reads the post and admits he's wrong. NOT! Clulup ignores the reply and acts like it never happened. That's the thing about arrogance. It never admits being wrong.

    In European terms, I will paraphrase a quote from the legendary science fiction icon, Doctor Who....

    "The difference between intelligent people and stupid people is that intelligent people change their views to fit the facts, whereas stupid people change the facts to fit their views."
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  13. #33  
    BTW, I refuse to vote in that poll. There is no logical choice. The poll might as well read:

    Which of Pamela Anderson's boob's are bigger?:

    A) Left one
    B) Right one

    And the four choices in that Democrats poll are all equally large boobs.
    ROOTING for WebOS makes me more sympathetic to Cubs fans.
  14. #34  
    I won't be voting since I find that the words Democrat and High IQ appear to be an oxymoron.
    The only thing that separates the men from the boys...is the lessons they learn.
    www.planetmills.com
  15. #35  
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...8&postcount=25
    Note his smiley and denigrating comment to Claire. As if it was her fault the article misspelt Rheineck.

    And this:
    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...4&postcount=26
    with his classic line to Claire:
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    But I know, I am wasting my time here. A world in which teenagers don't have Jeeps is certainly not worth living for. It's definitely better to pretend all of those silly things climatologists invent don't exist.
    No...not too denigrating...
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    First you claimed most of my statements are denigrating, without being able to show a convincing (IMHO) example. Now you bring up something new, that...
    See, this is the problem so many of us see that you are unwilling to see - you have no Humble Opinions. Is your fear of looking in the mirror driven by the picture you'll see or are you still just too young to recognize you don't know everything?
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    Regarding (A) and (B): I was able to think of an example in under 10 seconds and find it in the following outtake from clulup post regarding Americans:...
    Yeah, indeed that sentence, when taken out of context, sounds a bit harsh, SORRY for that. However, I invite you to read the whole post, which is actually a praise for the US...
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    My view of the US is largely positive. I guess it would rank quite high in my list of countries I would want to live in, say top six or so. For instance, I would far more like living in the US than, say, North Korea.

    Jokes aside, what I like about the US is e.g. the entrepreneurial attitude, the optimism, the fact that they get things going faster than Europe (Serbia/Kosovo comes to mind). Given the size of your army, I am also glad we share the same values (democracy, freedom of speech, etc.), by and large. Most people outside of the US had a positive or even very positive view of the US, but I can tell you this has changed a lot sice the other guy moved into White House (I know you don't care, I am just mentioning it).

    Of course we mostly discuss things where we don't agree, so you get the impression I am anti-everything US, which is not true. Nevertheless, I do see quite a few things which would make me think twice about living in the US.

    For instance, you take yourself far too importantly (Bob-C and his illusions about the size of SBC and Verizon are just one example). Most Americans know little about the outside world and therefore think they are the only ones who do things right. For instance, they have no idea that murder, rape, assault, abortion, teenage pregnacy, traffic death, etc., are record high in the US vs. e.g. Europe. Would I really want to go to a country where this is so? Americans only see the differences in economical output, but they have no idea about the fact that e.g. the people in France or Germany work FAR less than Americans and therefore have the greater quality of life (one can overdo everthing, 35 hours per week with five weeks of vacation per year is probably not enough, see France and Germany, but still). There are lots of other subjects where you are totally weird, e.g. regarding death penalty for mentally disabled or underage people, or the fact that people are allowed to go to the army and die in a war three years before they are allowed to order a beer in a bar, but this was supposed to be a post about positives...

    Oh, science: you have some very good universities (the top ones are very good), and there is some really good science and development going on (even if the number of Nobel laureates per capita is really low when compared to other nations, but still ).
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    The link to the thread is http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...901#post601901

    The synopsis is:

    - nudist claims the US is being passed in the tech/telecommunications industries by other countries. I think Taiwan may have been one.
    - I point to companies such as Microsoft, IBM, Verizon and SBC as being the leaders in their respective industries and all being American companies.
    - Clulup claims Vodafone is largest telco company in the world.
    - An argument ensues....
    Sorry for repeating this, but it is true that you were clueless about the size of Vodafone vs. Verizon. We were speaking about company sizes measured by their market capitalization, and the market cap of Vodafone in fact IS (or was, then) 79 % larger than that of Verizon, despite you saying
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob-C
    As for the discussion about sizes of telco corporations, I nearly fell out of my seat when Clulup claimed that Vodafone was 70% larger than Verizon. As for who is the largest telco corporation, it is without a doubt either Verizon or SBC. Most likely it is Verizon ... BTW, I am employed by Verizon and everyone here is asking what kind of clueless person thought Vodafone was 70% larger than Verizon.
    So I could not help noting the irony in you calling those who thought Vodafone was larger than Verizon clueless... Of course it is also true that the profit of Vodafone was smaller than that of Verizon in that particular year, but profit does not say anything about size, and the discussion was specifically about size.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  18. santas's Avatar
    Posts
    624 Posts
    Global Posts
    641 Global Posts
    #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    What you mean is spelled Democrat, not democrat.

    So what you are saying is that there is no Democrat with an IQ above 99? I guess this is a good example for a highly stupid and denigrating POST. (Note I did not say anything about you in general, and nothing about people who voted for Bush.)
    I thought a stupid poll deserved a stupid response.

    In fact just about all Democrats are smarter than at least one Republican:

    George W.

    Of course that still might mean we're all below 99
    Less than 400 posts to get my own little treo icon!
  19. #39  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Ummm...clu. That's not the topic of this thread.
    True, so let me come back to the topic (Democrats and their low IQ, and generally making fun of Democrats).

    Why do you feel the need of constantly making fun of Dems? After all you won the election, 51% vs. 49%. The Republicans control the government and the legislative powers (Supreme Court to follow?). Some ask for graceful losers, but you seem to lack grace even when winning.

    I wonder, is this making fun of Dems an expression of your frustration that your government is not making progress in any particular field, although the Republicans have full control?
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  20.    #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    True, so let me come back to the topic (Democrats and their low IQ, and generally making fun of Democrats).
    You are really having trouble grasping the poll, is it a language thing? I see a poll that shows four leaders in the democrat party. The poll is really simple. Of the four people listed, which has the highest IQ. Let’s use this as an example. Howard Dean is an MD. That would mean he went to medical school. I’m not sure, but I don’t think you’re a doctor or have done all that medical school stuff, so if you were on the list, that would make Howard smarter then you. See how easy that was.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    Why do you feel the need of constantly making fun of Dems? After all you won the election, 51% vs. 49%. The Republicans control the government and the legislative powers (Supreme Court to follow?). Some ask for graceful losers, but you seem to lack grace even when winning.
    I guess my “lack of grace” pales in comparison to what people have been posting of your arrogance. I didn’t bother to “cite” any examples because those posts should still be fresh in your mind. Many happened yesterday.

    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I wonder, is this making fun of Dems an expression of your frustration that your government is not making progress in any particular field, although the Republicans have full control?
    You seem to be more frustrated with my government then I am. Sorry you cant vote here, but you do have an opportunity to express your opinions.


    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    My posts were about Bush, the war in Iraq, Guantanamo, and other subjects where I disagree with current US policies. That has nothing to do with GENERAL anti-Americanism. I always talk about certain policies or actions, I never denigrate whole groups of people….
    That to me is really a silly statement.

    By defination denigrate
    1. To attack the character or reputation of; speak ill of; defame.
    2. To disparage; belittle: The critics have denigrated our efforts.

    So by defination, when you belittle the President of the United States, the U.S. and it’s policies you belittle, disparage, the 59 million Americans that supported him with their vote. You try and play these semantics games, you selectively edit posts and sources to support your efforts to belittle, disparage those that have opinions other then yours.

    I remember the article about the Muslim families that were denied citizenship in Switzerland after living there for 20 years and the reason was because they were “"less integrated into society and unaccustomed to the Swiss civil life". Swiss human rights groups have been trying to amend citizenship laws, but the demands hit a dead end due to stern efforts by rightist groups, that argue such amendments would allow large numbers of Muslims to become citizens.”

    Rather than discuss the story, you brushed it off because there was a mis-spelling of the name of the town. Are you part of the group in favor of broadening citizenship requirements?

    Let’s get the record straight Mr I never denigrate whole groups of people…

    Peace Out
    Well behaved women rarely make history
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions