The Ignorance Of America
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Huckabee, Religion, United States, VideoJust watch.
These aren’t bad people, they’re just ridiculously ill-informed. But there are a lot of similar views out there and if the Democrats think November will be a cake walk, well, take this stuff lightly at your own peril.
(h/t: C&L)
This entry was posted on Monday, February 18th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Hillary, Huckabee, Religion, United States, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 18th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Yes, they are bad people. In today’s world to believe as they do you have to be willfully ignorant. What that old woman’s fellow church member fit into her existing bigotry so she never questions it. The same for the others. My family came from that part of the country and when I used to be there I heard more than enough to where I always laugh when I hear about the “New South”. The video just shows that nothing has really changed since the last time I was there.
February 18th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
I honestly tried to sit through the whole thing, but I just could not do it. God help us if the majority of the people in our country display this level of ignorance.
February 18th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Thats one of the most tragic and disgusting things I’ve ever seen.
February 18th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I second everything Jim S said. Ignorance of this magnitude is unacceptable. How many people wanna bet the girl was “home schooled.” I was just starting to have my faith in people restored until I saw that garbage. Damn, I feel like crying.
February 18th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
No guys, they aren’t bad people, they’re just REALLY ignorant. So the question then is what’s going to change their mind? Well, hopefully the facts. If given the choice between something somebody told them that’s wrong and the cold hard facts, IF they choose the lie then that’s when they turn into the willfully ignorant…and that is indeed a choice to side with the bad over the good.
Again, there are a lot of ignorant Americans out there, and that’s what Obama and/or Hillary could be going up against in November.
February 18th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
How would you propose a liberal minded person from Minnesota ought to go about changing the minds of far-right leaning people in Tennessee?
February 18th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Yeah, they are bad people. People who don’t think are bad. They make good animals, but they are shit for people.
February 18th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
I am a Christian, but I never really understood what Fundamentalism is about until I watched this clip. These people are pretty fanatical about what they believe and aren’t really interested in the truth about Obama. I pray that the poor girl gets a Greyhound bus out of there after high school and discovers the real world.
February 18th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
Key point to remember here re: winning in November: while these folks are certainly sheltered and ignorant, they are in no way potential Dem voters, save Jesus running on the D ticket.
Whatever else commenters might think, and I agree with Justin’s assessment [ignorant, not bad], wasting time worrying about them is silly.
February 18th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
I think the time has come to pose the following question: Who poses a greater threat to the future of America, radical Muslims or radical Christians?
I personally fear the enemy in my own backyard more than I fear someone far, far away.
After the past seven years of religious insanity in the world, I appreciate my atheism even more.
February 19th, 2008 at 12:56 am
Hmmmm, there are just as many ill-informed people voting democrat. Go interview just about any union member. Same thing, they are good hard working people, just ill-informed… Anyone who thinks the government can create jobs and is against businesses is ill-informed. Businesses create jobs, not the government.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:27 am
These people are no more ignorant or opinionated than the rabid liberals who:
- embrace a partisan, PC reading of foreign policy that is just as unrealistic as any “end times” talk
- are childishly unable to make tough but necessary choices (like drilling for oil in a nature preserve)
- drape the mantle of pseudo-scientific authority around their pet ideologies, with little real rational analysis (”everybody knows” that global warming has been “proven” – as have the assertions that “all white people are racist” and “homosexuality is genetic”….. except for the actual researchers, who don’t believe any of these assertions).
- shout down other opinions while self-righteously claiming they are Speaking Truth to Power.
- heavy-handedly impose far more of their own ideology on other citizens than the religious Right ever has.
I’m not Christian. But I’ll take these Christians over leftie liberals any day. I know I am safer as a minority surrounded by these folks than I would be if Euro-trash liberals were in control.
February 19th, 2008 at 5:46 am
Justin – I disagree, these are bad people – some of the worst actually.
There’s over 3.5 billion not “one god” believers in this world for a reason – unfortunately not many of them are in this country. I recall hearing about a headline in an Australian newspaper during the whole Monica fiasco = “Thank God We Got the Criminals and They Got the Puritans”.
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.
But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.
~Buddha
February 19th, 2008 at 7:18 am
[...] Donklephant [...]
February 19th, 2008 at 8:06 am
I am suggesting “Enlightenment Rides” to the South. “Enlightenment Rides” — bus fulls of enlightened latte liberals on a mission to bring yoga, polythemism, gayness and, of course, lattes to these ignorant backwaters.
Now children, don’t poke the bad redneck monkeys. The ones that don’t submit to re-education, we simply shoot on the spot. Of course, we will have to borrow their own guns, but with the combination of hospitality and stupidity they will hand over their weapons easily.
By the time we are done, every redneck in Tennesse will drive a Jetta and be able to chat casually on the Vagina Monologues. Most importantly though, they will be good little secularist, desackled from their superstitions — converting all faith in Christ to a total faith and dedication to the state. Memphis will be the new San Fran, Birmingham the new Berkley, Little Rock the new Portland.
Fuck ya’ I can’t wait. And Justin, like a good commander, I hope you’re the first one on the bus and the last one back on.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:17 am
I see no evidence that these people are WILLFULLY ignorant. Just ignorant. Plus, I get the sense that a lot of you hate them more for their religion than for their mistaken beliefs on Obama. Hey, people are free to believe whatever they want in this country and vote for whomever they feel best represents their interests. Their “reasoning” may not be based on an educated understanding of history or modern politics, but it’s not like they’re supporting some radical cult leader. They’re for Mike Huckabee.
As for them being worse than the radical muslims — please. THAT is willful ignorance. These people have no power and there is not a scintilla of evidence that they would ever resort to violence. The number of violent acts committed by radical American Christians are very few and are almost exclusively individual acts and not planned by religious leaders.
Pity these people for having the misfortune to live such sheltered lives but don’t hate them. Justin is right. They aren’t bad people. To think that they are just makes the divides in this country deeper.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Oh, and I love the new genre of documentaries I call “let’s make fun of the hillbillies.” I can’t for a minute imagine someone so gleefully going into a poor black community and exposing their ignorances. Nor could I imagine many of you calling a bunch of disadvantaged African Americans “bad people.” I imagine we’d all be clucking our tongues about bad schools and a difficult environment.
If you’ve been to the rural south with your eyes open and your prejudices set aside, you’ll see towns as disadvantaged and as culturally cut off as any inner city ghetto.
There are plenty of suburban mega-churches for y’all to pick on — can’t we stick with them instead of kicking people who are already down?
February 19th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Maybe I am an intolerant latte sipper – maybe not – but I do know elitist conversation when I hear it = and I know enough about Jesus to say he would have never allowed that type of mis-understanding to go unchallenged.
Call it what you will…. Poke fun at the Lib’s for their intolerance and misunderstanding, but this level of discussion has been going on for a long time. Some really good quotes :
“You are too young to understand it … but sometimes the Bible in the hand of one man is worse than a whiskey bottle in the hand of–oh, of your father.
HARPER LEE, To Kill a Mockingbird
There are some kind of men who–who’re so busy worrying about the next world they’ve never learned to live in this one.
HARPER LEE, To Kill a Mockingbird
Government oppressed the body of the wage-slave, but religion oppressed his mind, and poisoned the stream of progress at its source. The workingman was to fix his hopes upon a future life, while his pockets were picked in this one.
UPTON SINCLAIR, The Jungle
February 19th, 2008 at 11:34 am
That is a good point TerenceC, but Harper Lee was part of the community that she was commenting on. Justin (and the other latte liberals) does it just to feel superior — kind of like me with Mexican labor, but I know I’m a bastard and I don’t make any pretenses at my love of diversity and tolerance. Just some intellectual honest that I hear so much about.
February 19th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Amen to that.
On the other hand, I’ll add that it was the prominence of these sorts of evangelicals that made the Huckabee candidacy a non-starter for me. I prefer a bigger tent.
February 19th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Folks, I’ve posted stuff about 9/11 truthers on this website and how ignorant they are. Call me an elitist if you want, but you’re just plain wrong. This video breaks my heart, it doesn’t make me feel superior.
February 19th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I never got the impression Justin was an elitist – but I do believe he is of a like mind as myself when the question “why do people think like that” is asked = I can’t explain it, and I don’t think anyone else can either. It’s just as silly to think there is a Santa as it is to believe there is an Easter Bunny, or to believe that some magical being is coming down to earth to take all the good boys and girls to heaven…… it’s silly to believe it, and it’s silly to allow it as the central focus of your “platform”. It’s terrifying frankly. Just because I feel that way doesn’t make it wrong or right, who the hell am I to tell people what to believe. Does it make them happy, peaceful, patient, honest, serene, trustful, then I’m all for it. But please keep it to yourself and please keep it out of political discourse. “I want god’s laws not mans laws” – what kind of crap is that – it’s simply insane. The world is waist deep in blood because of religion – we shouldn’t allow that discussion as part of our political discourse as a nation – it’s wrong and anathema to everything the founding fathers (primarily deists) believed. Religion and politics simply don’t mix – at all, no way no how.
February 19th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
To be fair religion and politics have skipped hand in hand for at least a millennium.
To ask people to amputate their religious beliefs from their political discourse is silly, considering to do so is tacit endorsement of another religion, Atheism.
I’m pro-homosexual marriage, but against the feds telling churches they must marry homosexuals. That’s a decision for each church to make, just as each person must reconcile whether a god that is perfect love would discriminate against any of his children.
I vote pro-choice, but I think abortions are a failure on the part of the parents and our society. I wont force my belief on another, but I could never take the life of a child in or out of the womb.
February 19th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Good Stuff People,
As painful as it is to sit thru, it’s very revealing and I believe it’s the reason we’re in the mess that we’re in now, so u figure out who u wanna side with, who u wanna make your nest with n then u gotta lie in it.
We’ve given this ideology enuff of our collective blood n treasure, so now it’s time to try the other side.
BTW, anybody wanting examples of disgusting atrocities of far greater ignorance from the other side of the moral isle, I suggest simply listening to any number of gangster, hard core hip-hop or rap tunes currently on sale at your local music store. Enjoy the poetry!
February 19th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Nice site, you should check out mine, although its more controversial when it comes to Barack Obama
http://www.barackobamaantichrist.blogspot.com
February 19th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
That it is flatly prohibited by The First Amendment. Who proposed such idiocy?
February 19th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
That looked like one sweet lunch. What was it – beans? country ham? corn bread?
Anybody who can whip up a good lunch is worth talking to, IMO. Just try to stay away from any subject that doesn’t involve food or cooking.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:59 pm
A little sanity in a sea of hatefulness by the same people that preach tolerance. What else is new?
The sane ones ~
Ben-David:
These people are no more ignorant or opinionated than the rabid liberals who:
- embrace a partisan, PC reading of foreign policy…
- are childishly unable to make tough but necessary choices (like drilling for oil in a nature preserve)
- drape the mantle of pseudo-scientific authority around their pet ideologies, with little real rational analysis (â€everybody knows†that global warming has been “proven†– as have the assertions that “all white people are racist†and “homosexuality is geneticâ€â€¦.. except for the actual researchers, who don’t believe any of these assertions).
- shout down other opinions while self-righteously claiming they are Speaking Truth to Power.
- heavy-handedly impose far more of their own ideology on other citizens than the religious Right ever has.
Alan Carl Stewart:
…I get the sense that a lot of you hate them more for their religion than for their mistaken beliefs on Obama.
As for them being worse than the radical muslims — please. THAT is willful ignorance. These people have no power and there is not a scintilla of evidence that they would ever resort to violence. The number of violent acts committed by radical American Christians are very few and are almost exclusively individual acts and not planned by religious leaders.
February 19th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
Rob:
“I vote pro-choice, but I think abortions are a failure on the part of the parents and our society.”
To believe abortion is wrong, and still support it, makes you part of the problem, as everyone else you denounce.
It’s akin to remain neutral as your neighor gets killed, because you don’t want to “impose” your belief on the murderer.
That wouldn’t fly among people of good conscience. Neither does your indifference of abortion.
February 19th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Justin, for the record, I didn’t think you posted this to act superior. I thought you posted it to show that Obama has an uphill battle among certain groups of voters easily swayed by malicious rumors. My beef is with the commentors who so brazenly declared these “bad people.”
February 20th, 2008 at 10:09 am
I appreciate that Alan.
And just to back Alan up on this, for those of you who think these are inherently bad people, well, you may want to think about that a little while longer. Because what does it say about you when you’re just as quick to condemn?
February 20th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Of couse you feel superior to these people, Justin. You say it “breaks my heart” — like what: some congenital deformation? an old drunk falling down? a starving baby in Africa? You pick every opportunity you can (See the Jesus Camp post) to posit Evangelicals as intellectually stumped mutants. It is then a combination of paternalistic faux-sympathy: “I am so scared of these people” and “Aren’t these people sad?” And what is there transgression: They think that a guy named Barack Hussein Obama might be Muslim (who’s own supposedly Christian pastor has ties to Farakan and the Nation of Islam.) They’ve got more evidence that Barrack is a closet Muslim than you do for global warming.
I don’t know about you, but my nice Catholic Church here in Dosville sure ain’t recognizing Louie for shit. We must all be stupid?
February 20th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Obama has an uphill battle with people that don’t support his liberal views. Apparently, even with liberals that don’t think he can beat a Republican candidate.
People fainting and crying at his speeches don’t qualify him as C.I.C.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
What I find interesting, sad, frightening, and a little hypocritical is that most Obama supporters display a similar kind of blind faith that the folks in this video do. But, because the Obama message is about generic “hope” and “change” and not about “God” then it’s all good.
The people in the video obviously don’t have any information to base their anti-Obama opinion on. But ask an Obama fan to articulate why Obama would make a great President and you normally get a litany of soft-skills like “motivating,” “eloquent,” “great speaker,” and so on. This, too, is deep ignorance, just of a different kind.
February 20th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Now wait a second. There’s a big difference between being inspired by a candidate and spreading lies about somebody.
Also, nobody has EVER proved to me that Obama supporters don’t know his issues. This is a merely a meme being spread through the blogosphere and beyond. In fact, the supporters I know personally definitely know his platform. Just because they’re also inspired by the new direction for Washington D.C. he proposes doesn’t mean they’re ignorant.
In fact, if you take a group of supporters from each candidate, I bet you get the same level of detail from each about their candidate. So just because somebody can’t recite a litany of policy proposals that passes YOUR test doesn’t mean they should be compared to the people in this video. Not in the least.
February 20th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Sorry Elisabetta, but the whole “If you aren’t for us, you’re against us” thing is tired and illogical. I’d recommend you try to reconcile the Pro-Life and the Death Penalty platform before you try to lay into me over my hypocrisy.
There is not a single christian that can in good faith support the death penalty or even war if they want to take the high road on abortion. Yet many still do.
February 20th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
If you’re suggesting that the denizens of Lynchburg are intentionally spreading lies, then they ARE bad people. Or are they just misinformed? Which one is it–please clarify.
And the point I’m making about Obama Believers has nothing to do with positions or proposals. Anyone can have a position on an issue. It’s called an opinion. I’ve got plenty. What I’m talking about is EVIDENCE of ability. A track record, if you will. What has Obama accomplished that makes people believe that he can execute Presidential policy? He has no deep experience, so he’s in the enviable position of not having a history of successes OR failures.
And that’s the beauty of Obama. He’s an empty vessel. People can watch him and listen to him and place in him their own hopes and dreams for a brighter America. So, when you’re talking to Obama Believers, the question shouldn’t be “Do you know Obama’s position on key issues.” The question should be, “What has Obama accomplished that makes you trust him to be the President of the United States?” Emphasize the word “accomplish.” Would love to hear the answers you get.
February 20th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Rob, you framed it incorrectly. I never said, “..not with us…against us.”
The gist is not what others believe on abortion or the death penalty. The focal point is your ambivalent position.
The issue was and remains:
“If you believe the unborn has rights and value too, you better do more than pay lip service.” It would be best to pick one side, than play them both. Can’t have it both ways.
Anyways, let me explain the obvious, in case you missed it.
~ Abortion is the *killing performed on an innocent, defenseless human being. *
~ Conversely, *the death penalty is the punishment administered to those that take another’s life. *
The incongruence lies in that we protect those who kill babies and bring the “other group” – you know the serial killers, the rapists, and etc. to trial.
To compare a pro-life stance with a pro-death penalty one borders absurdity.
It is dumbfounding that the same people that support the “right” of a woman to abort, cringe and whine at a murderer being sentenced to capital punishment. That, Rob, is more outlandish than the position of pro-lifers, who ‘may’ also support capital punishment. Although, ONLY for heinous crimes.
After all, the baby enjoys no due process before being aborted. On the contrary, a murderer is afforded a lawyer, a trial, and a jury of his peers. Not to mention, years of appeals.
***How do you reconcile your support of abortion with your condemnation of those that avail themselves of the same thing you condone?!***
Please, run it by me again?!
February 20th, 2008 at 7:34 pm
Ahhh so you now claim the ability to judge with complete accuracy the value of one life over another. Must be nice to be omnipotent.
Innocent people have been murdered for crimes they didn’t commit. Look it up if you don’t believe me. These people were innocent of their charges, defenseless (kinda tough to put up a fight when you’re strapped to a table) and executed.
But I’m sure that receiving due process was a comfort to them as they got a needle stuck in their arm for a crime they didn’t commit.
And I reconcile my stance by stating the obvious. I don’t know everything, nor am I arrogant enough to believe I do. There are some truths that I hold to be universal, but knowing the point at which conscious life begins is not one of them.
February 20th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
Elisabetta displays her ignorance once again. Given the numbers of people on death row that have been proven innocent by DNA tests and the Innocence Project only a blind person could believe that innocent people haven’t been convicted of murder and executed. And while this “~ Abortion is the *killing performed on an innocent, defenseless human being. *” may be the definition that you and other anti-choice ideologues accept, many others don’t.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Jim, I’ll answer you first, b/c it’ll be quick.
First, I note two things whenever you answer me:
1. A mindless knee-jerk reaction, based on your own biases and wrong information. I don’t think this blog is big enough to contain your witlessness.
2. You always respond to my comments, talking in third person – as though that justifies your insults – from your soapbox.
Regarding people exculpated by the wonder of DNA… Aren’t appeals great? Don’t forget the trials…
Incidentally, the same DNA, you tout also shows that babies are valuable, unique humans even before they are born.
FYI, ideology has nothing to do with this. Many democrats are pro-lilfe and some republicans pro-choice. However, you are so busy spewing hogwash, you conveniently sidestap that info.
Further, it is an undisputable fact that an unborn is a *human being.* While, it is understood, that you opt to believe otherwise that doesn’t make you smarter. On the contrary…
February 21st, 2008 at 12:37 pm
Rob, you are progressively getting off course. The polemic is not about the death penalty or even the pro-life position, what I believe, or others support. Those are topics for another thread, another time. This whole argument was jump-started from a statement you made.
You wrote:
“I VOTE PRO-CHOICE, but I think abortions are a failure on the part of the parents and our society. …I COULD NEVER TAKE THE LIFE OF A CHILD IN OR OUT OF THE WOMB.â€
No dispute there. Right?
I commented:
“To believe abortion is wrong, and still support it, makes you part of the problem, as everyone else you denounce.â€
At that point, you attempted to veer off what you said and put it on something/someone else with a non sequitur.
We could play that game, all day long, but I rather not. I was merely pointing out the clashing between what you claim to believe (abortion is wrong) and your actions (voting pro-choice). Actions, more often than not, are a barometer of what we really believe. That’s it. You can ponder it or ignore it, but please don’t spin the issue.
February 21st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Missing from my reply to Rob:
I asked you: ***How do you reconcile your support of abortion with your condemnation of those that avail themselves of the same thing you condone?!***
Your reply:
“And I reconcile my stance by stating the obvious. I don’t know everything, nor am I arrogant enough to believe I do. There are some truths that I hold to be universal, but knowing the point at which conscious life begins is not one of them.”
You don’t have to know “everything.” Nobody else does. Even though, it’d be nice that you figure out how to integrate not wanting (personally) to abort a child and still be pro-choice. Otherwise, it seems like you are equivocating.
Still, this is what I asked:
How can YOU be pro-choice BUT despise those you believe are at fault for abortion, ’society and parents.’ That shows false concern.
February 21st, 2008 at 4:39 pm
Elisabetta,
I believe you mean fetus, not baby. This Pro-Life habit of referring to a fetus as a baby is propaganda. It’s a fetus, it’s the scientific term for the life you are trying to save. The thing is your argument sounds less dramatic if you refer to it as a fetus.
February 22nd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
John, I stand by what I said.
You are to be commended for partial transparency. No qualms that the word “fetus†makes people less squeamish and lends a certain air of respectability to the whole affair.
Nonetheless, the propaganda comes from the side of abortion. By using said term they have achieved the dehumanization of the unborn baby.
No ob-gyn while talking to prospective parents EVER refers to their unborn as the ‘fetus.’ In fact, it’s always the BABY. It ‘becomes’ a “fetus†when people are considering or performing an abortion.
At any rate, this discussion was not about pro-life vs. pro-abortion positions. It revolves around Rob’s conflicting ideas.
Exhibits
A. He states, ‘he would never harm a *Child* IN the womb.’
That evinces, in his mind, this baby is not just a ‘fetus.’ **Note** Rob calls him a *child*
B. But, then he informs, ‘he votes pro-choice.’
His prerogative. HOWEVER, now b. clashes with a.
Ergo, to affirm that unborn are worth protecting and then champion the same line of thought that kills them is a bit problematic. In actuality, by voting pro-choice he elevates the “right†of a woman – to dispose of her unborn – over the right of that same baby to life and the pursuit of happiness.
C. He further blames ‘society and parents for the “failure of abortions.”’
That posturing would be passable if he hadn’t claimed to be pro-choice.
D. Lastly, he attempts to deflect with:
“There are some truths that I hold to be universal, but knowing the point at which conscious life begins is not one of them.â€
He seems to be saying, ‘I am not sure when “conscious life begins.”’ That brings us back to a. “I could never take the life of *child* IN…the womb.â€
Clearly, he’s going around in circles.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Elisabetta,
While you are right this was not a discussion about terminology and propaganda, It was actually a discussion regarding how to treat ignorance to issues at hand. The thing is, there’s a certain level of ignorance when you knowingly frame language in a discussion to suite your needs. While I agree, when a child is wanted by a parent or parents, it is referred to as a baby from the start. However, when a pregnancy is unwanted or detrimental to the health of the mother, it is referred to as a pregnancy and the life is referred to as a fetus. These pregnancies and fetus are only then referred to as a baby by people like yourself that claim that every life has the right to life. Now, going back to the question posed by Rob in which I believe you very inadequately resolved. that is the life of innmates seem to not have this right to life. While I do agree that most prisoners are actually guilty, it has been shown time and time again that that is not always the case. How do resolve the execution of an innocent man, in order to placate the Rights obsession with the death penalty. Add to this that it generally costs more to execute a man or woman than it does to imprison them for life. I don’t think you can, and I believe that Rob is correct that there is an inherent conflict of opinion in this stance. Presumably you are chrisitian, shouldn’t you allow your God to punish both the prisoners and the people that get and give abortions.
February 25th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
John,
I admire persistence. Can’t say the same for your mistaken (unwittingly?) attempt to contrive the argument as a lack of ignorance on my part. Moreover, you persist in digressing when you claim that I didn’t “adequately resolve” Rob’s question.
For starters, his question was a ‘red herring.’
In addition, I am still waiting for a cogent, on point response to my query as per comment dated February 19, 2008 9:13pm and subsequent ones.
As tedious as it may be, it needs restating that the gist of the discussion that ensued between Rob and I has been completely evaded by him, Jim S and now you. Your focus should have been on ROB’S JANGLED BELIEFS. Instead, quite conveniently, time and again, it has been shifted to me, others and inapposite (to the discussion at hand) matters.
Couple that with Rob’s silence and your (collectively) straw men intervention and I am left wondering whether Rob is unable to back up his sentiments with cogency and clarity.
Whereas, my previous responses have allowed for a certain amount of departure from the subject, to reply some of your points, I find it pointless to continue addressing smoke-and-mirrors propositions.