Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Good for you and Mr. Hawkins. In other news, our home-smoked brisket did well, as did the pudding for the strawberry and blueberry trifle I've planned for tomorrow. Hope y'all, and especially Messrs. Chronic and Hawkins, have a similarly deliciously-fed Fourth!
Just in case anyone didn't hazard the guess and in the spirit of this holiday weekend, this is a non sequitur: I've heard that partaking of the chronic can do wonders for one's disposition. That just might be something to explore on a day off.
So, John Hawkins runs "Right Wing News". He clearly believes that news and point of view are the same things. And they're not.
I didn't bother to read the op's link, simply because I'm tired of identity politics and opinion editorials pretending to be news. However, the same can be said for CNN, MSNBC, and most of the global(ist) mainstream media. The BIG issue is how they pretend to be apolitical news sources, when the fact is that nothing could be further from the truth.
You are under the mistaken impression that "well educated" means having degrees.
It does not mean that.
It means reading good books for pleasure -- which most people with degrees fail to do.
Lack of education is pervasive at all levels in our society -- including the so called "educated."
Ok, well, then let's put this into the context of this discussion. While what constitutes as 'educated' is interesting, we should ask why that's been brought up. Obvious answer: people feel the author of this article is uneducated.
Here's why I say that he is.
His article lacks a clear direction. At best, his main point is 'liberal suck' which would be ok if his points were well defended. They weren't. He sloppily jumps from one point to the next, never bothering to provide anything of substance. He basically says "I think this so it's true." This suggests he lacks any ability to craft arguments, and even worse, may not have the capacity to truly think. He's trapped in his own little narrative and unwilling to defend it from any criticism as he's never put the effort into doing so. This would suggest that the only reason he holds the views he does is because those were his views yesterday and not because he's had time to really think about it.
And hell, even if he's actually brilliant and has thought through his views, that doesn't show through with this article. So regardless of his actual education or intellect, the article is void of any intellectual material and not worth being discussed. Thing that present nothing to discuss should not be discussed. Seems obvious, but it seems the threshold has been lowered to "I agree with it so it must be true."
A citizen is an inhabitant or denizen. A denizen is: an inhabitant; resident. Notice the example given in the Dictionary, if a deer resides in the woods, it can be correctly described as a citizen of the woods.
So if someone says he is not a citizen of the world, he is in fact saying that he doesn't live in the world. Which is preposterous. But to understand it you need a certain familiarity with language and logic, which you've demonstrated time and again that those are not qualities possess in abundance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet
You are under the mistaken impression that "well educated" means having degrees.
It does not mean that.
It means reading good books for pleasure -- which most people with degrees fail to do.
I agree to some extend, there are many people with degrees who can't grasp simple logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet
Lack of education is pervasive at all levels in our society -- including the so called "educated."
I think you meant to say: Lack of knowledge is pervasive at all levels in our society. But yes, I agree with that too. Many educated people are not smart nor knowledgeable. George W. Bush is a perfect example.
.
Who is to say that you are choosing a "rich" group of books to read? No one. Invalid.
The books I have in mind are called "classics."
Books like Balzac's "Eugenie Grandet" or Flaubert's "A Sentimental Education."
Classics: something you apparently know nothing about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p
Talk about laziness! You didn't think to take a couple minutes to query an online dictionary before responding to me?
Online dictionaries are stupid.
Quote:
Alright, I'll do it for you:
A citizen is an inhabitant or denizen. A denizen is: an inhabitant; resident. Notice the example given in the Dictionary, if a deer resides in the woods, it can be correctly described as a citizen of the woods.
No, it can't.
"Citizen" has always been a political designation -- which you would know if you had studied even a modicum of political science, history and philosophy.
If "citizen" didn't mean anything more than "inhabitant" or "denizen," then there would be no reason to have the word "citizen."
You and the other person I am responding to apparently think that using google or using dictionary.com = being educated.
In other words, you are about to debunk the dictionary??!
This will either be very amusing or very sad, or both.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet
No, it can't.
"Citizen" has always been a political designation -- which you would know if you had studied even a modicum of political science, history and philosophy.
If "citizen" didn't mean anything more than "inhabitant" or "denizen," then there would be no reason to have the word "citizen."
Really? Always been a political designation? I guess John F. Kennedy was using it incorrectly then, eh?
Quote:
My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.
-- John F. Kennedy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet
You and the other person I am responding to apparently think that using google or using dictionary.com = being educated.
It isn't.
Son, let me try to explain it to you, although I am very certain most of it will not sink in.
When someone say a citizen of a particular country, yes, it carries a technical meaning - a citizen of USA or a citizen of France; for example.
But when someone say a "citizen of the world", that signals a different meaning. For the world doesn't actually grant official citizenship, so for the phrase to make sense a secondary meaning is applied. Thus, when JFK say, "My fellow citizens of the world....." he is referring to everyone on planet Earth. "Citizens" in his case means inhabitants - as in inhabitants of this planet.
Do you get it now?
That's just a rhetorical question, I know you won't get it.
.
Wrong. SS absolutely IS a handout, and it always will be for the people currently collecting. It was designed that way.
It's NOT a savings account the .gov keeps in your name. Your tax dollars pay for those currently getting benefits and others' tax dollars will pay for your benefits (if you're lucky) when your time comes to draw payments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
