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.
As has been already pointed out, his list would appeal to about half or less of the population. If you agree with any conservative policy or law, it's null and void.
Why was Arizona nominated?
I strongly, in every sense of the word, support Arizona's enforcement of the law against illegal immigration.
I strongly support its laws to preserve and extend gun rights.
I strongly support doing away with ethnic studies in this country.
I don't care much about the birth certificate issue either way, but I can't stomach Obama and it's nice to see any state flip the bird to that Marxist hack.
The only law he mentioned that I'm against is the banning of stem cell research.
I see it like this, I can live in a state with the most conservative laws of any other state in the country, thats still not going to affect how I live. This is a free country afterall right? I really don't care about politics at all, I live my own life.
In fairness Morgan Quitno's list includes several of Maher's choices, placing Arizona at rock bottom, while only having three of the bottom ten states be ones often deemed "liberal." (California, Hawaii, Oregon) The only conservative-leaning state in their top ten for smarts is Montana, although Nebraska is eleventh. Of states he listed Kansas actually came out fairly smart or at least above average. There's a strong creationist organization there but that doesn't mean it's representative of the whole state or that intelligence rises and falls on biological science. Texas seems to be just a bit below the middle.
Still college departments do tend to be liberal with the exception of business or engineering departments. However I think another issue is that many of these "not smart" conservative states are states with high poverty. You look at a more middle-class conservative state, like those on the Plains or the Northern Rockies, and they usually don't come out that bad. Utah comes out a little low on Morgan Quitno, but most studies I've read place Utah as fairly educated/intelligent. Likewise you look at the Democratic/liberal counties in Alabama, Mississippi, etc and they're not necessarily that well educated. Often they are "disadvantaged Democrats" who are highly liberal/progressive on economics but maybe socially conservative. Not that social conservatism equates to lack of intelligence either. My guess would be the "Lutheran Church Missouri-Synod" and "Christian Reformed Church" types on the Plains come out as fairly educated/intelligent and their churches are highly socially conservative. Mormons also tend to come out as well-educated and socially conservative. Economics and access to good schools is likely the more meaningful factor.
^^^^^So then we should get rid of Western Civilization courses? Which is by definition the study of the European ethnicity/race, is it not? But we don't call it Caucasian Ethnicity 101, do we?
If you think Obama is a Marxist, then you should read what Bush did. He administration saw the largest enlargement of government since the 1930s.
So gay couple should be denied the 2000 or so rights that are guaranteed to married couples. Marriage is a matter of state first and religion second, btw.
But as long as you get to carry your gun in public, who cares, right? Because I'm sure, damn sure, that your gun poses more of a threat to our society than the gay couple next door, or the college student learning about Mexico's influence on America.
^^^^^So then we should get rid of Western Civilization courses? Which is by definition the study of the European ethnicity/race, is it not? But we don't call it Caucasian Ethnicity 101, do we?
We should teach global history, a history of the world.
Obviously Western civilization will feature more prominently in that as Europeans tamed the New World, established the U.S. (the country where the history is actually being taught and the sole superpower), and have influenced events more.
Quote:
If you think Obama is a Marxist, then you should read what Bush did. He administration saw the largest enlargement of government since the 1930s.
Neoconservatism is a joke.
Quote:
So gay couple should be denied the 2000 or so rights that are guaranteed to married couples. Marriage is a matter of state first and religion second, btw.
What does this have to do with anything in my post?
I don't care whether it is a matter of religion or state. I don't support gay marriage and will always vote against it.
Quote:
But as long as you get to carry your gun in public, who cares, right? Because I'm sure, damn sure, that your gun poses more of a threat to our society than the gay couple next door, or the college student learning about Mexico's influence on America.
Your opinion. My gun has never harmed a human being.
I don't care whether it is a matter of religion or state. I don't support gay marriage and will always vote against it.
Your opinion. My gun has never harmed a human being.
I was meerly listing out laws that may pertain to your post. And using them as an example. An example easily understood by all.
It's not the gun that worries me, it's the finger behind the trigger.
See, you see gun ownership [your right to it] as a moral one. Whereas I don't. But I do see marriage rights, or a broad education as moral issues-as in ALL should be entitled to such.
So maybe we could look at it two ways,
No gay marriage, no guns
or
Gay marriage and all the guns you want
Legislating morality, sucks. How can you say your version is more right than mine, and vice versa.
But Texas, et al, have absolutely no problem, and I guess neither do you.
Before you pull out the second amendment, as a statement of your God-given right to carry a weapon, I'll pull out the line that states governments exist to protect life, liberty and happiness-the foundtion of the governments of the US.
The ultimate point being that the states Maher mentions work harder to legislate things they don't need to, and have thereby left their population lacking in the "civilized" category.
The thing is that all TV comedians make fun of conservatives. Bill Maher is very much like Jon Stewart & Stephen Colbert. They are political comedians who almost always focus on what they see as ridiculously funny. Sometimes that means making fun of Obama or the governor of New York [past & present]. Rod Blagojevich, former governor of Illinois facing prison [who is a liberal] gets as much ridicule as Mark Stanford, current governor of South Carolina who is a Republican.
But, in general, comedians go after what they see as hypocrisy and ignorance and examples of those characteristics seem to occur most often in conservative states. It isn't a surprise that all of Maher's most stupid states are basically Republican. Democrats are also funny when they get involved in affairs\ get caught cheating on their wives [John Edwards has been the butt of political jokes for over a year]. But Democrats don't preach false morality and certainly don't legislate fundamentalist Christian nonsense. Republicans do and why they come under fire so much.
Can anyone think of a conservative comedian on TV who makes fun of liberals?
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.
