Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Ignorance 25

Journal by pudge

OK, everyone is ignorant, but some people are more obviously so than others. Case in point: Janeane Garofalo.

She was on The Daily Show the other night saying, "at this point wanting to vote for Bush should basically be considered a character flaw." Then she went on to say how people who vote for Bush are just doing it out of a sense of pride for their party leader.

I'll tell you what is, quite clearly, a character flaw: not being able to understand how -- or in her case, even *that* -- a reasonable person can disagree with you for good reasons.

She appears to honestly believe that no one could possibly have a rational basis for voting for Bush (unless, I suppose, they are evil). There are few words to describe this other than "ignorant." "Arrogant," of course, comes to mind, and it certainly is that. But arrogance doesn't imply that it is incorrect, and is therefore an insufficient description.

The only conclusion I can come to is that she doesn't get out much. Oh sure, she travels, but she only talks to people who agree with her, or who are extreme on the other side. She doesn't experience enough of the people in this country to understand the many reasons why so many of us think Bush is a good President.

I'd like to have her sit on my couch for a couple of hours and talk politics with me. At the end, she'd understand that reasonable people have reasonable reasons for wanting Bush to be re-elected as President. Either that, or she would wind up in a fetal position in the middle of the floor. Either way, her view of the world would change. And maybe, just maybe, she would shed some of her obvious ignorance.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ignorance More

Ignorance

Comments Filter:
  • It is surprising how many people that claim to be liberal or "open minded" are unwilling to consider an idea that they have previously categorized as conservative.

    Many conservatives suffer from the same sort of knee-jerk resoponses, but being conservative this is a less hypocritical stance to take. :)

    In any case there aren't many media outlets that do a good job of presenting both sides of an issue in an in-depth way without belittling one or the other. I can't stand right-wing talk radio for the holi

    • It is surprising how many people that claim to be liberal or "open minded" are unwilling to consider an idea that they have previously categorized as conservative.

      Many conservatives suffer from the same sort of knee-jerk resoponses, but being conservative this is a less hypocritical stance to take. :)

      Exactly. It's one thing to be closed-minded, it's another to be so and yet profess open-mindedness.

      In any case there aren't many media outlets that do a good job of presenting both sides of an issue in an
      • David Brooks gives as good as he gets. Originally, this was one of my favorite parts of the show, now it ranks just above the lameass filler 'essays' they do. Best straight daily news show in the US.
        • It's not a great segment; I was just saying Shields tends a lot more toward belittlement. It is common to see Shields say, "well, they have a point, but my view is ..." and then have Shields say something along the lines of, "Jim, it boggles the mind that anyone could possibly see things the way David described."
      • So are conservatives open-minded or just close-minded and open about being close-minded? I am sincere in this question.

        Personally, I abhor Bush. I find him to be a terrible President, but I am doing all the reading and research that I can before November. That means I am reading a lot of "left-leaning" material, but I am also reading "right-leaning" stuff. Plan of Attack is at the top of my list, which I guess is centrist.

        I strongly believe in the separation between church and state. I think Bush i

        • So are conservatives open-minded or just close-minded and open about being close-minded? I am sincere in this question.

          As noted in the other post, it is that they do not claim to be open-minded. Usually.

          We aren't there yet... but we do have uncomfortable entanglements in my book that were brought on by Bush and are enforced every time he quotes (or alludes to) the Bible in his speeches.

          I understand though disagree eith the first part, and can't fathom the rationale behind the second.

          I think these en
        • Sorry, didn't finish my response. Continuing:

          As far as hurling insults and being close-minded... have you picked up any of the books by the conservative media darlings Sean Hannity and Ann Coulter? It seems to me that these people literally froth when they speak.

          Sean is not as bad as Ann, but yes, I agree. Again, the distinction was that they do not claim to be open-minded. I am not saying conservatives are less closed-minded. Not saying that at all.

    • Many conservatives suffer from the same sort of knee-jerk resoponses, but being conservative this is a less hypocritical stance to take. :)

      How so?

      • Because liberals are, overwhelmingly, the ones who claim to be open-minded. Conservatives rarely do.
      • I am using the classical definition of conservative, meaning someone who is resistant to change and likes things the way they are or even the way they were. Thus a conservative would be consistent in being closed minded.

        While we're on the subject of hypocracy, let me say that it is an oft overrated concept. It simply indicates inconsistency, rather than evil or malice.

  • I've been saying the same thing.

    I've seen Janeane Garofalo on shows like Real Time w/Bill Maher, and most of the time all you hear coming out of her mouth is derogatory comments about how "closed-minded" conservatives are, how elightened and intellectual liberals are, and seconds later makes some comment on how Bush is an "idiot", but fails to back up her insult with any fact.

    She reminds me of most liberals, who in reality seem to resort to childish insults instead of intellectual debate when they can't
    • I agree - you can be closed minded about being close minded.

      Janeane Garafolo, if on my couch - would be in a fetal position alright - except it would be a spooning position after intense sex - I'm a real conservative (not necessarily a Bush supporter, but definitely not a Kerry voter) Since she's one that's turned on by intellectuals and by big words (don't know the term for that and couldn't find it here [sexglossary.com]) - she'd be making love to me in minutes - by that time - each time I said, "Bush" - she'd be turned o
    • "most liberals" or most liberals that you know. If you sincerely mean "most liberals," you sure do get around a lot. I am sure you are using hyperbole, but that wouldn't exactly be at the height of "intellectual debate," now would it?

      I am not defending Janeane, or "most liberals," but there are liberals out their that will engage in intellectual debates with you.

      Heck, Al Franken and Janeane have national "call-in" radio shows (you can stream the broadcast if you don't have a local station). Call them

      • Heck, Al Franken and Janeane have national "call-in" radio shows (you can stream the broadcast if you don't have a local station).

        I didn't know you could listen online. I turned it on just now and lasted two whole minutes.

        I know it wasn't either of their shows, but that's another problem with dialogue on talk radio: you have to sit through the incessant inanities first. No thanks.
  • You know Pudge. You could always call up their show. They are always begging for conservatives to call and Janeane has had her conservative father on the show. I say "put up"...
    • I don't get the show in my area. And further, talk radio is a horrible medium in which to attempt interesting dialogue.
      • While I partially agree that Talk Radio is a horrible medium for interesting debate (it can be, see Talk of the Nation), I still think you should give it a try. You're well-researched and well-spoken. You present an even case.

        Plus, it is streamed over the Internet. You can get it anywhere.

        Give it a go...

  • I think I saw that when it came on Comedy Central, as that is my most watched channel. I basically have the opinion that the loudest mouths in the political campaign are the most arrogant, and by virtue ignorant. I can probably point to examples from both of the burro's and pachyderm's, but I won't digress. I'm a conservative, and I mostly fall in line with the republicans except when Bush ran for Governor of Texas. I hate to say it but Bush was not at the top of my list of ideal nominations for Governor, o
  • The Left's final retort is (and always has been) "Well, you're stupid anyway." Their real problem now it they have nothing else to say. So they are at their final retort at the beginning of the conversation. They are fucked. I feel bad for them.
  • How can anyone dislike Janeane Garofalo? She's pretty funny, even in her worst movies. I'd just let her have her opinion -- over there. Janeane Garofalo totally cracks me up. Most comics are Liberals, anyway. You have to take them with a grain of salt. :-)
    • I am treating her like any other person who is a professional pundit, which is what she is now.
      • I can't see how anyone could take a comic seriously. It's their job to make people laugh! Pundit or not, she may have political opinions, but the buck stops there. By all means, take her seriously if you wish, but I would never engage in debate with the lunatic fringe. You can't be a comic and expect to be taken seriously.
        • You can't be a comic and expect to be taken seriously.

          I don't understand that at all. People are not flat pieces of paper. She is a comic, but she has serious points to make, and her profession, currently, is making those points.
  • to be a bit more fair to Janeane. Not that she cares, but it would reflect a bit better on you and your positions.

    She is passionate about what she believes, but she's able to carry on a conversation with people who don't agree with her. I've witnessed it personally on more than one occasion.

    I'll tell you what is, quite clearly, a character flaw: not being able to understand how -- or in her case, even *that* -- a reasonable person can disagree with you for good reasons.

    "Reasonable" is a word that eva
    • It would behoove you to be a bit more fair to Janeane.

      Maybe you mean "nice" and not "fair." I was perfectly fair. She was completely ignorant, unequivocably so, when she said that people are flawed because they disagree with her. There is nothing but ignorance in that statement, and it is indefensible.

      "Reasonable" is a word that evades objective definition

      Not all. A reasonable opinion is one that has been arrived at using reason. She offered none, and surely had none.

      She knows well what argumen

Slashdot Top Deals

Avoid strange women and temporary variables.

Close