gifzette daily briefing

Conservatives Dumb, Says Science

LESS THAN THREE, LESS THAN THREENEW YORK—Hey look! It’s that time of year again, and the semi-annual release of some or another study claiming that conservatives are stupid has finally landed on liberal doorsteps across America. Perfect timing, really! Since, you know, the one thing the country needs right now more than just about anything else is yet another excuse to avoid the hard work of looking at those we disagree with as equal partners in a national conversation, people who we must engage with and convince—and, oh, maybe as a result challenge ourselves to check our work and, you know, make better arguments! But hey, now we can all let ourselves off the hook and just deride them as all a bunch of idiots who aren’t even worth talking to in the first place. Thank you, science! Yes, this is quite obviously how we will move forward together as a nation. (It was the dramatic improvement in the quality of the national discourse evidenced after the last two dozen times a study like this was published that gives us so much faith.)

Anyway, check it out: Congress is doing something! Apparently the first order of business following the President’s call for it in Tuesday’s state of the union is to hammer out an agreement on banning insider trading in Congress. Which is good! Or at least in a sense. Since, like, beggars can’t be choosers and all, but we still look forward to seeing Congress move on to maybe more meaningful legislation that miht actually help America be a better nation instead of just, you know, helping public officials not be douchebags (not hating, just saying, etc).

DO NOT MISS THIS: So PolitiFact is the worst (duh), and Rachel Maddow is absolutely the best (also duh). But yesterday not only did she manage to employ the phrase “After the economist Jared Bernstein and half of the English speaking internet L’d oh so O L at PolitiFact for screwing this up”—yes! she said that! live! on the air!!—she then delivered just the loveliest lecture:

PolitiFact, you are fired. You are a mess! You are fired! You are undermining the definition of the word fact in the English language by pretending to it in your name. The English language wants its word back. You are an embarrassment. You sully the reputation of anyone who cites you as an authority on fact-ishness, let alone fact. You are fired.

Robert Reich tried to spoil everyone’s fun yesterday by “being sensible” and “making sense” and doing other stereotypically Robert Reich-y things. He warned Democrats in a column not to root for a Gingrich nomination, arguing that even though the odds are low, the risk is far too high. But we must ask you, Mr. Reich: why else would we still be paying attention to this thing if not for MOON BASES??

Ha, so enjoy this one New Yorkers—turns out the Super PAC formed by Herman Cain after dropping out of the race has been buoyed by a single $50,000 donation coming from one man: Peter Kalikow!

Sadly, we must leave you today on a somber note. Remember the lesson of Terminator 2? “Skynet goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th.” Right. Then the computers bomb Russia, Russia bombs back, and before you know it, “3 billion human lives ended on August 29th, 1997. The survivors of the nuclear fire called the war Judgment Day. They lived only to face a new nightmare: the war against the machines.” Well that nightmare may very well be becoming reality, dear friends:

The Navy’s new drone being tested near Chesapeake Bay stretches the boundaries of technology: It’s designed to land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, one of aviation’s most difficult maneuvers.

What’s even more remarkable is that it will do that not only without a pilot in the cockpit, but without a pilot at all.

The X-47B marks a paradigm shift in warfare, one that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. With the drone’s ability to be flown autonomously by onboard computers, it could usher in an era when death and destruction can be dealt by machines operating semi-independently.

So yes, the machines are coming for you. Enjoy your weekend.

[READ MORE AT THE GIFZETTE.]

What Others Are Reading

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.

277 comments

  1. MrFizzy

    They're taking all the fun out of war – what's the point of it if people don't get slaughtered while the Cheneys watch?

      1. MrFizzy

        That's a good point, plus drones have really good hi-def cameras, so Dick and company could do live streaming. LIke a video game, but with more horror.

  2. johnnyzhivago

    If drones were programmed to detect shameless pandering, nauseating hypocricy and outright stupidity, there is no doubt that that entire debate last night would have been wiped off the map.

    1. Nothingisamiss

      "A rogue programmer decided shamless pandering and nauseating hypocrisy was the real threat….."

    2. Biel_ze_Bubba

      If robot drones flew around blowing up stupidity, they'd take out mostly conservatives. According to the science.

  3. johnnyzhivago

    Instead of trying to talk to conservatives, let's play upon their stupidity and lure them all into some kind of a trap (with shiny things) and never let them out???

  4. Goonemeritus

    I believe the job of convincing our Conservative brethren would be greatly aided were they to be rounded up and put in one location for mass re-education. Perhaps FEMA could be useful in this enterprise?

  5. DaRooster

    So… that is why Santorum is so against higher education.
    Folks might think he's dumb?

    Too late…

  6. PB Goodfriend

    Re: the idiocy in conservatism, I like your take. Reminds me of the 19th century eugenics arguments that allowed people to justify their racism, only what the studies you cite justify is political racism. In the end, we are all in this world together, and we have to find some way to get along, and help those who cannot help themselves. Even if they are idiots.

  7. Terry

    "What’s even more remarkable is that it will do that not only without a pilot in the cockpit, but without a pilot at all."

    Well, actually, a computerized drone brain might be safer than giving a joystick to a guy in his early 20's. The computer won't say "Hey, watch what I can make it do…".

    1. C_R_Eature

      You are right, of course. I think that the Navy began this automation program after having to watch McCain fly all those Skyraders into the ground.

  8. Negropolis

    As an admirer of science, I embrace that poll with an open heart and mind.

    And, Matt, sometimes Congress has to "help itself to be douchebags" to facilitate passing active, positive legislation directly on our behalf. Sometimes, you have to help yourself before you can even begin to help others, and Congress is no exception.

  9. salt_bagel

    If society could just, you know, LIGHTEN UP AND NOT WANT TO KILL EVERY OTHER PERSON, then we could start using this drone technology to make better sex dolls.

    1. SorosBot

      And really, humanity will be a hell of a lot better off if the first truly sentient machines are programmed to provide pleasure instead of to kill. I'm rooting for the Japanese over the US military here, out of pure self-interest.

  10. johnnyzhivago

    Mitt: "Let me say I will stand shoulder to shoulder with my friends in Israel – and stand proudly with my friend Bibi Netenyahou. Oh, btw, EXACTLY how do you spell his first name, because I needed that so I can enter him into Baptism Program, I mean my iPhone?"

  11. DaRooster

    Maybe the Bots can figure out the Global Warming thing…
    Getting rid of humans will help immensely.

  12. SorosBot

    Well, humanity has had a good run while it lasted; with our military, I'm sure the conscious plane will be nothing like KITT but just like that evil KARR.

    1. jus_wonderin

      Or the revolutionary tactical computer called the "M5 Multitronic System", designed by the brilliant Dr. Richard Daystrom.

      We will be Captain Dunsel's, all.

  13. Dashboard Buddha

    Sort of OT, but about Rachel:

    It seems that she was a Jeopardy question that no one got. Breifart seems to be driving the buzz here. I haven't checked the veracity of this and probably won't. Who cares? Most people would recognize a picture of snooky within milliseconds, so folks not recognizing her on a game is pretty meaningless.

    That being said, there is a Jeopardy question I'd like to see:

    For $500 – He is a drunken rabblerouser best known for prevarication, questionable press practices, drunken pompous behavior and is rumored to have made inappropriate advances to innocent young interns.

    Alex…who is ???

    1. Barrelhse

      Alex, who is any Repube currently seeking or holding public office?
      or, who is All of Them, Katy?

      1. Monsieur_Grumpe

        I have read it and I'm not surprised it's getting turned into a movie. It will be interesting to see what they do with the attacked on the Olds.

  14. ManchuCandidate

    What makes me laugh about all these neurology studies is how insulted wingnuts get. They revel in how little they know AND WANT TO KNOW (which is what stupid people do) so they should be proud as hell when science proves they are stupid… but alas they are not.

    Can't have it both ways… but since they're stupid they wouldn't know that.

  15. paris biltong

    It all depends on what one means by "conservative". Bismarck was one yet he kind of invented social security and, while unpleasant, was probably not dumb.
    A better statement would be that dumb people are stupid and vice-versa. Intelligent people are also frequently stupid, although stupid people are seldom intelligent.
    Humanity can perhaps more usefully be divided between creeps and assholes,

    1. ManchuCandidate

      No, intelligent people are frequently wrong as in
      1) "Let's go to this restaurant"
      2) eat food
      3) vomit from food poisoning
      4) "Let's not go there again."

      Stupid people in the same situation go:
      1) "Let's eat at this people we are comfortable with restaurant"
      2) eat food
      3) vomit from food poisoning
      4) "Hey, let's eat at that restaurant AGAIN. It'll be better this time."

    1. Generation[redacted]

      If necessary I'm willing to send wave after wave of my own men until the killbots reach their preset kill limit.

  16. freakishlywrong

    and just deride them as all a bunch of idiots who aren’t even worth talking to in the first place.

    These are people that believe Jesus had a pet dinosaur, have a fictional, evil, Marxist/fascist/Nazi President and call global warming a "hoax", in January, when it's 60 degrees in NYC. Idiots? Fucking idiots.

  17. ManchuCandidate

    The new Killing Drone leaves several questions unanswered:

    Where will our Future Mavericks go if Machines do all the fighting in the air?
    What Highway will Kenny Loggins sing about now?
    Will Viper still have a job?
    Does this mean we can merge Top Gun with the Terminator?

    1. Generation[redacted]

      On the plus side, Navy will be a lot less homoerotic (not that there's anything wrong with that).

    2. Guppy

      "Future Mavericks" have already been out of a job since 1992, though they may not know it yet. A few guys in a beat-up old pick-up truck really aren't going to challenge anybody's air superiority.

      (but we'll build the F-35 anyway)

    3. YasserArraFeck

      Does this mean we can merge Top Gun with the Terminator?
      Yes – we'll call it Top Germinator – AKA Duggars Redux

  18. paris biltong

    Machines should not be only put in charge of fighting wars. They could also usefully replace bankers and capitalists in general. They would earn huge incomes which could then be used to repay the debt. Ergo, no more taxes, problem solved.

    1. Ruhe

      Those machines already exist in the tightly guarded server-bunkers of the hedge funds. The problem is that they have yet to achieve self-consciousness so at the end of each day their Quant masters draw the cream off the top and then command them to go do it again.

  19. CapeClod

    Why do we need a poll? Newt Gingrich has a legitimate chance of getting the nomination by running as an outsider. That speaks volumes about the intelligence of the GOP.

    1. GOPCrusher

      No shit. If your Congressional career is measured in decades (I'm looking at you, Ron Paul), you lost any chance of calling yourself an outsider.

  20. Negropolis

    Rachel was totally within bounds to go ape-shit on Politifacts. More than it being some Republican outfit, I think they are guilt of doing this bullshit where you have to appear to "give both sides." What's crazy about this is that this is a site that supposedly prides itself on calling bullshit from an objective viewpoint. They are caught up in this toxic "both sides do it" false equivalency crap.

    1. DarwinianDemon

      Yup. Same with Jon Stewart and Obama many many liberals. They're so desperate to sound reasonable and fair they just can't bear to go away from the "both sides do it" meme.

    2. lulzmonger

      Yep. If you sift through enough of their shit you'll find this exact thing happening over & over: well, er, technically it WAS a fact, but ….. [insert variously fishy qualifier/s here]! Also easy to find some amazingly generous "HALF-TRUE" ratings.

      A true thing is only as true as the PoliFactoid Oracle says it is, I guess.

  21. SorosBot

    Who would have thought that adherents to an ideology that demands its members disbelieve in proven facts, like climate change (and here it's 60 degrees and raining, in fucking January) and evolution, might be stupid?

    1. finallyhappy

      are you here in Dc too? I thought we had a lot of liberals but given the driving skills I saw this morning- liberals are stupid too. How hard is it to understand what blinking lights or broken lights mean???

      1. SorosBot

        No, I'm in Philly; but our weather is usually pretty much the same. And drivers are such, particularly the suburban commuters or tourists who don't seem to understand the concept of people moving around with their feet and think they only have to obey traffic laws in regards to other cars.

    2. Ruhe

      My own dealings with conservatives would lead me to refer to them as intellectually lazy rather than dumb or stupid. Reality is complex. Dealing with it is hard work sometimes. Holding to a small set of easily applicable, mythology-based axioms is a great way to avoid that work.

      1. Ruhe

        From the Yahoo article describing the study:
        "Nonetheless, there is reason to believe that strict right-wing ideology might appeal to those who have trouble grasping the complexity of the world."
        QED, baby.

  22. dsundertaker

    Death and destruction dealt by machines operating semi-independently? The GOP in a Wingnutshell.

  23. Chichikovovich

    I've always thought that social scientists who substitute sensationalism and headline-grabbing for intellectual discipline by throwing around charged, vague, poorly defined, ideologically loaded words like "conservative" or "liberal" are pretty stupid. Perhaps I should apply for a big research grant.

      1. Generation[redacted]

        I need to start demanding that people explain their political views without using either of those words.

      2. Chichikovovich

        See also Denmark's biggest right-wing party (center-right, not the wingnuts of Folkepartiet, who are, of course, stupid) called the "Venstre" party. ("Venstre" = "left")

        I mean, they were left-wing a hundred years ago!

  24. qwerty42

    Well, I suppose someone has to give Mill's quotation:

    Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.

  25. Ducksworthy

    Was Politifact around to fact check the claim that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction before we wasted a Trillion dollars and at least 5,000 of our soldiers lives looking for them or do they only get into really find grained nit pcking?

    1. Generation[redacted]

      And if MLK had been a more eloquent speaker, federal troops would not have been necessary.

    2. Nothingisamiss

      Really, all these fine people need is to be sat down and spoken to calmly. If only we could elect a president commited to that idea, who spoke rationally to idiots, we'd come together as a nation to solve some real problems.

    3. Negropolis

      Really, it tells you something that even Lincoln found the necessity to go to war, because he didn't want a war in the worse way.

    4. BearNoLike

      If the protesters would have brought sandwiches, then the pepper spray would have been welcome, because, basically, a food product. Props to: Fare la Volpe.

  26. FlownOver

    Absolutely. "Better arguments" will win over those who are filled with misinformation at the molecular level and taught to reject all those uppity European Socialist arguments. That'll work because, logic! Let's form a task force to study the effective application of massive resources toward the goal of getting mouth-breathing bigots to consider the nuances of [your issue here].

  27. prommie

    There is a better corelation between "conservative" and being fretful and easily scared, than with stupidity. Thats why they are authoritarians, they want a daddy figure (Ronnie) to make everything alright. And why everything is a bugaboo to them. Idiots.

  28. Negropolis

    Here are the drones they've been flying over the Detroit and St. Clair rivers here in Michigan/Ontario since 2009:

    General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper

    No shit; they've been flying something over our border called a Predator Reaper. I mean, it's not even subtle, anymore, not even the names of the robots. The Canadians up in Sarnia opposite Port Huran had enough humor to do a mass mooning of them when they originally went up (along with cameras along the rivers).

    But, they are okay 'cause their not weaponized!

          1. Designer_Rants

            I used to live in Ankeny, IA. My house was close to a sewage plant AND a Tone's Spice factory. One day (depending on the wind and the production schedule) it may smell like Lowery's seasoning, the next? Rotten Egg Farts. Pick your poison.

          2. Monsieur_Grumpe

            I work at Kalamazoo's Public Library for several years. I loved that town. And now they have Bell's beer. Good times.

  29. Huevos Ocupados

    "…it could usher in an era when death and destruction can be dealt by machines operating semi-independently."

    Yes, but can they piss on the dead bodies of enemy combatants? I think not.

  30. chascates

    This morning NPR reported on the new class of drones that can refuel themselves in mid-air, discover such things as a human footprint and follow it, and determine targets based on AI.

    Drones are people, my friends.

  31. estoppelboy

    Allow me to clarify a point. The study deals with IQ. It does not say "Conservatives are stupid." The study says "Stupids are conservative." Important point, and helpful and revealing in many regards. It's not their fault they can't, say, grasp sophisticated arguments. It's not as if they refuse to get it, it's that they cant.

  32. teebob2000

    What do you mean "are coming??!!" THEY'RE HERE!! OUTSIDE MY DOOR!!! I can't — GAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!!111

    *eerie silence*

  33. C_R_Eature

    I know that this "Conservatives are *ahem*, shall we say Intellectually Challenged "is not exactly Hot News to all of us who've suffered through the aggressively-incurious-but-always-Right George W. Bush administration, but it's nice to see some hard data.
    Even if the methodology is somewhat flawed, there's certainly more than a grain of truth there. Yahoo Comments Section, Submitted: Exhibit A.

    I saw Rachel's Politi"Fact" Rant on the rerun after the debate. It was wonderful and awesome and somebody needed to say it. I'm glad it was someone of such high caliber as Maddow.

    If anyone is wondering just why it it that we feel the need to create machines to go off and do our Mass Murderin' Dirty Work for us while we sit in our Climate Controlled Bunker, featuring Barca-Loungers, 22 oz. Carbonated Fructose and Giant Double Anusburgers, the best explanation I've ever seen has to go to Vulcan.

  34. Pithaughn

    Victory for the machines was assured the day the first human(s) was(were) mowed down with a machine gun.

    1. Steverino247

      That was suggested as a means of keeping screaming female fans at bay during Beatles concerts, you know.

  35. Chichikovovich

    equal partners in a national conversation, people who we must engage with and convince—and, oh, maybe as a result challenge ourselves to check our work and, you know, make better arguments!

    Sigh. I don't deny that it would be a good thing to have "better arguments" in the sense of classical rhetoric: "more persuasive", or "more rhetorically effective", or just "better at engaging with human psychology so as to get people who have fled from reality to start to face it."

    But if you mean "better arguments" in the sense of "better engaged with reality", "better approximating the ideal of "true premises and conclusion drawn from them by logically valid steps", or "Arguments that draw the conclusion most strongly supported by reliable statistical techniques", well, that's just dumb.

    Do you think that the reason Inhofe, Rush and his dittoheads, every talking head and every guest allowed on Fox News, say flatly that accepted predictions concerning global climate change are a "hoax" (or "complete hoax", or "hoaxiest hoax in the hoaxie history of hoaxing") because the arguments of the climate science community aren't sufficiently rigorous, or don't conform to reliable statistical norms? That my dittohead neighbour would stop thinking that global warming must be a hoax because there was a record snowfall one day last October, if I just carefully and patiently, without condescension, explained why that tidbit of information was irrelevant?

    1. HuddledMass

      Try that and get back to us. I'd do the experiment myself but my tolerance for stupidity is really, really low…

  36. prommie

    Why do people speak as if "intelligence" is a moral virtue? As if it were a "good" in and of itself, and as if possessing it makes one good, so that an intelligent person is somehow better than a stupid person? Why is it that the vast majority agree that it is immoral, for example, for a large and strong person to use physical strength to make someone else give him their stuff, but its not immoral for a "smarter" person to use his or her big brain to acquire a stupid person's stuff? Your intelligence is as much an accident of genetics as is your size and strength. In biology, the winner is the one with the most offspring, in which case, the imbeciles are winning the race by miles.

    1. Chichikovovich

      The opening ten minutes of "Ideocracy" certainly presented your closing point effectively.

      That's why I'm going to expect healthy continuing business returns from my late night TV adds for special, super-effective toilet plungers (Made in Malaysia, where suction was first discovered!), "Normally $45 or even more in stores, but if you act now, they can be yours for the super low price of only seven easy payments of $8.99!"

      1. prommie

        I envy the stupid. They are content, or at least more content, than most of the highly intelligent. Fat, drunk, and stupid is in fact a fine way to go through life. Whereas smart people are expected to meet certain standards, like having the right opinion on the Oxford Comma. Anyone who has a "favorite font" is a walking example of the evils of too much intelligence.

        1. Chichikovovich

          Anyone who has a "favorite font" is a walking example of the evils of too much intelligence.

          Finally, a kindred spirit! I couldn't agree with you more about not having a favorite font – absolutely, they all suck. Times New Roman is OK for text, but the math symbols have funny spacing and some of the Greek letters don't look right in math mode. Calibri is fine for text too, but subscripts and superscripts don't place just right in math mode. Of course Computer Modern in the standard LaTeX package gets everything right in math mode, but the text looks dopey and everything ends up looking like a cheaply produced technical report……

          ?

          What do you mean, I've missed your point entirely?

    2. DahBoner

      "its not immoral for a "smarter" person to use his or her big brain to acquire a stupid person's stuff? "

      Law Schools everywhere shudder at your implication, sir or madam….

    3. vulpes82

      *sigh* That stupid movie. "Intelligence" is, like most things, a complicated and still not-entirely-understood-at-all characteristic dependent on both nature and nurture. Culture, genetics, childhood nutrition, and all host of other things go into it. Sometimes a bunch of morons produce a genius, and vice versa.

  37. V572 the Merciless

    Tiny but perfectly formed Robert Reich is the cutest two-year-serving secretary of labor in history.

    And by the way, if Mittens' daddy was born in Mah-hee-koh, doesn't that make him an anchor baby?

      1. GOPCrusher

        Probably because, at that time no one was trying to sneak into America for fear of being thrown in a uniform, handed a rifle, and sent to Vietnam.
        Canada had a bigger illegal immigration problem than we did.

  38. Ruhe

    I'm a big fan of rational arguments but the patience required to engage politely in a conversation that chases even one conservative belief down to the end of its own blind alley is draining.

  39. Pithaughn

    today I am sad. The discussion / idea we never debate or try to comprehend: Why is it ok to have a system of organizing humans, call it society or civilization, where a few have exponentially more of everything than almost everyone else?
    The answer I believe is religion or the belief in myths. When you get right down to it, all the major myths allow this gross inequality.
    That's all I've got so far.

    1. prommie

      Because its human nature; the toughest meanest, nastiest sonsabitches are always gonna be taking shit from the weak and timid. Ron Paul wants society to encourage this. FDR wanted society to discourage this. The degree of the limitation of individual freedom vs. the degree of economic equality achieved is an important factor in how far you want to go in discouraging it.

    2. MissTaken

      I believe that inherently humans are stupid assholes. Not only are we jerks who truly believe "well, I gots mine, so fuck you" but we are also stupid enough to not realize that we actually succeed and progress further when we cooperate and play well with each other. The invention and belief in religion perpetuates this stupid assholery.

      1. SorosBot

        And it's pretty much always the most selfish, nasty bastards who manage to rise to the top. In ancient times, tribes were ruled by whoever was strongest and most willing to use violence to enforce their will; then we invented civilization, and it became whoever could raise the biggest army.

        Along with the spears, religion was used to keep the masses in line, convincing them that this inequality was the natural order of things. Note that the earliest kings in places like Sumer and Egypt were worshiped as gods, and the populace was so convinced in their religions that people would willingly agree to be human sacrifices to appease their gods.

        Nowadays, it's whoever has the most money – and the people who make the most are corporate executives who profit off the labor of others who they screw over, and in turn use that money to bribe those who officially make the rules.

        1. Generation[redacted]

          It's like the hypothesis that, "If we arm everyone, the good guys will win." Actually, if we arm everyone, the people most inclined to use their guns typically win. Two armed men have an argument. The man who uses his gun first, wins the argument.

          1. SorosBot

            Until later the director goes back and reedits the film so that the bad guy shot first, but missed, out of a weird belief that shooting first made the good guy seem less heroic.

  40. C_R_Eature

    Well, now look what You People have done. My "p" score is up to 100. If you keep on encouraging my bad behavior I'll never learn.

    *Pssst* Thankyouthankyouthankyou! shhhhh.

  41. CapnFatback

    I believe this study perfectly foretells Newt and company's next move after conquering the moon; they will move on to Jupiter–to get more stupider.

    And might I add, "Nyaah, nyaah."

  42. DarwinianDemon

    My favorite comment regarding Politifact came from Jared Bernstein's blog:

    FlipYrWhig says:
    January 25, 2012 at 10:33 am I look forward to PolitiFact scoring every invocation of the greatness of the American people as “half true,” because, you see, very many of them are kind of unimpressive and sucky.

  43. chascates

    While not all stupid people are conservatives, all conservatives are stupid people"
    –John Stuart Mill

  44. WhatTheHeck

    Sure the robot killer plane can land by itself after it took out targets 5,000 miles away. But what if someone asked it to play Tic-Tac-Toe at the same time? That's when humans will finally become aware how stupid humans are.

  45. Neoyorquino

    Well, I'm going back to bed. Okay, maybe a couple of drinks first. Wake me up in time for the nightmarish conflagration.

  46. Nopantsmcgee

    "But hey, now we can all let ourselves off the hook and just deride them as all a bunch of idiots who aren’t even worth talking to in the first place."

    You don't have to present both sides of an argument when one of those sides is completely made-up. I don't know about you, and maybe I am not spouting the 'compassion' a libtard like me should have, but you can't argue with ignorance and especially those who are proud to be ignorant. You lose 1 pt, Wonkette.

  47. Biff

    I posit that Robert Reich read my comment from the SC primary thread last weekend, wherein I said I thought we were flirting with disaster with pretty much any one of these asshat candidates, likening it to snorting lines off a vice cop's ol' lady's ass, when he wrote that column. Where's my royalty check?

  48. Dashboard Buddha

    How cool will it be when autonomic drones swoop in like clouds of wrath just like in the bible.

    How much cooler when a hacker in Russia signs each of the drones up for a Facebook account.

    1. Designer_Rants

      Can't wait until we learn demonstrably why what seemed like a bad idea (semi-autonomous homicidal flying-robots) are, in fact, a bad idea.

      I'm imagining a young mother pushing a baby stroller which appears suspiciously like an al Qaeda operative to some computer. When it asks its human er, chaperones? if it's okay to shoot a 50 caliber machine gun at the "target", let's say the robot thought it received a "sure" instead of a "better not". That'll play well on the evening news. Or maybe no one will care, like when drones kill people today.

      1. Dashboard Buddha

        :::Scan area:::

        Sighted: Baby carriage

        :::scan for bomb in the baby carriage wired to the radio:::

        No bomb present

        :::scan for evidence of previous abortion:::

        Evidence present – target had abortion at age 17 after being raped by father

        :::Kill:::

        Firing missles.

  49. HarryButtle

    "Since, you know, the one thing the country needs right now more than just about anything else is yet another excuse to avoid the hard work of looking at those we disagree with as equal partners in a national conversation, people who we must engage with and convince—and, oh, maybe as a result challenge ourselves to check our work and, you know, make better arguments!"

    Ah, to be young and naive like Matt…he still thinks conservatards can be engaged and convinced that the leftists, faggots, feminazis, abortionists, and browns on welfare aren't evil minions of Satan trying to destroy this God-fearing land of ours. Probably still believes in the Easter Bunny, too.

  50. DahBoner

    SCIENCE BITCHES:

    1. Whiners grow up to be conservative http://majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/2006/03

    2. People with right wing views have a larger area of the brain associated with fear and a smaller area of the brain associated with courage and optimism http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8

    3. The more psychotic (mentally ill) the voter, the more likely they were to vote for Bush. http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewArticle.asp?i

    4. People who give in to racism and prejudice may simply be dumb http://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-soc

    5. Conservatives are more likely to be close-minded because they don't have a novelty-seeking gene variant that Liberals do, which causes Liberals to be more interested in learning about their friends' points of view.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/1010

  51. DahBoner

    "In our Spring 2006 survey, we asked the respondents to pick their favorite odors from the following list: Chocolate, Coffee, Vanilla, Garlic, or a Newborn Baby. The Conservative and especially the Very Conservative females were sharply elevated in their preference for the Newborn Baby odor relative to the Liberal females. The Very Conservative females were the only cohort to select Newborn Baby as their favorite odor."

    Guys, if you want to bang a Conservative woman–and I have no idea why you'd want to do that, but if you do–cover yourself from head to toe in Baby Powder.

    GO ASK NEWTIE WHEN YOU'RE ONE FOOT TALL…

  52. HelmutNewton

    What we should be doing is try to convince the stupid conservatives that *voting* is a librul/soshalist/Muslin conspiracy and that they should avoid it at all costs.

    I mean, look at all the other stupid shit that they believe. It shouldn't be too hard, right?

  53. lulzmonger

    Media Study Confirms: SCIENCE HAS A LIBERAL BIAS!

    If you do not ban science, it means you want the terrorists to win.

  54. JackObin

    Pugsly Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and the entire AM radio dial are stupuid? No, I won't accept that.

    1. Designer_Rants

      I read an article on Glenn from the AV Club (Onion) about 5 years ago. It dawned on me that he always wanted to be a Theater Queen. He can cry on cue (I understand that's a real virtue in some circles?). The article was about a x-mas movie or some bullshit he produced and/or starred in.

      Anyway, it should be clear to anyone that he doesn't have the face for super-movie-stardom, so he became a drunk as his hopes and dreams were dashed. Then he snapped out of it and worked his way up through propaganda. Any guy who can "connect the dots" between an obscure Greek terrorist group from the 80s(?) to the peaceful popular American "Occupy" protest movement (and maintain a fervent audience!) is not a complete Moran, just a despicable person.

  55. Antispandex

    I have such a crush on Rachel Maddow…even though I know that, as a straight guy, it is wrong! I know! But you really aren't helping with these posts! Couldn't you show her saying something stupid and "Palin-y" just once?

  56. Beetagger

    I knew the Politifact guy when he was a college douchbag at Arizona State. I'm sure his parents love him.

  57. Naked_Bunny

    I think our future machine overlords will be less like Skynet and more like Colossus, which only threatens to start a nuclear war unless it gets to watch computer scientists have sex (and, presumably, upload the video).

  58. ttommyunger

    …"Conservatives Dumb, Says Science." To which Professor Gingrich retorted: "I know you are, but what am I?"

  59. megadama

    NEOCONSERVATISM IS JUST RE-PACKAGED COMMUNISM. "Jews" are only "conservative" when it comes to two things: 1) "Defense", i.e. conning their American useful idiots into taking over every economy they want to control, and 2) "Free enterprise", i.e. conning their American useful idiots into allowing them to monopolize every sector of the American economy they want to control. "Jews" founded communism, socialism, and liberalism – the direct opposites of conservatism. This is historical fact. Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky were all "jews". Read the "jewish" playbook at http://100777.com/protocols. You'll see that "jews" are rabidly dedicated to destroying EVERY CHRISTIAN NATION ON EARTH. Also, learn how YOU can become a REAL CONSERVATIVE by visiting the barometer of what's really conservative – The John Birch Society – at http://jbs.org. DEAN BERRY MINISTRIES: "When you get tired of fighting the truth."

Comments are closed.