Freedom

[Ray Brinzer]

Surely you are in favor of laws that prevent you from robbing your neighbor.....arernt you?

I'm pretty lukewarm on those.  However I am strongly in favor of laws that prevent my neighbor from robbing me.

[mspart]

If we were angels, we wouldn't need government to control us.  We would be in control of ourselves and would always do the right thing.  We are not angels.  Therefore we need some amount of government control (no killing, stealing, robbing, lying etc) to persuade us to do what is right rather than to do what is wrong. 

mspart

[TobusRex]

I believe that the nasty elements of human behavior preclude absolute freedom, particulary a tendency to violence.  I don't think primitive bigotries and biases should be protected by law. However I don't think somebody getting "hurt feelings" means jack shit. As long as people are receiving equal treatment under the law...I'm good.

Religion cannot be trusted as a moral guardian. Religious countries have more crime (especially violent crime) than non-religious countries. Religion has no monopoly on morality. Look at countries where religious authorities have taken control and they are all, without exception, repressive. Look at the historical record of the violence the Church imposed on Europe through history, but particularly with the religious wars following Martin Luther's separation from the church.

I come in at about the 80% mark. I think people's energies have to be at least somewhat controlled/directed for the betterment of the nation as a whole. I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience. The more experience you get, or the more talented you are, the higher you will rise. The ancient Chinese had a similar system (under an emperor, granted) that was remarkably efficient. In lieu of an Emperor a President will suffice (BUT only if he meets all the requirements of the other top bureaucrats). A meritocracy, essentially, of highly intelligent professionals.

[Cougar1]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

[TobusRex]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

[buck]

What about our food supply?  How do you guarantee our food won't sicken us without safety standards?  The food industry has claimed that it can rely on private food inspectors, but these auditors are hired by the very companies they inspect and have often failed to point out problems in facilities.

[ViseGrip]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

William F. Buckley, Jr once said he would rather be governed by the first hundred names in the phone book than by Harvard graduates. And I couldnt agree more.

[ViseGrip]

I believe that the nasty elements of human behavior preclude absolute freedom, particulary a tendency to violence.  I don't think primitive bigotries and biases should be protected by law. However I don't think somebody getting "hurt feelings" means jack shit. As long as people are receiving equal treatment under the law...I'm good.

So you think it was wrong for OU President Boren to expel those two frat boys on the bus?

So you think speech codes on college campuses are wrong?

[Cougar1]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

Like I said, that is incredible ignorance on your part. I've started more than one business and managed in a couple others. Have a superior IQ does not translate to effective management and sometimes works against it due to arrogance (the POTUS is a fine example) and working in government is not the real world where people have to produce in order to maintain their job. As long as you provide a steady stream of someone else's money there is little reason to be efficient and responsible with it. Our bloated bureaucracies are fine examples of this.

[TobusRex]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

Like I said, that is incredible ignorance on your part. I've started more than one business and managed in a couple others. Have a superior IQ does not translate to effective management and sometimes works against it due to arrogance (the POTUS is a fine example) and working in government is not the real world where people have to produce in order to maintain their job. As long as you provide a steady stream of someone else's money there is little reason to be efficient and responsible with it. Our bloated bureaucracies are fine examples of this.

No thank you sir, I prefer to have someone brainy in charge. Look at Bush Jr's miserable record as President. Cheney on the other hand IS very intelligent...but an evil son of a bitch. I wonder sometimes how bad Bush would have been if he had been smart enough to make decisions on his own. Probably even worse.

You are 100% correct that IQ is not completely reliable as an indicator of how well one can do a job, but intelligent people as a general rule tend to do things much better than dummies.

[ViseGrip]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

Like I said, that is incredible ignorance on your part. I've started more than one business and managed in a couple others. Have a superior IQ does not translate to effective management and sometimes works against it due to arrogance (the POTUS is a fine example) and working in government is not the real world where people have to produce in order to maintain their job. As long as you provide a steady stream of someone else's money there is little reason to be efficient and responsible with it. Our bloated bureaucracies are fine examples of this.

No thank you sir, I prefer to have someone brainy in charge. Look at Bush Jr's miserable record as President. Cheney on the other hand IS very intelligent...but an evil son of a bitch. I wonder sometimes how bad Bush would have been if he had been smart enough to make decisions on his own. Probably even worse.

You are 100% correct that IQ is not completely reliable as an indicator of how well one can do a job, but intelligent people as a general rule tend to do things much better than dummies.

Intelligence is not necessarily the same as academic achievement. Especially in politics.

[TobusRex]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

Like I said, that is incredible ignorance on your part. I've started more than one business and managed in a couple others. Have a superior IQ does not translate to effective management and sometimes works against it due to arrogance (the POTUS is a fine example) and working in government is not the real world where people have to produce in order to maintain their job. As long as you provide a steady stream of someone else's money there is little reason to be efficient and responsible with it. Our bloated bureaucracies are fine examples of this.

No thank you sir, I prefer to have someone brainy in charge. Look at Bush Jr's miserable record as President. Cheney on the other hand IS very intelligent...but an evil son of a bitch. I wonder sometimes how bad Bush would have been if he had been smart enough to make decisions on his own. Probably even worse.

You are 100% correct that IQ is not completely reliable as an indicator of how well one can do a job, but intelligent people as a general rule tend to do things much better than dummies.

Intelligence is not necessarily the same as academic achievement. Especially in politics.

Yes sir I agree completely. Especially in politics and that perfectly explains our country's ills.

[TobusRex]

Let me cite an example of dumb vs smart. The Branch Davidian debacle in Waco. If the person calling the shots had been smart then Koresh could have easily been seized with no fuss when he went on his morning run.  A stupid "macho" decision was made and 80 people died. Ruby Ridge...that is the fault of somebody not thinking shit through. Furthermore both those incidents inspire further terror. Stupidity is something that has an echoing, lingering effect on a country in profound ways.

[TobusRex]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

William F. Buckley, Jr once said he would rather be governed by the first hundred names in the phone book than by Harvard graduates. And I couldnt agree more.

Buckley went to Yale.

Dumbass.

[Cougar1]

I think the government should only be staffed with professional bureaucrats with high IQs and years of training and experience.

This may be the best argument against big government you have offered us to date.

Exactly. God forbid somebody competent does the job, right?

Like I said, that is incredible ignorance on your part. I've started more than one business and managed in a couple others. Have a superior IQ does not translate to effective management and sometimes works against it due to arrogance (the POTUS is a fine example) and working in government is not the real world where people have to produce in order to maintain their job. As long as you provide a steady stream of someone else's money there is little reason to be efficient and responsible with it. Our bloated bureaucracies are fine examples of this.

No thank you sir, I prefer to have someone brainy in charge. Look at Bush Jr's miserable record as President. Cheney on the other hand IS very intelligent...but an evil son of a bitch. I wonder sometimes how bad Bush would have been if he had been smart enough to make decisions on his own. Probably even worse.

You are 100% correct that IQ is not completely reliable as an indicator of how well one can do a job, but intelligent people as a general rule tend to do things much better than dummies.

You are proving yourself to be uninformed. Try this: http://keithhennessey.com/2013/04/24/smarter/

To take the matter further let me go for the jugular in a subject that will raise your blood pressure. Sarah Palin, whom you consider an idiot but who is easily as smart as you, was a highly effective Governor who carried an approval rate of over 70% and had a lot of Democrats that liked her as a Governor because she managed well. This is the kind of reality you can't seem to digest.