She is arrogant, but her information/recommendations/observations are correct.

No doubt.
Fact is, I don't think she's evil incarnate, just disconnected from real people and always has been. It's just like the bozo rich buffoons coming out of the mahogany woodwork in our election; they don't know shit about real people at ground level.

Liberals try to demean inheritance. This is in order to contrive a pretext to confiscate the property of others. That is the real purpose.

I don't even know why I'm responding to this comment----"This is in order to contrive a pretext to confiscate the property of others."

Whose inheritance has ever been confiscated, by who, by what authority?

The fantasy continues. Lots of demons in Righty-Land. Perhaps the answer is in Eastwood's chair: Are they friendly spirits?..... Just listen!

Left-wingers always want to dramatically increase the inheritance taxes. There have been proposals - I believe even under the Truman administration - of actually having 100% (ONE HUNDRED PERCENT) inheritance tax when the inheritance exceeds a certain amount, say, 10 million or a million. I do not remember the exact numbers, but I do know that there have been such proposals and we see Leftists on these very threads advocating this.

In addition, look at the typical criticism of the so-called "rich." The typical one is "they did not earn it." And variations of that.

I simply ask: What does that imply? And what would the consequences of that thinking be? Do you think that is some kind of a criticism or condemnation?

Here it's simply off topic and irrelevant.

Liberals try to demean inheritance. NO! Just the responsibility not taken that is from it.
Just because you got rich does not mean you should treat your workers bad then tell everyone to do the same. It would be like ALEC here. It brought down the pay, as the cost of living is going up.
Now it's hurting the rich, no sales. More people like me that does without, does not buy high $ stuff. Much of it lost value so I walk away from it!
Like the orileys car parts. They opened a new store in my town. So I went there only to find out they raised the price of Lucas $3. So I drove across town to the other orileys only to find it's the same price. It was $12 a few months a go, now it's $15. I let the workers have it. "Just because a new store opened ya'll don't have to raise the prices so high., Im going to K-mart you can have your high prices for your self!" Out the door I went. Never been back yet. And haven't bought Lucas, found something cheaper!

Anyway you get the point, it lost it's value! And the greed killed the sales.

I think it's more like your taxes on what you do with the money. House taxes, car taxes.
They cost more because they buy better cars & houses with the money.
You have more money you buy more things, better things they get taxes more & better!

"Just because you got rich does not mean you should treat your workers bad then tell everyone to do the same."

True. And most wealthy people are as kind and generous as the rest of us. To believe the Leftist myths that say otherwise would be the same as believing hateful myths about certain races or other groups of people. The Left-wingers are against humanity: They try to dehumanize those who do not agree with their ideology and fit their categories.

Not exactly.

"True. And most ..... "
Written as a true shill would write it. Do your Tea Party friends understand that you profit from your bullshit?

Hey there, friends of Mishima, how much do YOU get paid for your allegiance to the GOP and the 1%? Do you require verifiable proof of what they resent to you? Do you know what critical thinking is?

Glad you wrote that reply on the other page about Bush's IQ being around 91. It is a fabrication, and there are a number of ways to see it. I thought you were more of an independent thinker or at least critical thinker.

First of all, notice that the fallacious report indicated that Clinton's IQ is 182. That is absurd in the first place because there is practically nobody around who has such an IQ. (Please do not debate me about intelligence testing.) And notice the obvious relationship of the two IQs: 91 to 182. Notice anything, rerushg?

It was a joke put out. The first number is simply made up! Then, the second one was doubled!

What a freakin' joke!
-----
But there is more. Bush's SAT score is public record: You can find many sources to verify this, so don't START with the Left-winger garbage of denying data, OK?

Bush's total SAT score was 1206. Al Gore's was considerably higher, 1355.

http://www.insidepolitics.org/heard/heard32300.html

Next, SAT scores can give an approximation of one's intelligence, and it was even more true during the time when Bush took the test (and Gore, too). Now, do not play the word games; I chose my words carefully, using the word APPROXIMATION!

Now, using the research that shows the approximate IQ expected from the SAT score attained, an SAT score of 1206 would result in an IQ score of about 125. Gore, at 1355, would have an IQ of about 139-140.

This is only one of many charts for this kind of estimation:
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/oldSATIQ.aspx

If you are going to play games with these data, I would really appreciate your not offending me with a reply. Please reply to others. Thank you.

"Glad you wrote that reply on the other page...."

And I'm glad you replied on this one. Hit a nerve, did we?
LOL! Joke? No. Stuff happens. The Moon never shows it's backside to the Earth either, but there it is every night.
Your reliance on a "given day" score clearly indicates your stress on this issue. We would note that while direct IQ scoring should be available for such a person, it isn't. Instead, we have an indirect appraisal that inherently includes the testing error of the original test plus (actually "times") the error of the correlation. The simple facts remain that nothing in Bush's life prior to the White House and certainly nothing while there would suggest an ability above average in any intellectual skill. Hence, disaster. So an independent assessment of ability based on "what you've shown" is likely more valid. Indeed, the case of Bush, definitive.
And, by the way, that's much of your problem with Romney. Apart from his speaking issues and having had no trustworthy stance on any policy, there's just no evidence that anything in his past is the result of his personal abilities. Bain was a set-up by friends of Dad in a "can't fail" financial environment that was as much political as anything else. As governor everything he's pointed at as achievements have been either refuted (by insiders even) or simply bullshit overstatement of routine events.
So you're coming with the same kind of dummy: the dynastic and easily manipulated one. Why are they that way? Because that's all you want them to be. Grover Norquist said it outright. Whatever the IQ's, both are substandard presidential material for what they've shown. Fortunately, it won't matter.
Wear black.

Bush's overall intelligence is about 1.5 Standard Deviations above the mean. You are wrong. You have been summarily and conclusively proven wrong.

You have shown that I am correct about the Left.

You have "summarily and conclusively" proven nothing. Just more assertions about a man who was obviously intellectually inept. Now you propose another of the same. Norquist made that clear.

Please refrain from further projection. You overuse it to the point that even your associates must wonder why you're never able to present a valid argument or adequately defend an assertion.

I provided the raw data, quotes, and links. You are wrong.

"I provided the raw data.... "

Sorry, my friend, the proof is in the pudding. Good grief, you people won't even be seen in public with Bush. Obviously there's a reason for that. Should not the last GOP president speak to the issues of the day? Has he no standing? Do your Tea Party friends know that he was only there to bankrupt the country and hand it all over to the elites, thereby destroying democracy? Do they not know that the inept Romney's purpose is to finish the job? Norquist: ... just need enough intelligence to sign his name. Be sure he has a desk placard with his name on both sides in case he forgets.
But I digress. Just wear black.

Well said! More right-wing magical thinking!

right-wing insani-tea-party-FASCISM paranoia at it's finest!

You agreed with another poster that Bush had a low IQ, and you posted that it was 91.

You are now trying to change the subject.

You were wrong. I provided the specific numbers and links.

I posted the data on the approximate IQ of Bush. Can you refute the data? I know that it is irrefutable.

"[You] know it is irrefutable."
Perchance was it YOU administering the test? He likely doesn't even get close to "91." When you have the money and the name, you can purchase most any degree your little wrinkly heart desires. And he did. Then he avoided his duties in the Coast Guard, disappeared from duty for a year. Not showing his "smarts" there.

IQ is overrated.

For instance, I know someone who has a doctorate who has been STAGGERINGLY stupid and careless in their online behaviour. I mean, really EPIC, even hard-to-fathom, stupidity.

IQ sure doesn't equal common sense.

Maybe that explanation could be a whole Chapter in the second (ugh) book.

You have violated Current guidelines. I will now report you.

Perfect imitation of a 2 year old runnin' to mama... "now i'm gonna tell on you, nya nya..."

Voodoo thinking. :)

He's nuttier than a fruit cake not to mention the proof is there.......he's a Tea Bagger!

Especially him! :)

".... I will now report you."

Go for it. Nothing has happened here.

Yeh Kenny, As Progresshiv said a week or so ago - "OH More Fruitcakes and it's not even Christmas...."
The 'baggers just can't resist our charm.

You are now trying to change the subject.
I would say that you must be right with that statement as you are a master at doing exactly that. Bush is still at least 1.5 standard deviations below the mean and as rerushg said that puts his IQ somewhere between 90 and 95. How's the weather on Fantasy Island?

Pwr 2 the intelligent peons!
GUILLOTINE the cheap labor conservative CORPOFASCISTS!

Too funny! :)

What a nut job!

What? I'm still waiting for you to report me for actually providing MORE information about your alternative handles, like Liberty Shrink on amazon! You can't report her and get her comment removed before mine!

I won't stand for it you, hear me? I WON'T STAND FOR IT!

I got your back!

I am a member of the Tea Party, and we are now communicating by the tens of thousands with one another across the nation. We will take our nation back. The executive and the Senate.

I provided the numbers and the links to the irrefutable data. The other, with Billybob at an IQ of 182 and Bush at 91 were fabrications.

It is unfortunate that you simply cling to untruths that make you feel vindicated.

We in the Tea Party are very well organized. And we vote.

"You are now trying to change the subject...."

No. Your words: "Glad you wrote that reply on the other page about Bush's IQ.." and you brought the issue to the front page. Clearly the issue is of interest to you.
You have simply described a methodology that's useful for the assessment of populations. There is considerable uncertainty when applied to a single case. That's why other methods, expert opinion, is brought to bear (as it was).
Bush's real-world performance clearly suggests intelligence around "normal" and, if better, not significantly so. The point is that the GOP prefers men of manipulable ignorance, just as Norquist indicates.
You can accept the disaster of the Bush adminstration as that of the ignorance and intellectual deficiency of Bush, or you can accept it as the failure of GOP/1% manipulation. Your choice.
The second point is that Romney is of the same ilk. Norquist intimated this almost explicitly. He is simply intellectually incapable of POTUS. There's nothing behind the facade and the facade itself is of an inept, distant individual. Nice try but the man to front the GOP lie machine just isn't up to the task, my friend. You guys keep picking dummies because the reasonably intelligent ones (Gingrich, maybe Santorum) can't conceal their racism, bigotry and condescension toward Americans not of their economic class. It's just that simple. Sorry.

"I posted the data on the approximate IQ of Bush..."

It has been definitively refuted. Case closed.

".... More Fruitcakes and it's not even Christmas...." Ha!!

They come to learn the truth in order to devise ways to refute it back in the lie factories. A vain effort, of course, but if they want to try their lies out here first - hey - it's entertaining.

I posted the numbers and the data. Along with links. You are wrong. I am sorry.

Yes, the issue is of interest. Not so much about Bush's intelligence, but the Left distorts conceptions and clearly defined parameters. In this case, the Left-wingers have disseminated incorrect information and distorted the concept of intelligence. I really do not like to see the latter, and that has little to do with politics.

"We in the Tea Party are very well organized...."

Correction: "..very well monetized." Or at least you were. Now I see meetings and rallies that don't quite happen. "Honored speakers" that can't quite make it. Other Right-Wing ideologues who just aren't available anymore. You are rejected by your party.
Will they vote? Or perhaps not, out of disgust with the Mormon and the Randian. Tell enough lies and even your own start to question. Or maybe many of them just write in someone else. Who knows? You're done. The Tea Party is done. The official nomination of Romney slammed the door forever. Bye-bye.

"You have simply described a methodology that's useful for the assessment of populations. There is considerable uncertainty when applied to a single case."

I asked you not to post to me on this topic. You are free to do so, of course, but you know essentially nothing about it and give opinions. I simply do not want to explain it because it takes a bit of time, but I do not want to see distortions and untruths being posted. It also can be upsetting because you are probably telling others these myths and misconceptions. I simply want you to know that you are wrong and spreading untruths.

Romney is absolutely brilliant. High IQ in itself does not qualify one for such an office, but there is no denying that Romney is extremely intelligent. Rumor has it that Romney had a perfect score on the SAT, but I have not been able to verify it. But these precise scores are not important. The truth is that Romney is easily in the gifted range of intelligence.

To say otherwise would be puerile and simply dumb.

"I posted the numbers and the data...."

Yes. Thank you. And again, easily refuted with intelligence, critical thinking, and a clear understanding, not ideologically driven, of the issues of human intelligence and it manifests itself in real-word effectiveness. What's your point? Bush was a highly intelligent fuck-up? If you'd like to start some new discussion from there, have at it.
Embarrassing though it may be, you might consider recommending to your handlers that your services might better serve them elsewhere. Perhaps somewhere where things are less complicated.

The Tea Party has many branches. Again, you are giving an opinion on something about which you have little information and no understanding. The Tea Party lives mostly from individual donations.

But it does not matter, anyway. You Left-wingers are against groups of people getting together and speaking through a national organization - when it does not align with Leftist dogma. Like you attack the NRA when it speaks for millions of patriotic lovers of America, but support GOVERNMENT union voices that live off the taxes of working people.

The hypocrisy of the left has no bounds, and the Left is anti-liberty.

You have manifestly refused to accept hard data. What can one say to such a person?

"Yes, the issue is of interest..... "

Oh please. Every time you get stuck you point to subjective reasons about deflection, distortion, or whatever. You're just stuck with an ideology that is anti-human and it's indefensible. That is all.

Pro-human. Bush was called retarded. I presented irrefutable data.

Mishi!!!

Since you opened the door by making a direct statement by saying:

"YOU Left-wingers are against groups of people getting together and speaking through a national organization- when it does not align with Leftist dogma."

Let me ask YOU,when was the last time you supported groups of people or a national organization who do not align with YOUR Right-wing dogma?

And no fancy foot work by listing a left leaning org that does something charitable.

Virtually every time I respond, I find it necessary to say the same thing: Read my post.

I hesitate to explain what is already very clearly and simply written, but will do it one more time. The next time, please read the post.

The poster in question essentially said that the Koch family was how the Tea Party exists, how it is funded. I clarified that mistake and said that is not so important.

Now, please pay attention because I do not want to keep repeating this, OK?

I then went on to refer to people speaking via some organization. This poster OBVIOUSLY was criticizing the Tea Party by implying that it exists through Koch funding. I simply said - are you paying attention here? - that it is an organization through which people are gathering to express their opinion.

If other organizations are massively funded - and the Tea Party is not primarily funded by Koch by the way - Lefists support them if they adhere to Leftist ideology. (Think about Comrade Soros, for example.) But if they mistakenly think that the support comes from a patriotic, Conservative, pro-free market source, then they do not like the idea of people speaking their voice through the organization.

Again, read my posts. I really find repeating and explaining what was already there quite tiresome.

It is unfortunate that you simply cling to untruths that make you feel vindicated.

Right back atcha! Is the Fall nice on Fantasy Island?

Pwr 2 the INTELLIGENT peons!
GUILLOTINE MEDIOCRITY!

I posted data and links.

Notice how he puts his hands over his ears and refuses to entertain anything but very refutable LIES? Poor little man -- sometimes I honestly feel sorry for him.

Pwr 2 the reality-based peons!
GUILLOTINE MEDIOCRITY!

what's new?

It's all magical voodoo thinking with them isn't it? So very "revealing"...

overdosed on the insani-tea.

Ha! Well said!

Ha! Made me LoL! :) I'm with you brother! Solidarity!!!

Mishi!!!!!

I have no interest in your post----to me that would be like reading the graffiti on a gas station stall.

I knew you would do the Mishi shuffle, typical.

I know people have different ( in Right-winger's case willful ) levels of comprehension But my point was exact.
When YOU say:

"YOU Left-wingers are against groups of people getting together and speaking through a national organization- when it does not align with Leftist dogma."

It means that "Us" Libs will not listen to the message from a group WE diametrically oppose. Why would anyone do that? Do you make it a habit to agree with something that goes against your own thinking?

Now stay with me, I'm not referring to your post but to only this part, focus please--"YOU Left-wingers are against groups of people getting together and speaking through a national organization- when it does not align with Leftist dogma."

"the Tea Party is not primarily funded by Koch" Well yes it was not 100%, it happed on
December 16, 1773. It's over!

Now look at the "It was against the tax policy of the British government and the East India Company that controlled all the tea imported into the colonies."

Tax policy, cuts going to the rich not everyone. As it is heading.
Yes there is a new Tea Party coming. We will not stand for the tax cuts going to the rich!!!

"We in the Tea Party are very well organized. And we vote."
So does the Gays, Mexicans, the poor, old, all people of any color.
I think the workers all need to take a vacation on the same day & give their
corp boss a voucher for the work that was not done!

You distorted the message. Gina is essentially correct.

It is fine to have fun; you distorted that part.

But people should cut down on tobacco and drink. The "fun" part really is in reference to those who want immediate gratification, cannot discipline themselves, and are too lazy to make concerted and sustained efforts. Those behaviors lead to poverty.

Another distortion is that you say this woman is claiming that one can be a "billionaire" if they stop being slovenly and have self-respect and work hard. Nothing of the sort. They can avoid POVERTY. They do not have to live off the earnings of others who are not malingerers and who have decency and self-respect.

"You distorted the message...."
Projection. Nothing, and I do mean nothing, that you say here accurately reflects either the video or llip's comment. Quit making this stuff up.
Like Rinehart, you presume some knowledge of the subject when you have none. You have no concept of even America, much less lower class struggles.
This woman inherited $20 billion, has nothing to do with the business, and lives a life of ease. That's not to say she is necessarily evil, she's just disconnected.
So she utters what suits her wealthy interests: "lower the minimum wage and cut taxes". Total disconnect. The disconnect of ignorance.

Ah, yes I remember you long for Antebellum.

"They can avoid POVERTY. They do not have to live off the earnings of others who are not malingerers and who have decency and self-respect." So are billionaires the victims of the poor Devils?

I understand America very well for the following reasons:

1. Born and grew up in America.
2. Worked in the public and private sectors of America.
3. Lived in rural America (rural Alaska, rural Florida, rural CT, rural NH, rural VT) and suburbia/city America in four states, adding Texas to that mix.
4. Have visited many, many states. Meet people and discuss a lot from each.
5. Lived abroad. This enables one to see one's own country clearly and objectively.

I am not trying to arouse envy in you. I just state facts that I think you should know. I will not repeat this.

No, I do not long for antebellum. You did not read the post about it. I used it to describe pre-Civil War utopianists compared to the start of today's Liberals' legacy, the Progressives.

Utopianists have always been among us. Those of antebellum America differed in a very important - ESSENTIAL - aspect: They confined themselves to their communities. A person could join or leave.

This changed qualitatively with your progenitors, the Progressives: They wanted the entire nation to conform to the "dream" and enlisted the power of the federal government to COERCE the people to the extent that they could.

The only "longing" I would have for the antebellum era is that I would like to see these malevolent Left-wingers just start their communes and leave the rest of us alone. Let the Left-winger lie in the mud and slime of their poverty and immorality and anarchy, and try to crawl out of it to civilization.

"I understand America very well.."
There's that "envy" again. Are you serious? I have no envy of you. I've been all over this country, as well as extended periods all over Europe (including Russia), and extended periods in Japan and South Korea. Not military... professional career.
The difference is that I did not abandon my country in order to throw peanuts from afar.
You don't present here any view of our country that represents a rational view in the international context. The rest of the world looks at us very negatively because of the Bush/Cheney administration... the wars and the economic destruction that brought the roof down on their heads as well. Why do you think President Obama got the Nobel Prize? That was the world saying, "Thank you America for no more Bush/Cheney and no more war mongering GOP with their destructive economic policies."
You may claim what you wish; your disconnect with the American people on the ground is obvious. You represent a very narrow ideology in this country. Quite frankly, it's embarrassing and offensive to the great majority of Americans.
We're one day closer to Mormon/Randian splatdown.
Wear black.

My G-d Mishi you believe in a utopian society! "I would like to see these malevolent Left-wingers just start their communes and leave the rest of us alone." You see in your vision us "Malevolent" Liberals would be gone; now you get it? it's not so much about the realization, that's foolish, but the improvement attained.

In my vision Right-wingers are still around, they would still rant full of righteous indignation
as that is their privilege, they however would be a minority incapable of causing harm with their EXTREMISTS views. I think my vision is closer to realization than yours.

At this point in time we have a good Liberal president; who has prevented a great depression, passed monumental laws social laws and the historic healthcare plan. The GOP was embolden by the criminal acts of GWB but we have held our ground and in the next four years we WILL chip away at their power.

I Am proud that given the GOP treachery we *LEFT-WINGERS* still adhere to our principles. Paul Ryan is a product of Liberal policies; his education ( I use the term VERY loosely ) was funded by the very programs he hopes to destroy . After his father's death Ryan received Social Security survivors benefits until his 18th birthday, which were saved up in order to pay for his college education. Hell even Ron Paul Admits He's On Social Security. They enjoy the benefits of LIBERAL policies, they just think poor people shouldn't.

{My G-d Mishi you believe in a utopian society!}

Please read my posts. If you are going to write conclusions and evaluations/judgments, please give just a very quick moment of reflection. Then I will not have to "spell it out."

You did the same thing claiming I wanted to return to an antebellum America. You did it again with that coment.

I was about to explain, but just read the post to which you responded. I simply do not want to rewrite what was already written.

Thanks.

Please see video above! Bertrand Russell In Praise of Idleness

They do so very desperately long for the neo-feudalism of the 1%er-masters as lairds -of-the-land and everyone else as peasant-serfs to our rightful (god-ordained!) masters, we're all supposed to shut-the-fuck-up and "know our place".

oh expect him to say his usual right-wing-corporate-FASCIST-party line, he's a "leftist", it's really a broken record, the groove is worn so very deeply...

I have the same problems. Except I don't waste time talking to mishi. I would rather talk to real people.

Hmmm, no reply as of yet. Was this a drive by removal? Was it done for political reasons because I penned it? Since I didn't say anyting personal or threatening to Mishima someone may have complained. This after people falsly accusing me of flagging posts. I have been threatened and called everything here but a nice person but that doesn't seem to bother removal person. Hey removal person, loosing credibility here.

Maybe you're being to harsh on our fellow travelers in Australia. The activist movements down under do quite well. If you're interested, follow Asher_Wolf on Twitter and go from there.

"Activist" = Forceful redistribution of wealth that ignores liberty, the protection of property and human rights, all in the name of the "common (collectively forced) good."

"Activist = "
Please get a grip before you enter a discussion. That is not what I'm talking about all. Again: ground level disconnect.
Your "definitions" are meaningless here anyway. Fact is, they're meaningless everywhere.

Maybe you're being to harsh on our fellow travelers in Australia.
Sorry, I have respect. Love those V8's there! WOW!

Just being harsh on the rich there that pull the people down there. I just don't stand for that!

Cool. Kinda figured that but it wasn't real clear. Yep, they do good work down there.
Thanks for hanging in here, by the way. Nice effort. Good solid points made. :)