Which group of people were more stupid?

[MrFun]

In regard to Romney's remark about wanting to open windows on a commercial airliner.


Are the ones who defended Romney as if what he said was serious, more stupid?

Or are the ones who attacked/mocked Romney as if what he said was serious, more stupid?

Or are both groups basically equally stupid in this regard?

[Guynemer]

Prolonged exposure to American politics causes stupidity.

On a long enough timeline, everyone's IQ regresses to zero.

[loinburger]

Depends on the intent. For example, if somebody mocked a political figure for saying something irrelevant and stupid but didn't belabor the point, then that's fine. If instead somebody then made the implication that a political figure is an unsuitable candidate because of the irrelevant thing that they said, then I would conclude that the person making this implication is an idiot.

Putting things in concrete terms, the non-stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
loin: Yeah.
Random Schmuck: And thus ends the conversation.

No problem. The stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
loin: Yeah.
Random Schmuck: Well, this means that you shouldn't vote for Romney, because he sometimes misspeaks and is also a sub-par aeronautical engineer.
loin: Eat **** and die.

On the other hand:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
Other Random Schmuck: I don't see how that is relevant.

No problem, albeit possibly a bit stick-in-the-muddish. The stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
Other Random Schmuck: Romney can't possibly misspeak because I idolize him and I want him to impregnate me with Republican butt babies.

This is problematic.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

That banana is looking mighty good

[loinburger]

Remember this?



That was funnier and stupider than anything that any other President or Presidential candidate has done in my lifetime (with the possible exception of the elder George Bush puking on the Japanese prime minister). Should you poke fun at it? Of course. Should you protest "hey, the President's door-opening skills or lack thereof do not reflect his skills as a politician"? Sure, but if you do then you're being a stick in the mud. But if you take either response too far ("The President should be impeached for having food poisoning" or "it is treasonous to say that the President is a schmuck" or whatever) then you're an idiot.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

This one brought a smile to my face again.

[DaShi]

Remember this?



That was funnier and stupider than anything that any other President or Presidential candidate has done in my lifetime (with the possible exception of the elder George Bush puking on the Japanese prime minister). Should you poke fun at it? Of course. Should you protest "hey, the President's door-opening skills or lack thereof do not reflect his skills as a politician"? Sure, but if you do then you're being a stick in the mud. But if you take either response too far ("The President should be impeached for having food poisoning" or "it is treasonous to say that the President is a schmuck" or whatever) then you're an idiot.

That's not a fair comparison. George Bush did turn out to be a terrible president. As far as we know that could be entirely derived from his lack of door-opening skills.

[Uncle Sparky]

Chevy Chase as Gerald Ford was amusing.

[MrFun]

Depends on the intent. For example, if somebody mocked a political figure for saying something irrelevant and stupid but didn't belabor the point, then that's fine. If instead somebody then made the implication that a political figure is an unsuitable candidate because of the irrelevant thing that they said, then I would conclude that the person making this implication is an idiot.

Putting things in concrete terms, the non-stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
loin: Yeah.
Random Schmuck: And thus ends the conversation.

No problem. The stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
loin: Yeah.
Random Schmuck: Well, this means that you shouldn't vote for Romney, because he sometimes misspeaks and is also a sub-par aeronautical engineer.
loin: Eat **** and die.

On the other hand:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
Other Random Schmuck: I don't see how that is relevant.

No problem, albeit possibly a bit stick-in-the-muddish. The stupid version is:
Random Schmuck: Hey did you hear that Romney said something stupid and irrelevant about airplanes?
Other Random Schmuck: Romney can't possibly misspeak because I idolize him and I want him to impregnate me with Republican butt babies.

This is problematic.

And for the record, in the thread where this joke made by Romney was discussed, I chimed in to ridicule him, but not as an argument that this should be a reason not to vote for him.

[MrFun]

Prolonged exposure to American politics causes stupidity.

On a long enough timeline, everyone's IQ regresses to zero.

[James3ms]

I liked the poll question and answers.. and I go with the second option