Those 'experts' and their 'fancy degrees'
By Steve Benen Wednesday Apr 23, 2008 9:15pmThis isn't another item about how and why abstinence-only programs — championed by the Bush administration and conservatives everywhere — don’t work, waste money, mislead young people about reality, and undermine public health. Instead, it’s about Republicans’ reaction to the evidence on abstinence-only programs.
This week, for example, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on the effectiveness of government-sponsored abstinence-only curricula. Not surprisingly, researchers, medical professionals, and scientists in the field explained to lawmakers that the evidence is overwhelming — abstinence-only doesn’t reduce teen pregnancies, doesn’t reduce sexually transmitted diseases, and doesn’t even lead minors to abstain from sex.
So far, so good. Then, of course, committee Republicans piped up.
Republicans said even if some abstinence-only programs do not work, others do, and it would be wrong to end the funding.
Rep. John Duncan, a Tennessee Republican, said that it seems “rather elitist” that people with academic degrees in health think they know better than parents what type of sex education is appropriate. “I don’t think it’s something we should abandon,” he said of abstinence-only funding.
Just a few weeks after the so-called “bittergate” story prompted a media frenzy, the right has already taken to defining “elitism” down — it’s now apparently “elitist” for qualified experts to tell federal officials about available evidence while they consider how to spend federal resources.
As John Cole put it: "Damned elitists with their facts and figures and numbers and statistics and fancy degrees. What do they know about public health that a regular Joe from Tennessee doesn’t?"
Login or Register to post comments.
Hundreds of millions for abstinence education and they forget to get the domain name: I did though.
http://www.abstinenceonly.com
enjoy. (not quite safe for work)
everyone knows that this abstinence-only program does work and
this is how; turn around bend over and squeal like a pig as
your boyfriend/fb sticks it in your ...................
you don't have no babies this way, right? lol lol lol
Just like it was "elitist" for china to have all those perfessers and such thinkin they wuz better'n the peasant folk; wull, chareman mao sure shewed 'em.
That there kultural revolushun and Great Leap Forward sure shewed 'em.
Oh, the stupid burns!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Elitist"?! Is that what we're calling the reality-based community now?
Damn us for our truthfulness as opposed to truthiness!
So if I have the right degree that means I know how to raise your child better than you?
Well, stating the obvious regarding the use of the word "elitist", I have to say that the real problem is the American citizenry on which this kind of blatant stupidity actually works.
I agree with Republicans. Fact-based book learnin' is bad. The best way to live one's life is to base every action on an ancient, poorly translated book of parables.
I've heard that Osama Bin Laden believes that 2 +2 = 4, maybe we need to stop teaching that to our children. Anything to prevent them from becoming Islamofascists !!
IF WE DUN LEARNS TO REED AND RITE THE TAR-ISTS WILL WIN!
What frightens me is how successful the GOP has been in their well-coordinated branding campaign that utter stupidity is all-American and anyone who aspires to be anything other than a dropout is an elitist.
Elistist defined: see Hillary Clinton in meltdown mode; see Republicans who accuse think they know more about a subject than the experts; see television journalists who ask inane questions.
The intent. Of abstinence. Only education. Is to. Create more. Republicans.
We wouldn't want to encourage anyone to respect intelligence, scientific data or factual information.
So is 'elitist' the new 'n' word?
oncall @ 11:
Correction: ....see Republicans who think they know more than the experts tell the experts that the data is worthless.
Or perhaps more appropriately, is 'elitist' the new 'librul' ??
This is why the GOP works so hard to destroy any non-mythology based education.
daxe @ 9:
That touches on a great point. Conservatism today only accepts the facts as they fall within the boundaries of their narrow political vision. On those issues where reality clashes with their beliefs, all the facts in the world would not sway them; they'll go down with the ship with some contrived piety that they did what they knew was right.
JasonS @ 12:
And more meat for the war grinder.
CD @ 6:
Um, do sex educators "raise" their students?
So, we're supposed to "teach the controversy" about evolution lest we get eXpelled! But we can't teach UNDISPUTED facts about sex?
Ridiculous. Just give the kids the facts. They're going to get some (highly defective) version of them anyway. Lots of "virgins" these days with VD.
Tell you what. Why don't we do it the truly scientific way? Just segregate the kids into fact-based sex education and abstinence only and see how many more pregnant teens are in each group? Oh wait, that's what we've been doing with the abstinence-only education for the last 8 years. Case closed.
Give the kids the facts.
Abstinence only sure did work at that compound in Texas, didn't it??
"Rep. John Duncan, a Tennessee Republican, said that it seems “rather elitist” that people with academic degrees in health think they know better than parents . . . "
Gee, Duncan, you think maybe some of these people with academic degrees in health might also be parents?
What’s all this fuss about? Everybody knows that a shot of bleach or moonshine will take care of any pesky little problem that may develop. The added bonus is that this cure also kills those yucky aids germs, too. Yay.
Needless to say (but I'm sayin it anyway): sarc off
JasonS @ 19:
Teach the controversy! While some people say that having sex can cause pregnancy, others think that R rated movies causes pregnancy.
Its moments like this that make me ashamed to share the same state with these morons. I am so glad I went through puberty during the Clinton administration or I'd have really been in trouble.
Wow - knowledge is elitist to these clowns. No wonder they don't 'believe' in evolution. What's their motto? "If God wanted me to be smart He would have given me a brain." Rocks are smarter than these guys.
CD @ 6:
that is not what is being said and you are taking the usual insecure attitude
of being attacked by someone else's opinion. if you feel fine in what you
teach your children about sex to help protect them, then feel fine. but grow up
maybe have a more mature look that someone else also has the best
interests of your children's health. no one wants to choke your opinion.
oncall @ 11:
I'm trying to parse the logic of your comment and I'm afraid I'm having no luck. Do you know what elitist means? What does Hillary Clinton have to do with this thread? Do you suffer from HRC tourettes?
I found this about Rep Duncan. His idiotic statement is indefensible, but I think his political stand against the Iraqi war is interesting:
Duncan voted against authorizing the War in Iraq based on opposition to what he believed to be an unnecessary foreign involvement. He also opposed and voted against a June, 2006 House declaration in support of the war.[1] He was one of the most conservative Republicans to do so.[2] The Family Research Council rated him as a 92% or above since 2002[2]and the NRA has rated him in equally positive terms.[2] He is a frequent contributor to Chronicles, a magazine associated with the paleoconservative movement. Duncan and Ron Paul were the only two Republicans to vote against funding for the Iraq War on May 24, 2007.[1] Duncan voted, along with three other Republicans, to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq by April 2008 on July 12, 2007.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Duncan_%28U.S._politician%29
People who quote facts are elitest?
Republicans show their stupidity every day.
McCain the Liar @ 30:
Quit showing your elitism by quoting facts about Republicans.
JasonS @ 19:
I don't remember saying anything about how we should "teach the controversy" about evolution.
Nice red herring though.
CD @ 6:
No. If it gets dangerous enough, there are child protection laws to step in. Parents will always make errors. We shouldn't nanny them.
Peter G @ 28:
Very easy to answer your questions. a)Yes, I know what elitist means. Do you? b) Prior to my post, somebody mentioned elitist and it reminded me of the time that she called Obama an elitist. She doesn't understand that she published her tax returns showing an income of over 100 million - hardly a common income, and mostly in the range of the financially elite. She has been in the halls of power for many years and therefore is in the politically elite stratosphere. She envisions herself entitled to be President. We all remember that she was the unquestioned Democratic nominee until Obama began to effectively challenge her. Her elitist self deception was injured and at that point, she decided to use her "kitchen sink" strategy and impugn her Democratic colleague's qualifications to be President. When she was directly questioned, she had to say three time, "yes", Obama is qualified to be President. c) no.
Slaw @ 31:
LOL
CD @ 32:
Actually your original argument is the red herring. The argument here is about the expenditure of public funds on educational programs and the effectiveness of those programs not who is going to raise someones child. If you want to use your logic I would ask if an ill-informed religious nutbar should decide what misinformation to give my child?
The swinish cult of anti-intlectualism is no longer a cult it is main stream America.
oncall @ 34:
I think, that, given the subject of this thread and your rambling response the answer to c is most definitely yes.
I am going to go off topic for a second - Bush hates Americans !!! (especially those that don't support him !) Please take a look at War Made Easy and you can witness all those pundits that now sometimes offer a meager criticism of Bush and this terrible war, in order to get an idea that maybe it's time we drove these people out of the media. I do not support CNN, Fox (sic), NBC, CBS, ABC, etc - as the recent news that military analysts lied to us... LET ME REPEAT THAT - THEY LIED FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT !!! They benefited from their analyzes, which were FALSE ! Now, if I am a doctor that operates on the wrong side of the brain, or maybe an engineer that builds a collapsible bridge, or a clown that kills people accidentally, chances are I will be out of a job. However, in this administration and for that matter, let's be honest, politicians in general, get to be wrong all the time. I enjoy the concept of term limits for everyone. Get in, do some good if you can and then get out. If you suck, you will be quickly exposed and thrown out of office. I work hard for very little money. Bush gets to stay in office for 8 years, take like 520 days off - preposterous - and then make a killing on speaking tours. So you are averse to having sex being discussed... what exactly are you obfuscated about ?!#?! Please tell me, because religion has nothing to do with policy - it should be kept separate ! For the love of Christ, stop teaching kids about abstinence, especially when our administration lies to us every day about these Wars, their policies abroad and especially at home. $4/gal... he didn't know ! Where did you hear that ? It's like Rudy not knowing how much milk costs... These people have become detached from reality. Wars are evil. Terrorists are evil (duh ?!#$%). Has terrorism been around for a long time ? uh, yeah. Why is there never a coherent strategy of the war presented on television ? I see these experts paint these portraits of war like it's a poem about life - I want specifics. Tell me what the population breakdowns are - who is who. Oh, and the fact that journalists (those that remain are not making a killing like Friedman - fly Pie fly) are unable to go where they please is a testament to the nuanced propaganda campaign this administration is willing to continue unleashing on us. I remember reading the french and british press prior to the assault on the people of Baghdad, and I... my blood boils at the despicable bullshit that passes as governing in these times. During Clinton Fox was afraid of presidential powers and now during Bush they praise it (make up your minds !!!), but please don't call your brand of television reporting, because it's propaganda ! Pure and simple.
My prose would be a bunch of exclamation points, but I need to at least bring a coherent message to the board, as I want to connect other people that are as mesmerized at the continuing smokescreen that is the Bush presidency. Why do we believe in parties anyway ? Republicans and Democrats. Many earmarks between the both of them. The whole concept of change is fundamental to the next steps we take as a country and Obama would certainly provide a testament that the general populace is ready to put racist tendencies behind it, as it would for Hillary - is America ready for a woman president ? is America ready for a black president ? Who are these mongols on television that get paid thousands ???#!$@ I cannot get over these questions ? I love non-fiction and this garbage is reserved for the books by Safire, Coulter and Hannity, where the bibliography is as thin as the ice of Boston in June. Come on !
The people I speak with are as confounded by the circus that is currently unfolding in our media about the political race for presidency. I wonder, though, can bringing us this much bullshit coverage be good for business ? I understand that these media companies are beholden to sponsors, but wouldn't we all benefit from being better informed. To have people still believe that Saddam had ties to Al Quaeda ? Puh-lease !
What is wrong with educating kids about sex ? Are you afraid that it will force them to put two and two together that daddy is sleeping with mommy #2 ? Wow ! Sex is just sex ! It's not evil ! It's natural. And how about the fact that scientists are being stifled ! Man, I am out. Good night. Love your neighbor and find out more about the views that you don't share, stop being offended !
There is an explosion in STDs among high school girls..... cause and effect
Einstein was a elitist - why do we need him? Our militias could have taken on the Japanese and Germans
Pasteur was an elitist - why boil anything before consuming it?
Is our society on a downward slide of know knowthing ness, amazing corpulence and the inability to provide food, shleter and health care for ourselves and out children. How quickly we are falling.
Peter G @ 38:
I see a common thread, in how people react to facts not in their favor, like statistics and delegate counts. Like abstinence-only advocates, Hillary knows what is best for America. She will fight like a lioness against her party itself, tooth and claw, even intentionally misspeak, to make right. By turning to an elite body of super-delegates.
Yes, like how those doctors are always so scientific when they examine them. How dare they!
LibertyLover @ 20:
Already been done.
My wife's idiot evangelical cousin, has seven holier-than-thou kids who were home schooled to protect them from the "evils of non-christianity." The three oldest girls all had babies out of wedlock by age 20, and the boy joined the army to stay out of jail. Yet, they rationalize everything in some sort of totally irrational way.
This is also the same woman who barely graduated high school, and yet I have seen here "lecture" professionals with advanced degrees about intelligent design. As if the very fact of her existence isn't overwhelming proof against any type of intelligent design.
I bet you would never guess they are staunch, authoritarian republicans. And unfortunately, they vote!
Peter G @ 36:
Actually my original argument was relevant so no it wasn't a red herring.
As for Sex Ed I am in favor of it and of parents being required to sign statements saying they had spoken to their child(ren) about topics that are volatile as part of their kids homework.
Jake @ 40:
The repuke fascist's need the sheeple to be dumber than dog shit. If the people had any brains at all, they would see right through the GOP's bullshit, and those bastards would be a 5% party (since that is all they truly represent, the richest top 5%).
"We'll give you a $150 tax cut for your pension and health insurance." And the moron's bought it! Reminds me of that Simpson's episode where Homer gives up the company dental plan, for a big jelly doughnut.
How else is the religious right going to get their millions of pork-barrel dollars?
If you have watched John Adams on HBO, you are, like me, probably deeply embarrassed and ashamed about what has happened to our country.
Our Founders where the elite of the elite. They were the finest intellectuals of their day. The best read, most literate, most educated and proud of it. This actually was the general thinking (i.e, smart is good) in this country until, perhaps, the 80's, when somehow Reagan made an average intellect (though I believe he, unlike the current moron in chief, was quite intelligent and reasonably well read) acceptable for politicians and, [insert deity of choice here] help us, even the POTUS.
I think both Obama and Clinton should start reminding the voters that intellectual achievement and capacity are good things and if you think this nation could have been founded by the likes of W, Cheney, Kristol, Rove and their ilk, then you are sorely mistaken. Our nation was founded on the stunning intellectual, elitist achievements of our Founders, not on the rantings of anti-intellectual boobs!
Peter G @ 38:
Think what you want, but logic is clearly not one of your fortes.
DammitDammitDammitDammitDammit!!!!!!! Don't you (Elitist) fucks get it yet?!?!?!!??! Shrink the message til it fits on a beer can, bumper sticker, box of ammo, or in a Major Newspaper Headline!!!! Can't the biggest and brighest brains on the left (of which neither am I one('cept for the left part)) figure out a simple (read 7 syllables or less) way to say "TELLIN' 'EM NOT TO FUCK DON'T FUCKEN STOP ABORTIONS, TELLIN' 'EM TO WEAR A FUCKEN' RUBBER DOES!!!" (and go ahead and lambaste me for being elitist but break your high falutin' asses down to the least fucking common denominator like the Greedy Old Party did 20 fucking years ago did) is the only fucking Pro-life/Pro-choice solutiion!?!?!?!!??!?!?!?!!??!!???!!?!?! Is it really that fucking difficult to agree on a fucking message... good lord, it's as though the last thing the Democratic Party wants to do is demand just a little bit of accountability for those of us Democratic Party Members who happen to possess penises instead of PUSSIES. Grow a set you whimpy FUCKS!!!! (and just to let any naysayers off the hook, I'd vote for Farakan before McCain as long as Dr. F put a (D) in front of or behind his name....) for the love all that is (religiously or scientifically, take your pick) HOLY learn how to MANAGE THE FUCKING MESSAGE!!!!!!!
Max Underkill @ 49:
Here's a simple bumper sticker: Abstinence.. stuff happens. Contraception, it works.
ya know?.... it's a start.....
cmh@cmhughesmd.com @ 47:
You bring up some good points. I have seen only a few of the John Adams episodes. Yet, one of the big differences of that time and today is that today's political elites, in many cases, legislate to ensure that the financially elite maintain their economic superiority while the financially elite safeguard the politically elite's position in government. It is a symbiotic relationship between the two spheres of influence.
During the days of our nations independence, the elite were both the financially and the politically elite. Therefore the system they were creating was designed to protect their positions. It just so happened that in order to protect themselves, they had to protect the remaining colonists (except the slaves, a major failure of our Declaration of Independence which ultimately led to a Civil War).
Let it be known that Tony Perkins, one of the most vociferous proponents of abstinence-only does not refer to what they preach as 'abstinence-only' but simply as 'abstinence' - as in "When asked by Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) if they would support abstinence education, three of the four "health experts" who testified against it said they would oppose abstinence even if scientific evaluation showed it to be as or more effective than so-called comprehensive sex ed.
But there is a new twist: "On the positive side, Dr. Stan Weed, the lone pro-abstinence health expert at the hearing, testified solidly on behalf of the positive impact of abstinence-centered education." It is now referred to as 'abstinence-centered', whatever that means to them. Are they now saying that they include prevention?
Max @ 49
Don't forget to take your blood pressure meds.
Does an ill-raised child eventually become a good parent? How?
Through the looking glass. Nothing is true. Everything is just an opinion.
ronhohn @ 53:
Heck, that's what all responsible parents tell their kids anyway.... "Honey, I'd prefer that you wait to have sex and the possibility of a parcel of kids until you 1) have an education 2) get a job and can support any offspring that comes along 3) have moved out of my house. But if you do decide to drive that car/smoke that weed/use that gun/dance naked in the moonlight with the opposite sex, then you better know how to protect yourself from red light runners/other stronger drugs/accidental shootings/STDs and pregnancies."
ronhohn @ 55:
It is possible, but it takes self-awareness, exposure at some point to good parenting from somewhere - either by observation or experience- and (wait for it) education ( thereby completing the circle of eliteness. /snark off)
is it not elitist of them (repug) to assume that teaching absteince only education will prevent sexual activities among teens?
who do these elitist (repug) think they are, thinking that they know better than the pregnant teenage girl who was forced feed absteince only education or the kid got a std because he didn't know about condom or all the lies and myth surrounding prevention.
If a teenager who wishes to engage in sexual activities wants some information on how to used conctraceptive correctly and is denied because the elitist felt that they shouldn't be given that information to began with.
the elitist felt that he know better than the sexual active teenager who want to be sexually responsible when it come to expressing his sexuals activity with a women/men
The kids can't be taught about sex.
The kids can't be taught about evolution.
Can we teach them about de-evolution? (Because that's where we're headed).
How are we going to go back up into the trees, when they're all chopped down?
When will democrats learn and start their own 527s that slime republicans. Democrats need to get nasty and hide behind 527s and throw the mud. They also need to start hiring their own experts and start manipulating electronic voting machines.
Why it's them fancy book readin' types thats gettin' them teenage girls all knocked up !!!
It's time to cut off funding for this abstinence only ed. Any parents that disagree with the elitist experts are welcome to teach whatever they want to their own kids. For free.
CD @ 6,
Thanks for completely misunderstanding the whole point of the hearing and testimony. Despite what FOX Noise has told you, sex ed teachers do NOT want to raise your children. However, sex educators would like to be able to tell your kids ALL the facts about a responsible sex life, including using contraception and protection from disease. Unfortunately, abstinence-only education bars this, or only allows these topics to be discussed as not effective, when STUDY AFTER STUDY has shown that condoms and the pill, etc. are effective.
The actual point of the hearings was to point out that after 5+ years of federal funding for abstinence-only education, we don't even have a reduced pregnancy/transmitted disease rate to show for it. The hearing demonstrated that not only is abstinence-only sex ed inadequate, it's ineffective.
I know that this is very difficult for you to accept. However, I'm sorry to inform you that public schools are NOT obligated to pass down ancient superstitions about sex as education. They are obligated to teach kids what humanity has learned about preventing disease and unwanted pregnancy. Abstinence-only sex ed does not do that, and it has no beneficial effects on disease and pregnancy rates. So it's time for public schools to really teach sex ed, instead of the ignorance-only program you seem to think they should.
Trained medical personnel are elitist and don't know more than parents -- walk around the high shcools for a day, and take a gander at all the pregnant high school students. Then go to the middle schools, where you'll find some more pregnant children. Pregnant teens in one county of Duncan's district runs at 28%, just short of the "average" given to the House Committee, but extremely high.
And to think, in the next few weeks, in Duncan's district, Trinity Chapel will be putting on a Fake Funeral the day before mothers day for all the fetuses that have been aborted, but it's just a-okay for women to die in childbirth.
Hey it's Faith based sex ed. They don't need to rely on facts or evidence to know it works. They just read a book that says it works and believe it.
It's time to flip the whole "elitist" label onto those who are waging cultural and political war with it. Elitism (in my mind) is the practice of favoring an elite group over the masses. In other words, it's the Republicans' main purpose in life and manifests itself as a corporatist and christianist philosophy. The hypocrisy of their use of the "elitist" label against the left is staggering.
The opposite of "elitism" is "egalatirianism" or "populism" or even "pluralism"... in other words, what the Democrats are supposed to be about. So, why are they losing this semantic battle?
Dismissing an educated person's opinion (particularly a scientist) in favor of some religiously driven policy, is not populism, but rather puritanism or a fundamentalism. (Don't confuse us with facts and science, we already have an answer!).
Anyone who has studied the Puritan and fundamentalist movements in history will tell you that these have led to nothing but strife and chaos if allowed to dominate the political dialogue. Our founding fathers understood this perfectly, and despite some of them coming from Puritan backgrounds, agreed to leave specific religion out of our government for this very reason.
Ben Stein sees another movie in the making.
Oh, puh-leeeeease, people, haven't you been paying attention to what the DrugWar has been doing? The entire War on Drugs was based on lies. Lies about minorities (Native Americans, African-Americans, Hispanics, etc.) being more prone to drug induced violence than Whites. Lies about 'instant addiction'. Lies that cannabis (aka 'marijuana') causes cancer, teens to become ax-murderers, men to grow breasts, women to grow beards, etc. Lies, lies, lies.
And when the bona fide experts on the issue publish studies deriding those lies...they're ignored, and the liars blissfully continue their lying. With national policy based upon lies.
You wonder where the current practice of government ignoring factual information supplied by those best qualified to give it comes from? Look no further than the DrugWar. Trofim Lysenko is laughing his arse off in Hell.
You can be damn sure that if the science had shown that Abstinence Education works, that every Republican would be waving the report and demanding that we not only increase funding for the program, but that we give the money to Churches so that they can go into the schools and teach it, and while they're at it, the preachers could also teach Biology in high schools, and there would be earmarks attached to the bill for "Ten Commandments" plaques to be installed in every school entrance.
It is incredible; a mere week after Jon Stewart made fun of this "elitist expert" attitude.
It's scary to see these idiots from the middle ages. I wonder when they'll start burning witches and books.
I read an interesting theoretical argument once that one of the reasons abstinence-only education doesn't work is because it does successfully convince some guys to stay home on Friday night and not go out looking for sex -- but only the responsible ones who would have used protection anyway if they had had sex.
Removing the responsible men from the hunt actually has the paradoxical effect of increasing the likelihood that available women will wind up hooking up with the irresponsible slimeballs -- the ones most likely to already have an STD and pass it on and most likely not to use protection and to get their partner pregnant.
So in fact if we actually want to slow the spread of STD and prevalence of teen pregnancies, we need to be encouraging more sex, not less! Increasing the availability of responsible sex partners might actually reduce the amount of unsafe sex going on.
Certainly not a politically popular strategy, and probably not scientifically testable, but interesting nonetheless.
Those ‘experts’ and their ‘fancy degrees’
Actually that's known as 'fancy shmancy degrees', or just 'book larnin' to flat earthers like Rep. John Duncan.
abstinence based sex ed is a wasteful evangelistic bunch of horseshit designed to give federal money to the people dumb enough to believe that it works. the same people are of course dumb enough to vote for w..............twice. it's just another way that w the moron rewards his supporters and punishes his detractors. here in tennessee, the redneck republican fools think abstinence based sex ed is a success just as they believe we are winning in iraq and afghanistan, the soldiers love being there, and high gas prices are good for the country. although john duncan may support this abstinence horseshit, he is a vehement critic of the war in iraq and w's wasteful spending across the board. his monthly newsletter mailed to every mailbox in his district criticizes the bush alleged administration for the iraq debacle, wasteful spending, their horrendous economic mismanagement and the fact that w is out of touch with the vast majority of americans. duncan is wrong about the abstinence sex ed issue, but he is a vital ally in the fight to get us out of iraq. let's get the troops out of iraq first and then we'll fight the battle against abstinence only sex ed. if this post shows up twice, please disregard the spelling errors in the first. i hit the preview button and the non proof read edition was posted.
Instead, Rep John Duncan would have all parents be forced to listen to the latest sex education ideas supported by a few well-placed but data-ignorant elitist loons, and at taxpayers' expense.
"Elitist" is the word adults use for "nerd." It describes anyone who has anything more than the most basic knowledge.
NoGWBpolicyleftinplace Says: LibertyLover @ 20:
One of the best bits of the whole thread and certainly bears repeating. The combined ignorance and arrogance of the creationists distilled perfectly.
Well, that settles it folks. Reality is elitist, with a liberal bias.
MargeAggedon @ 13:
Actually, 'elitist' is the new 'L' word. Liberals have taken the word 'liberal' back so that it is no longer viewed as a dirty word. Now, elitist is the insult.
You know, chardonay drinking, terrorist loving elitist! Will this crap never stop?!
Warpig went to Yale & Harvard Business School. I guess that makes him an elitist! Farging iceholes!