April 9th 04, 07:29 PM
|
|
|
Michael Bryant wrote:
From: "Stinger"
Very likely,
many people listening to some of the more esoteric or fringe radio hosts
(Gallagher, Reagan, etc.) would not necessarily be the same ones that read
William Buckley or even George Will.
Duh. That was hard to guess. Do you think 15% of conservatives (can) read
Buckley or Will?
Liberals do not have a monopoly on
college graduates.
But, you'd probably blast college teachers (more educated than just college) as
being the vanguard of the commie invasion, right?Remember, you do exactly that
later in your post!
Additionally, I think an easy case could be made that elitist dumbasses such
as yourself
Aren't you the same guy that was lambasting liberals as namecallers because
they lack intellect?! Did you have a lobotomy, yesterday?
must rely on an ever-larger, uneducated (or lower-educated) mass
of people to try to elect your socialist dream teams.
So, do you really want to stick to the ASININE claim that liberals appeal more
to the lower rungs of society than do conservatives? Now, that's boggling!
With the help of
their alliance with teachers unions, the Democratic agenda of late has been
to create a populace as uneducated as possible, convinced that they must be
reliant upon the government.
Oh, I get it. Teachers are against education. They want ignorant students. That
must be why Bush's Secretary of Education calls teachers terrorists.
Especially the ones who lie about having a PhD!
|