Explain this bumper sticker I saw yesterday on an SUV with many

[sinkingfeeling]

little pictures of Jesus (?) or saints across the back: "I'm not anti-Bush, I'm pro-intelligence".

[BlueCollar]

1. I'm...

intellectually independent of reason?

[TheFriedPiper]

2. But if they were pro-intelligence they wouldnt drive an SUV

and they certainly wouldn't think Jesus was anything more than a man.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

24. Hmmm. Now There Are Some Statements That Lack Any Intellectual Validity.

[Maine-ah]

60. you said it for me OMC.

[Bandit]

82. So you believe driving an SUV is responsible and that

if there even was a person such as Jesus he was something more than just a man? Talk about lack of intellectual validity....I am quite certain Jesus would be driving a SUV if he were here now seeing as how responsible it is...:crazy:

[bmbmd]

63. Try this on for size.

"The fool says in his heart 'There is no God'".

[EvolveOrConvolve]

70. Thanks for painting

a large group of us with your broad brush of bullshit.

"All atheists are fools" says the person who believes in an unseen, uncontrollable, incalculable, indecipherable, unmeasurable, invisible "god". Ah, the smell of irony...

[bmbmd]

74. Thanks for proving my point.

Those were not my words-they were spoken by someone much wiser than you or me thousands of years ago. I could give you the reference, but you would be better served to find it yourself.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

78. How did I prove your point

Please explain how:

"All atheists are fools."

[bmbmd]

83. A thinking person could easily be an agnostic.

To sweep away the experience of millions of believers of every race and creed with the broad generalization that atheism demands- "There is no God" is indeed foolish. Pretending to be wise, pretending to hold a negative answer to the central question of human existence-that is vain and silly. The fact is-you don't know, and I certainly don't know. Questions of faith are dealt with by personal experience. Can't be bought, can't be sold, can't be proven. My personal experience leads me to believe in a living, caring supreme being. You speak of "painting with a broad brush"-you have negated my entire life, and the lives of millions and millions with your "broad brush" of bitterness. Here's another obscure quotation for you to try on: "All knowledge dies with you".

I would encourage you to, at least, be open to the possibility that you are mistaken.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

84. I make decisions based on logic, empirical evidence, and rational thought

You called atheists "fools" in your post, and I called you on it. Nowhere did I assert that "There is no God" (your words, not mine). If you can point out where I said that, then please do - I would love to eat my own words.

You're correct when you say that it is a fact that I don't know, but I'm not going to make a guess based on a book written hundreds of years ago by a "committee". Why should I believe that the Bible is the word of God? Because it says so? That's not logical, that's the fallacy of circular reasoning. I don't care how or what you believe, but I DO take exception to your calling me a fool, and I WILL call you on that. We believe different things, but that's no reason for you to start with the name-calling. Instead of alerting on your post, I tried to educate you, and your response is to put more ridiculous words into my mouth.

As for the "questions of faith" that you write about, you say that "personal experience" is the only real measurement. Are you saying that your personal experiences are somehow more valid than mine? Because I've yet to see any proof of a higher power, other than the loud lamentations and exhortations of His followers. That's another logical fallacy, but I'll let you figure out which one. Wikipedia is great for things like that.

BTW, there are lots of thinking people that are agnostic, but it's obvious that you don't know the definition of agnostic. FWIW, I'm a gnostic atheist. Wrap your mind around that one.

[bmbmd]

85. So-to quote Dr. Phil

"How's that working for you?"

[EvolveOrConvolve]

86. Perfect obfuscation

Just what I expected.

Could you at least make an attempt to respond to my comments?

[bmbmd]

87. No-not obfuscation. You have won me over with your

superior logic and reasoning. I asked a straight forward question-How is it working for you? You have all of the answers-you must be wealthy beyond measure, full of joy and peace and contentment, and with loads of dear, trusting friends at your beck and call. Lucky at love, I bet, too. So, my question as one who would follow your footsteps is- how is it working? Are you happy? And, by the way, those are not my words-I am not that clever. "The fool says in his heart..."
written by a sheepherder turned king. I thought that was clear.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

88. I know exactly who said it

And it insinuates that all atheists are idiots. It wasn't a clever statement, it was a bigoted, theo-centric statement for the POV of a scared mortal. Used in a modern context like you did is calling atheists fools. Admit it, you think atheists are fools (or can you only debate a point by quoting other people?).

To answer your question, atheism is working wonderfully for me. I am fairly wealthy, I have a great family and loads of trustworthy friends. I've been married for almost 10 years to a beautiful deist women, we have one atheist son, age nine, and are in the process of adopting a young christian girl. I wouldn't change a thing about my life right now.

[bmbmd]

89. When I debated in high school and college

I was taught to back up an opinion with documentation. So, here is another quotation from someone who is quite intelligent....

"If we are to understand how to answer the fool, if we are to be able to demonstrate that God has made the pseudo-wisdom of the world foolish, then we must first study the biblical conception of the fool and his foolishness. In scriptural perspective the fool is not basically a shallow-minded or illiterate ignoramus; he can be quite educated and sophisticated in social reckoning. However, he is a fool because he has forsaken the source of true wisdom in God in order to rely on his own (allegedly), self-sufficient, intellectual powers. He is unteachable (Prov. 10:8) and despises instruction (Prov. 15:5); whereas the wise man heeds council given to him, 'The way of a fool is right in his own eyes' (Prov. 12:15). The fool has utter self-confidence and imagines himself to be intellectually autonomous. 'He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool' (Prov. 28:26). A fool cannot think of himself as mistaken (Prov. 17:10). He judges matters according to his own pre-established standards of truth and right, and thus his own thoughts always turn out in the long run to be correct. The fool is sure that he can rely on his own rational authority and intellectual scrutiny. 'The fool beareth himself insolently and is confident' (Prov. 14:16), and therefore he utters his own mind (Prov. 29:11). In actuality, this autonomous man is dull, stubborn, boorish, obstinate and stupid. He professes himself to be wise, but from the opening of his mouth it is clear that he is (in the biblical sense) 'a fool' - his only wisdom would consist in keeping silent (Prov. 17:28). 'The heart of fools proclaimeth foolishness' (Prov. 12:23), and the fool flaunts his folly (Prov. 13:16). He eats up folly unreflectingly (Prov. 15:14), pours it out (Prov. 15:2), and returns to it like a dog to his vomit (Prov. 26:11). He is so in love with his folly and so dedicated to its preservation that 'It is better for a man to meet a bear robbed of her whelps, than a fool is his folly' (Prov. 17:12). The fool does not want to find the truth; he only wants to be self-justified in his own imaginations. While he may feign objectivity, 'A fool hath no delight in understanding, but only that his heart may reveal itself' (Prov. 18:2). He is committed to his own presuppositions and wishes to guard his autonomy. Thus he will not depart from evil (Prov. 13:19), and thus all his knowledgeable talk reveals nothing but perverse and lying lips (Prov. 10:18; 19:1). He may talk proudly, but "A fool's mouth is his destruction, and his lips are a snare of his soul' (Prov. 18:7). He shall not endure the judgment of God (Ps. 5:5)." (Greg Bahnsen, Always Ready, pp. 55-56)


I think you are a brilliant, literate, caring person-otherwise you wouldn't be in DU, nor would you seek justice and peace with your fellow man. My opinion, though, is that your point of view is folly. The Anselm hypothesis (http://www.princeton.edu/~grosen/puc/phi203/ontological.html)
has never been successfully refuted, but that is just showing off, and really has nothing to do with faith. I do not deny you your experiences-clearly, you have been put off and driven away by people of faith. You must be able to see, though, that a negative experience, no matter how unpleasant it must have been-cannot be extrapolated to an entire population. By the same token, you should not deny my experiences-you weren't there, I was. They were as real, and as physical, as the nose on my face. We are surrounded, St. Paul says, by a great cloud of witnesses-in my own little way, I am one of them.

I am delighted that your life is so full and so satisfying-I expect you have it all together. I encourage you to continue to think, to open your mind to other ideas, and to act nobley and with compassion. Come to Texas, and I'll buy you a steak. We can continue this discussion another time, or on IM-but I've bogged down this thread enough. Goodnight, and thanks for the challenge.

[Kingshakabobo]

90. You sound like a fundie preacher - putting someone down........

.......with bible quotes and a phony smile on your puss.

I couldn't stomach all of your blather. Did you throw in the mandatory "I'll pray for you" crapola?

[elaineb]

91. You call a quotation "documentation"??

How's this for a quotation?

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell." Matthew 5:22 (NIV)

Ouch! Watch out for those angry hellfires.

Me, I'm a far-left "Christian" who loves agnostics and atheists as much as I love Christians, being that I'm a humanist as well as a Christian.

If you think a person who says "There is no God" is a fool because he doesn't have absolute proof, do you also call those who say "There is a God" fools, when they have no absolute proof either? If you do, then at least you would be consistent and I apologize for this response to your post. So do you also call people "fools" who say without qualification that there is a God or do you not?

[earth mom]

97. FYI-it is against DU rules to insult another DUer in this manner.

You basically called someone a fool for not believing as you do!

Well, I say to that: Alert is your friend ya'll!

And BTW-I saw a couple bumper stickers on a HUGE new truck towing a nice boat that read:

"Ex-Republican"

and

"The last time anyone mixed politics and religion
people got burned at the stake!"

Try that last one on for size! :grr:

[mcscajun]

3. The driver is For "Intelligent Design"?

:shrug:

[rug]

4. Catholic Democrat with money.

[patrice]

30. Bingo!

Just figure out the right people to kill and presto change-o you have a "Just War". Nevermind the millions of slaves you use to finance and fight it with little or no choice in the matter. Their moral choices are either ir-relevant or mistaken.

[NOLADEM]

5. Makes perfect sense to me

Saying he isn't being partisan in opposing Bush, he is just using his brain to come to the conclusion that the Chimperor is not the best man to lead our country.

[sinkingfeeling]

14. I'm not sure. By stating, "I'm not anti-Bush", doesn't that mean they're

supporting of Bush? I just didn't 'get' it.

[EstimatedProphet]

16. I think that may be in regards to being called a 'Bush hater'

This is saying "No, I'm not just a 'Bush hater', I have a brain."

[blondeatlast]

36. Those "pro-i" stickers are sprouting up everywher in my RED county.

That's exactly how I take the message being sent.

[LostinVA]

20. No, it means they are anti-Bush

[GOPBasher]

6. Why can't a Christian who drives an SUV be a Democrat?

Should we tell every Christian in the country and every SUV driver that they can't be Democrats? Do you propose that we try our hardest to be a permanent minority party?

[Tunkamerica]

9. i don't think christians should be allowed

to drive suvs UNLESS they have little pictures of jesus all over them. What if the pictures were of little pineapples, would that make the message easier to understand?

[blondeatlast]

37. Great reply!

:rofl: :thumbsup:

[tinfoilinfor2005]

29. Umm, that would be me.

Although it is a Saturn Vue which is actually like a mini SUV.
And a Christian by choice after studying all the world's religions and philosophies at University many years ago.

But MY bumper sticker doesn't need clarification: Impeach Bush.

[ContraBass Black]

72. Blasphemy! They are mutually exclusive!

Repent!

[patrice]

33. Responsible people who drive SUVs can make whatever

other adaptations in how they live to compensate for the SUV. The essential criteria is responsibility. People who don't drive SUVs could net out as polluters if they are irresponsible.

Of course, all of us are going to net out as poluuters. The question is: Are you doing what you can about it to keep it to the lowest effect possible.

[wildeyed]

7. I saw a truck th other day with three nascar stickers,

one marines, one rebel flag and right next to that........ Kerry-Edwards. I had to ask my husband, um, are you seeing what I'm seeing?

[GOPBasher]

10. Well I hate the rebel flag, of course, but as for the rest of those

what's wrong with a nascar-loving marine voting Democratic? I think we need more nascar fans to vote Democratic. They're suffering under Bush too; they may not know it yet, so we need to tell them.

[ktlyon]

17. Yes they are suffering too, and they are beginning to notice why

nt

[wildeyed]

18. Me too.

I am not into the rebel flag. At all. But the rest of it is all good.

[undeterred]

8. I'm pro- Intelligence

so I'm anti-Bush.

[IChing]

19. This is the correct logic not the bumper sticker's logic

I agree, the SUV was posting a pro bush sticker

[LostinVA]

21. I see it as an anti-Bush sticker

[IChing]

27. OK, lets go through the logic

I am not anti-bush which is the stated premise. That means he is not anti-bush

I am pro-intelligence, which is equating that the first premise is true and equivalent to the supporting statement.
The course of logic is faulted in it's ambiguity, so it is neither intelligent or a logically statement, extremely poor
and is an example of "fallacies of ambiguity".

Ambiguous Language

An ambiguous word, phrase, or sentence is one that has two or more distinct meanings. The inferential relationship between the propositions included in a single argument will be sure to hold only if we are careful to employ exactly the same meaning in each of them. The fallacies of ambiguity all involve a confusion of two or more different senses.

It is pro-bush because of the convoluted use of language.

[LostinVA]

28. "I'm not anti-meat, I'm pro animal"

Same logic. He's being anti-Bush.

[IChing]

31. No the statement is a logic fallacy of composition

Please examine it a little closer or take it to your logic teacher

[LostinVA]

58. Why are you being such a snot to me?

I have examined it, and it is an anti-Bush sticker.

Go take it up with your manners teacher.

Geez.

[IChing]

73. I'm not being a snot, I am pointing out the fallacy of inference

in the bumper-sticker: "I'm not anti-Bush, I'm pro-intelligence". The statements imply they are congruent

"I'm not anti-Bush.....This statement has a double negative which makes it a positive, so how must we take this statement? Anti means what?
it means: opposed to; against (link: ) So now we have these choices.


1. I'm pro-Bush....this is the correct use of the double negative
2. I'm not against Bush.....(doesn't sound real good)
3. I'm not opposed to Bush....(doesn't sound real good)


or

4. I'm am neither pro or anti bush, but ambivalent to Bush.....this is not stated so can only be assumed, but this was never said
but is fallacy of inference for the statement


1. I'm pro-intelligence ... or I am for intelligence, I don't think this can be read any other way.

Ok, now let's take the statement and turn it

"I'm pro-intelligence I'm not anti-Bush"

Does this work without a fallacy of inference?

Didn't mean to get your gander up my attack was on the logic of the bumper-sticker that said really nothing.

[ProfessorGAC]

79. False Logic

First, it's a bumpersticker, so you're overanalyzing. The bumper sticker is quite clear, given the amount of room available. The driver isn't anti-Bush because of merely being ANTI-BUSH. He's pro-intellect, so that is the REASON for opposing Bush. It's not "anti-Bush" in a vacuum.

I think that's fairly obvious, and you seem stuck missing the forest because your counting the ripples in the bark.
The Professor

[IChing]

94. Sure you have given no Proof on my analysis just

name-calling and hyperbole. I don't disagree that the driver is pro-intelligence but the argument of the congruences don't work.

Truth Table for Implication
Premise Conclusion Inference
A B A => B
false false true
false true true
true false false
true true true


If the premises are false and the inference valid, the conclusion can be true or false. (Lines 1 and 2.)
If the premises are true and the conclusion false, the inference must be invalid. (Line 3.)
If the premises are true and the inference valid, the conclusion must be true. (Line 4.)
So the fact that an argument is valid doesn't necessarily mean that its conclusion holds -- it may have started from false premises.

If an argument is valid, and in addition it started from true premises, then it is called a sound argument. A sound argument must arrive at a true conclusion.

[hootinholler]

11. It means he likes being spied on? n/t

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

12. Christian Democrats do exist and some of them drive SUVs.

I drive an SUV. I hate it, but my car died and I was able to get the Grand Cherokee for free. Pretty damn hard to turn that down. The closest I get to religious stickers is a Buddhist mandala (I thought it was pretty) and a "War is not the answer" sticker from the Friends Society. The other stickers are DU sticker, rainbow "Girls Kick Ass" and an Area 51 parking permit. The last one is purely because I'm a geek.

[rumpel]

13. some people do need utility vehicles and are

waiting for the industry to offer alternatives

[TheFriedPiper]

15. How funny, I was at the furniture store last night

And I see all these SUVs parked at the exit, waiting to load up furniture.

So, I back my little Eclipse GTS up, pop the hatch back, slide my wife's bike back a little and put the entertainment center I just bought in.

I turned to the SUV owners and laughed and said, "Haha, who needs an SUV? by the way, how long does it take YOU to go 0-60?"

My car:


Then I pointed out to them that my car handles better AND gets better gas mileage.

None of them seemed too pleased, but I don't care. It's about time more of us called out people for doing stupid things. If we were less accepting of stupidity, there would be less stupidity.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

22. There are some legitimate reasons for SUVs.

Some people actually do live in areas where 4WD is necessary and there are also people who need to tow things. Most SUV drivers don't need the things, but there are people that legitimately do and that's not stupidity.

[kineneb]

25. local need for SUVs

I live in an area where the real estate people actually have listed properties with this comment: "Hey look! Paved road!". So yes, I know people who need 4 wheel drive just to get to their house, especially in the winter. You can usually tell them by the quantity of dirt on the SUV.

[blondeatlast]

48. Good liberals forego such wonderful things as free drives for moral

superiority. :sarcasm:

Get thee back to the Lounge. I'm thinking of starting a confessional there!

[Maine-ah]

61. Thankyou Haruka

some of us actually need the vehicle. You'd never make it in my area with that little Eclipse during the winter or mud season, LOL, you'd need some stupid SUV driver to pull your ass out of where ever you got stuck....I'd like to see you tow a lobster boat in that thing...and pack your equipment and dogs and kids into it...

[Pierre.Suave]

26. Heres a question...

Can you tow a 32 foot sailboat with that car?



I didnt think so...

[patrice]

32. So, is that the standard then: If one can _______ it's okay?

Just asking.

[Pierre.Suave]

34. Some people have a use for bigger vehicles

putting us down for having them is just silly...and does not make you, or anyone else that does it, a better person.

[patrice]

38. I am not putting you down.

Honestly, I WAS just asking about a criteria for this discussion that you proposed in a statement that seems to say something similar to "Because I (want to and) CAN tow this boat, I should be allowed to."

Perhaps some people do put general classes of others down, but I am a moral relativist. I believe each and every situation must be evaluated on its own pluses and minuses, kind of like what is commonly refered to as "carbon credits". Please see my posts above about responsibility.

[Pierre.Suave]

39. Do you propose I push it down the road by hand?

just asking...

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

41. Yeah, in my experience, towing our boats is quite easy with the Jeep.

I don't think pushing it would work. Perhaps, if I had a sports car and I could just sort of scoop up under the bow...

[patrice]

46. I am proposing you do whatever else you can to mitigate its effect.

That could be anything from all types of very simple reducing, re-using, re-cycling and re-storing up to an including considering putting the boat permanently where boats belong, i.e. living on the water, so that the boat doesn't need to be towed.

[Pierre.Suave]

47. Will you pay for the mooring?

Just askin...

Edit: I also should remind any of you that may have missed this small, but very pertinent fact, it is a SAILBOAT. Wind-powered and has NO gas motor.

[patrice]

50. I didn't choose to buy the boat.

I, in fact, sold mine.

But, if you are proposing that others/all-of-us bear some responsibility for people's choices, I can consider that statement as long as the exchange is defined and not open ended as it is at present (i.e. the overall system will bear the ALL costs of whatever anyone wants to and can do - just doesn't make sense): if I am to pay for your boat mooring, "we" need to define what I will I not pay for in exchange for that cost to me/us, and if I want you to bear the effects of something that I/we choose to do, what will that be and what you, in turn, will not be held responsible for in my/our behavior.

[Pierre.Suave]

52. What you did choose to do however..

was belittle me for my choices. I enjoy sailing, and not always on the same lake. it does not make me a "bad" person.

[patrice]

53. I never said anything of the sort. I said people should be responsible.

Your insistance that I am belittling you is puzzling. It makes me wonder about your motive.

At most I am saying ir-responsible people are ir-responsible. I have no idea whether you are a responsible person or not. If you infer from my statements that ir-responsible people are bad, that's your doing, not mine. Why do you suppose you do that?

If there are other people in this thread or elsewhere who are belittling you, please, please distinguish me from them.

I am trying to explore this question, not belittle you.

[DrunkenMaster]

43. your sailboat is VERY IMPORTANT

uhuh.....keep justifying. You'll believe yourself eventually.

[Pierre.Suave]

45. It is

It is how I heal my soul from the effects of the chaotic world we live in.

edit: also, you may want to lay off the holier than thou attitude a bit.

[patrice]

54. The problem REALLY is therefore: How do "we", i.e. *each* of us,

live in a way that does not need our souls to be healed with _______________.

How does a person get him/herself to the point of defining what that way of living might be and accepting the consequences of that decision, the price each of us will pay for it, rather than pretending that "we" can have our cake and eat it too.

[Pierre.Suave]

55. I think that

it is impossible for anyone to live in this world and not need something to soothe their souls.

[patrice]

56. I understand. I will agree with that hypothetically and say that

what I am talking about here are the various costs of "soothing" our souls, ALL of our souls (SUV owners and non-SUV owners . . . recyclers and non-recyclers etc. etc. ). ALL of us are poluters.

I would like to point out, if the world is as you say it is, the costs of our various addictions acrue in a geometric progression and never go away, so ignoring them is a suicidal manifestation of the very destructiveness that we are self-medicating ourselves to ignore. If we hate it so much that we need self-medication of various types, why do we give it victory, why do we just bend over and smile. Perhaps we prefer our illusions to the reality of the struggle. It's like treating a curable cancer with lipstick. If that's the way we are, if we really are that weak, perhaps it IS time for us to go away.

[Pierre.Suave]

64. Thats a lot of words just to say...

...that you are better than me.

[patrice]

66. Everything I have said here today has included both those who

are commonly thought of as "eco-sinners" and those who think they are "eco-saints". I have repeated and repeated that all of us polute. Do you assume that I think that doesn't include me? What is your definition of the word "all"?

Your reaction belies what you think of yourself, that's a problem for you so you blame it on others. People who don't have problems with their self-esteem do not react that way. They are not threatened by others, no matter what. I'm not surprised your life is so miserable that you have to hide from it on a boat.

P.S.Before you get angry about that last remark, remember that you are the one who said it was so.

[Pierre.Suave]

67. I did not

say I was "hiding" from life. I think you could probably use a vacation, it may be good for your soul.

Perhaps you can come off your high horse and re-read your posts. You cover your condescension in a lot of words and a lot of obfuscation, but its still there.

[patrice]

68. You are projecting the attitude of a victim.

A person who does not feel low to begin with can't be condescended to or with. They just understand that what someone else says is in error.

[Pierre.Suave]

69. And

you are full of it...

I can understand and comprehend what you are doing without projecting victimhood. it is called comprehension.

[DrunkenMaster]

92. hilarious

"it is how I heal my soul"...if you are shallow enough to think you can heal a soul with material goods, you have very little soul to begin with. If you don't like the attitude don't read or respond to the post, Bunky.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

51. Wow, is your arm getting tired from patting yourself on the back?

Everyone has hobbies. My family *gasp* has motor boats. Yes, multiple ones. I love boating and sorry, but I wouldn't give them up for anything. I guess that negates the rest of my liberalness. Oh well, I'll still be found boating most nice weekends.

[DrunkenMaster]

93. you wouldn't give them up for anything

thanks, you just said it better than I ever could.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

95. If somebody's life depended on me giving up my boat, then that would

be different. However, I'm not going to give up one of my favorites hobbies, because it doesn't fit in with your definition of an ideal progressive or whatever. I do enough for the cause, that I think it's okay for me to go boating without being judged.

[blondeatlast]

44. You definitely beat me on the superiority scale.

See, here's where I lose my liberal superiority. If you had approached someone I know like that (and I know lots of good liberals who drive SUVs), I wouldn't have blamed them for kicking your ***.

***Superior small car's bumper. Yeah, that's what I meant!

***Or however you read the stars first.

[MurrayDelph]

23. Look, I may not like SUV's

Personally, I own a Prius. But, we have no kids (my wife had one, but she's grown up and gone).
So the Prius is enough room for us to go on vacations with (assuming we drop off the dogs before we
pack the car). These days, if a family has two or more kids, your only options are SUV or mini-van.

So please don't assume unless you have more to go on (Like yesterday, when I saw a brand new, with paper license plates,
Hummer H2 with a jacked-up suspension, so the bottom of the doors were five feet off the ground. THAT guy I can
make an assumption about!)

[niyad]

77. THAT vehicle definitely warrants my "YES, your dick really IS as small

as you are afraid it is" bumper sticker.

[renate]

35. it seems to be a logical parallel to "I'm not anti-child, I'm pro-choice"

I.e., their opinions are informed not by being anti-something but by being pro-something else.

To me it's a little ambiguous because of the two meanings of intelligence that are relevant these days--IQ-type intelligence and NSA-type intelligence. It would have given me pause if I'd seen it, but I'm pretty sure the sticker really means that the person is not a Bush supporter.

[DrunkenMaster]

40. Just Another Yuppie Jackass

That is the awesome and terrible thing about the monoculture: it can absorb and use any perspective or point of view to reproduce itself. I have a neighbor who drives a huge SUV with a Wiccan/Earth-mother bumper sticker on the back.

The nicest thing you can say about this type of people is that they are missing the point. Clueless, selfish and lacking in any real critical thought, they are happy to adopt the next cultural fad while coasting obliviously through life.

I've even read several posts here on DU claiming that driving an SUV is a "God-given right", fer chrissakes. One can only hope that idiotic perspective will fade as our planetary ecological crisis becomes more and more apparent.

[Justice Is Comin]

42. He's putting bush down and mocking the lemurs one track

mantra of being a "bush hater." He's probably a republican that's seen the light.

[patrice]

57. Do you mean lemmings?

Just trying to help; please don't feel assaulted.

Aren't lemurs a kind of cat? Or a rodent or something? I'll go look it up.

[Justice Is Comin]

62. Yeah they're related to the monkey

ala kin to the head vine swinger.

[patrice]

65. Okay, so you do mean lemurs then. Right.

I was thinking of those little critters that suddenly start forming mega-herds periodically and have been known to follow one another off of high cliffs into the sea and die.

[LostinVA]

59. Thank you -- I agree -- although one poster on here

Will tell you you've reached a fallacy and need to go talk to your logic teacher.

[redherring]

49. Intelligence can mean three different things

1. Intelligence meaning high mental capacity
2. Intelligence as in the CIA
3. Or maybe Intelligent design.

I guess by "I'm pro-intelligence", he means that he thinks bush is dumb, i.e. he's using definition number one.

[TheFarseer]

71. I think that is anti-bush

It means they are not against bush's policies just for the sake of being anti-bush, but because being against bush's policies is just good common sense. Maybe they were not smart enough to realize it is anti-bush? Hard to believe someone with Jesus paraphernalia all over their car being anti-bush.

[hyphenate]

75. They have multiple personality disorder? eom

[Javaman]

76. Explanation...

if you can't get them with the facts, dazzle them with bullshit.

[OnionPatch]

80. Well, I drive an SUV and consider myself a Christian

so I don't see anything wrong with this sticker. They're on our side.

And just because you drive an SUV doesn't mean you are more stupid than someone who doesn't. Stupidity would be for me to trade in my paid-off SUV for the pennies I would get for it and go deeply into debt to buy a Prius. Why do I have the SUV in the first place? Because I lived in a place that gets up to five feet of snow in the winter when I bought it.

Stereotypes suck.

[Shaman0979]

96. As if there was anything else being sold

Good point! I drive a paid off SUV that I bought at a discount. Now its virtually worthless. So what. When it was purchased that's pretty much all that the automakers were shoving down the throats of the consuming public. As if we really had a choice in 2001.

This "addiction to foreign oil" hyperbole that Bush and his retard Administration are shoveling out is more right-wing drivel to shift blame away from themselves. Blame anyone else and see if it sticks. Don't hear him shouting at the auto manufacturers. Anyone bother to ask what kind of car his mother or father or daughters or cousins drive? What a piece of work!

The God I pray to and the Lord I serve don't judge me for the car I can afford either.

[lectrobyte]

81. That's the kind of bumpersticker I wish I saw around here. More

power to 'em.