Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

siligut

(12,272 posts)
40. Buzz Clik was being sarcastic
Mon May 27, 2013, 11:36 AM
May 2013

This was said in sarcasm: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022904937#post3
But the resultant discussion has merit. I can't claim to know either way, but do want to differentiate between stupid and naive, the difference is awareness, the naive person never had the ability to make an informed decision, the stupid person had the information and made a bad decision.

Naive or naïve
1. Lacking worldly experience and understanding, especially:
a. Simple and guileless; artless: a child with a naive charm.
b. Unsuspecting or credulous: "Students, often bright but naive, betand losesubstantial sums of money on sporting events" (Tim Layden).
2. Showing or characterized by a lack of sophistication and critical judgment: "this extravagance of metaphors, with its naive bombast" (H.L. Mencken).
One who is artless, credulous, or uncritical.

Stupid
1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.
2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes.
3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake.
4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied.
5. Pointless; worthless: a stupid job.

No wonder it didn't make it -- how could war mongers profit?!?!?! gateley May 2013 #1
Wow ismnotwasm May 2013 #2
Americans have never, ever voted for something really stupid or contrary to their best interests. Buzz Clik May 2013 #3
Prohibition? dumbcat May 2013 #16
It wasn't Scootaloo May 2013 #20
Sounds stupid to me dumbcat May 2013 #21
Buzz Clik was being sarcastic siligut May 2013 #40
Thank you for that. dumbcat May 2013 #44
Our RW politicians are being led down the garden path siligut May 2013 #45
It ended the prospect of alcohol as an alternative fuel. Blanks May 2013 #39
" a substance that is - very consistently - the most harmful to human health and social fabric." JayhawkSD May 2013 #41
And yet it still causes more harm than any other substance Scootaloo May 2013 #49
Disregard actual statistics JayhawkSD May 2013 #67
Reminds me of today's war on drugs. gtar100 May 2013 #46
It was cultural genocide NutmegYankee May 2013 #48
true but Chaco Dundee May 2013 #50
Very nice... zeos3 May 2013 #59
1971: American citizens should have the alienable right to an environment free of pollution. arcane1 May 2013 #4
I think inalienable rights are better .... oldhippie May 2013 #17
Indeed. I wonder if that was how it was written in the original attempt arcane1 May 2013 #22
Sounds good in theory loyalsister May 2013 #27
Including world war 2, which would mean I wouldn't be here, so no thanks. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #5
A lot of men signed up after Pearl Harbor Politicalboi May 2013 #8
John Wayne didn't. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #51
I would gladly volunteer to not be here if it meant the end of war. BrotherIvan May 2013 #31
'I wouldn't be here" how can u know that? leftyohiolib May 2013 #42
I'm Jewish, and live in Europe. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #47
Excellent point! Pterodactyl May 2013 #54
well if the 2 people that comprise your parents didnt meet that doesnt mean you wouldnt be here leftyohiolib May 2013 #55
Perhaps a better solution would be to put me in charge of wars. SheilaT May 2013 #6
Where are you?... awoke_in_2003 May 2013 #9
I'm in Santa Fe. SheilaT May 2013 #13
Oh, I know that feeling all too well! kentauros May 2013 #33
You too? Manifestor_of_Light May 2013 #52
Then let me be the first to nominate you to be in charge of all wars! Kath1 May 2013 #36
I love that amendment about putting war to a national vote. Initech May 2013 #7
A National vote would be interesting, as I don't believe we ever had one ..... oldhippie May 2013 #19
Wouldn't the Federal Election Commission do that? dumbcat May 2013 #23
Nope ....... oldhippie May 2013 #24
There is no such thing as a "national" election hack89 May 2013 #56
I like this one BobbyBoring May 2013 #10
They can't all be gems... zeos3 May 2013 #58
2013 is still a good sulphurdunn May 2013 #11
Let's even bump it up zeos3 May 2013 #60
That would be about $18 million sulphurdunn May 2013 #66
Do keep in mind we voted in GW Bush two times. Buzz Clik May 2013 #12
Actually, he wasn't. RC May 2013 #29
... and we want the same system to start wars. Buzz Clik May 2013 #30
And don't forget, Art_from_Ark May 2013 #32
I hear you. zeos3 May 2013 #61
Very interesting indeed.... Swede Atlanta May 2013 #14
Um...those are constitutional amendments jeff47 May 2013 #28
hmm... chervilant May 2013 #35
The ERA not on the list.. came so close, then the stupid Americans took over. mountain grammy May 2013 #15
peace cure hog May 2013 #18
Great point lovemydog May 2013 #26
Ha, good one! It oughtta be a law! When my son enlisted I did not give my permission mountain grammy May 2013 #37
I support all three of those lovemydog May 2013 #25
Cheers! zeos3 May 2013 #62
The first one would mean the end of the secret ballot. Lady Freedom Returns May 2013 #34
Good point. zeos3 May 2013 #64
To paraphrase All Quiet on the Western Front: Nevernose May 2013 #38
Well, they sound good, but... JayhawkSD May 2013 #43
These days it would be an army of 70+. Spitfire of ATJ May 2013 #53
My Problem With That Amendment erpowers May 2013 #57
Very insightful. zeos3 May 2013 #65
only the dead have seen the end of war arely staircase May 2013 #63
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»This would end most, if n...»Reply #40