Beck to O'Reilly: It's "up to you" whether you leave your parish because of clerics' belief in social justice
March 18, 2010 9:32 pm ET
From the March 18 edition of Fox News' The O'Reilly Factor:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
BJFan is the former, natch.
I'd bet my house that he gets beat up a lot by kids with more pugilistic puissance.
I did notice that if you remove the letter "U" from puissant, it accurately describes young BJF.
I've got to find the quotes where he claimed to have an IQ of 125 like Sarah Palin's and where he claimed to have taken the LSAT tomorrow. He did say both of those things.
I have offered speculation on the IQ number of Palin and Barry, but NEVER myself.
Here is a challenge - if you can post a quote in which I claimed to have an IQ of 125 (as Bntix claims I have). I havne't posted that because for one thing that is not the number. If you can produce such a quote I will go away and never again post here.
That should give you incentive to try to find such a quote. Happy Hunting!
I took a brief look at Palin threads out of curiosity, and came up with the link I posted. It was more to satisfy my own self than any attempt to settle a dispute. Whether you did or not makes no difference to me. I DO still find it terribly amusing that you think Palin is smarter than Obama, and likely always will.
Stick around. Keep arguing your side. Who knows? I might even learn something.
So 125? No. But you "bet your life" that you have a higher IQ than a man whose IQ you estimate to be around 110.
So the sentence, "I have offered speculation on the IQ number of Palin and Barry, but NEVER myself" is just plain false.
I claimed I am more intelligent than Obama (and I maintain that claim) well AFTER bntix claimed I posted I have a 125. My IQ is NOT 125. Why would I claim it is when it isn't.
I am merely trying to expose bntix as a liar.
If you have a high IQ, your principal talent is in hiding it from your readers.
You know, the one he said he had to polish everyday, because his head is far up his arse he needs it spotless so that he can see clearly.
Thank you. Please relay that message to bntix.
Precisely what I found while Googling:
site:mediamatters.org IQ Jindal.
I would bet my life I have a higher IQ than Obama.
Bobby Jindal fan (February 17, 2010 3:14 pm ET)
If I had to guess I would say Obama's IQ is somewhere around 110 and his SATs are somewhere betweeen 900 and 1000. That's my best guess, but we don't know because he won't release his academic records. Hmmm, wonder why?
Bobby Jindal fan (March 18, 2010 3:45 pm ET)
Despite what liberals like to claim, IQ tests and SAT scores are an EXTREMELY accurate barometer of intelligence and cognitive puissance.
So I assume that you might consider LSAT scores a relatively accurate barometer of intelligence. Or put another way, MENSA accepts many tests other than direct measurement of IQ as indicators of intelligence. LSAT scores are among them. For MENSA, an applicant must achieve a score at the 98th percentile on a standardized, supervised intelligence test or equivalent. Part of the reason percentiles are used is because there are many different tests used. If you score a 132 on most standard IQ tests you are MENSA material. But if the LSAT is used we would be using the 95th percentile as the cutoff (since 1982). Obama attended Harvard Law School and the average LSAT for students admitted is currently around 173 (but was 171 for the years he attended). Although we don't have grades or LSAT scores, or IQ tests to go by we know about his performance. He graduated magna cum laude which means that it is quite likely that his intelligence was above average when compared to his peers. But considering only his LSAT: the percentile rank for an LSAT score of 171 at Harvard during Obama's college stay was 98.8 %, well above the score required to be accepted by MENSA were he to apply.
So I think we have a pretty strong case for assuming Obama's IQ to be at least 130 and possibly much higher. So if as you say on Feb 17th that you would bet your life that your IQ is higher I would take that bet. So no I can't find anywhere where you claimed you have an IQ of 125. You are claiming that yours is higher than 130. Even higher if Obama's IQ is over 13(something which is very likely). You estimate that Obama's IQ 'is somewhere around 110' is laughable. Unless you can make a stronger case than this, supported by compelling evidence, please do go away. Of course I know you won't. The only thing bigger than you IQ may be your ego.
Obviously they are different tests. However MENSA accepts performance on the LSAT placing you in the 95th percentile or above as equivalent to a score of 132 or above on more standard IQ tests. Chances are very good that Obama scored 171 (probably higher based on graduating magna cum laude) on his LSATs if admitted to Harvard Law School. I am not aware of any studies establishing a direct correlation but you can use linear regression analysis (a statistical method) to convert LSAT score to IQ's. I won't bore you with the details but here is a link where such an attempt is made. Obviously this can and has been debated. But I think it is safe and reasonable to argue that, based on available evidence, it is unlikely that Obama's IQ is as low as BJ estimates, and even more unlikely that BJ's IQ (as he claims) is higher.
I have no reason whatsoever to doubt that. Here I was just being conservative (not the kind of 'Conservative' BJ is though). If I were that kind of Conservative I would have just made everything up.
The LSAT is an extremely accurage barometer of intelligence (as are the SAT, MCAT, GMAT, and GRE).
You are correct that the average LSAT for Harvard Law is 173, but that does not prove that Obama got a 173 (my guess would be somewhere around 120). There is no doubt in my mind that he is an affirmative action case. Affirmative action students score well below the mean LSAT.
I further believe that Khalid al-Mansour and Percy Sutton greased the skids. I maintain that Obama did not gain admittance to HLS on the basis of academic merit.
And of course they greased more skids to get him appointed an editor of the Harvard Law Review in his first year and president of the journal in his second year. Of course they couldn't grease more skids to get him on the faculty of the University of Chicago Law School because they were out of grease. To make that happen they (and you know who they are) had to enlist the power of Vril: the secret subterranean master race. Evidence also points to involvement of the Rosicrucians, the Vatican, and the Freemasons.
And of course Health Care Reform is a project involving the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program (HAARP). Mind Control on a mass scale is one of their lesser known projects. This is not so well known because it operates out of the headquarters of the New World Order which is a city located 7200 feet under the Denver International Airport. Glenn Beck is merely assumed to be fighting Obama: he is actually delivering subliminal messages converting everyone within earshot to Stalinism. That must be why it appears that HCR will pass in some form. Thanks for alerting us to the conspiracy. I am sure that some day a grateful nation will bestow its highest honors on you. Carry on patriot.
On another note: If you have concerns about the accuracy of the standard for admission to MENSA you'll have to take it up with MENSA. I only posted what is on their website. Different standard IQ tests may be used and there is a range of scores (but it is very narrow): 130; 131; or 132 with 132 being the most frequent (5 of 8 instances):
Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT):SAS or CSI (IQ) 132
Differential Ability Scales: (DAS) GCA 132
Otis-Lennon Tests: IQ 132
Otis-Gamma Test: IQ 131
Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) Individual and Multilevel Forms: Ability Index Score of 130 or above
Stanford Binet: IQ 132
Stanford Binet 5: IQ 130
Woodcock-Johnson Test of Cognitive Abilities(not the Woodcock Johnson Achievement Test): IQ 132
Probably because you're totally wrong.
http://www.mensa.org/about-us#qualify:
Membership in Mensa is open to persons who have attained a score within the upper two percent of the general population on an approved intelligence test that has been properly administered and supervised. There is no other qualification or disqualification for initial membership eligibility.
The term "IQ score" is widely used but poorly defined. There are a large number of tests with different scales. The result on one test of 132 can be the same as a score 148 on another test. Some intelligence tests don't use IQ scores at all. Mensa has set a percentile as cutoff to avoid this confusion. Candidates for membership of Mensa must achieve a score at or above the 98th percentile on a standard test of intelligence (a score that is greater than that achieved by 98 percent of the general population taking the test).
Generally, there are two ways to prove that you qualify for Mensa: either take the Mensa test, or submit a qualifying test score from another test. There are a large number of intelligence tests that are "approved". More information on whether a test you have taken is approved, as well as information on the procedure for taking the Mensa test, can be obtained from the nearest Mensa office. There are no on-line tests that can be used for admission to Mensa. Feel free to contact Mensa for specific details about eligibility.
Mensa has no other eligibility requirements other than IQ testing. However, many tests are not valid for people under the age of 16. You should contact the nearest Mensa office for more information.
You're a fraud.
There are times that I have admitted I was wrong. It is not that difficult. Why can't you just simply admit that you are wrong? You are not conceding any policy point to me - you can still call me an idiot and a racist if you like, but just simply admit that you misspoke.
You can spend super duper eidetic memory the rest of your life searching and you will never find it because I did not say it.
Still at it I see. BTW, you haven't admitted that YOU WERE WRONG when you said the the Branchflower Report "completely vindicated" Sarah Palin.
In your own words "Why can't you just simply admit that you are wrong?" You are not conceding any policy point to me - but just simply admit that you misspoke".
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
You already concede your mistake as you have refused to post any verifiable proof that it did. Whereas I have supplied to you the link to proof that it did not vindicated her.
Glenn is absolutely correct. Social justice is a bastardization of Christianity. Liberation theology (a derivation of Marxism) has attempted to hijack Christianity. Liberation theology is a cancer within the Church which must be eradicated. We need some high profile excommunications of Marxists who preach this crap.
BJ Fan again: "I am often wrong and I admit it every time I am. There is FAR more than I don't know than I do. True wisdom is knowing precisely how much you don't know -- and there is A LOT I don't know."
BJ Fan now: "[...]nobody has ever proved me wrong."
Did you not actually read the Branchflower Report?
Nicely done, aBeck.
True about Todd. That was a separate finding. It said that he was not a part of her administration and offered no finding against Sarah on that point.
Branchflower investigated several allegations. You must address Finding Number One.
This issue is NOT the fairness or veracity of the report. The issue IS that YOU got the fact wrong. The report contradicts your own words about what it concluded.
You are demonstrating your dishonesty and your hypocracy by dodging the issue. You were wrong and you won't admit it. You are acting like a punk right now. You are a phony!!!
I own you right now, at this moment, on this issue. I own you! You are proving yourself coward and a documented liar. You ride roughshod over anything and anyone in your path and make up your own rules as you go along. However you have led yourself into a trap and you don't have the character to man up.
I own you BJ. And everyone can see it. And you are letting me do it.
Sarah has never once done anything unethical that is a fact. All charges against her were a partisan witch hunt. She was charged with wearing a jacket with a logo outside. You are out go get her because she scares the hell out of you.
THere have been no charges filed against her which have been substantiated. You basically concede that the report is not fair as you refuse to discuss that issue.
You are wrong. Who owns whom? I don't believe in indentured servitude, so I free you go along your merry way.
The Branchflower report recommended no penalties of any kind. You got Todd for not dotting an I and crossing T correctly. Big flipping deal.
And you KNOW what it means in the vernacular when I say that "I own you" You are acting like a child! I can't believe this. But I am anything but surprised by it.
I do not concede any such thing. And I have not refused to discuss that particular issue. You have not asked me to before now. That is a separate issue and discussion. I am arguing about YOU , not Sarah Palin. You are deflecting from that point.
Are you PeeWee Herman now?
YOU however contend that the Report COMPLETELY exonerates her. The report does not. That is a fact I have previously documented.
You just don't want to admit that you were wrong.
So you lied when you said you always admit when you get a fact wrong.
You've been proved wrong again and again. You just ignore it when it happens. That stops being "I win" somewhere around fifth grade, for most people.
by Bobby Jindal fan
I do not stop replying - and nobody has ever proved me wrong.
Oh, that's right, you either ignore it or slither away like the sniveling, lace-curtain coward you are.
Thank you, Torquemada.
Is Catholicism a bastardization of Christianity?
It's more than just "liberation theologists" in Catholicism that preaches and encourages social justice. Since it is an integral part of the teachings of Jesus Christ (as well as followers such as St. John and St. Paul,) encouraging social justice is found in every church. As it should be.
According to YOUR rules, you just lost your argument.
He'll be back later today to claim that he's never been proven wrong.
Social Justice has always been sort of the mission statement of the Catholic Church, going back to Jesus Christ.
Beck is perverting the followers of any religion that will listen to his drivel. What he's telling people is to choose between their faith and his faith. His faith being the knowledge that some people will believe anything.
If you want to an opressive Central American government in the 1980s, look no further than Ortega's Sandinista regime. Who elected them?
The ARENA candidate who won DID win was Alfredo Cristiani.
BJF, you just made a factual error.
You are indeed a fascist, BJ.
also:
from:bio of Romero
Hardly a direct condemnation. I trust that you can find a quote from the Pope which "directly condemns" Romero to refute this.
second factual error.
Just like Sophie Scholl. Should have stayed out of politics and minded her own business. Aquino, too.
Nice of you to promote JPII's condemnation of Romero's political involvement.
Who the fu_k is JPII to get involved in the politics of Poland, the Soviet Union and the United States?
And who the fu_k appointed you as the arbiter of which prelate can get politicly involved?
You've shown yourself to be arrogant, ill-informed, humorless, argumentative, egotistical, illogical, and pathologically unable to admit error.
Now you can add hypocritical too.
The Nicaraguan people on November 5, 2006.
But then again, you don't consider democracy to be legitimate unless it's a brutal, oppressive, right wing oligarchy that is being installed.
I wonder nothing about BJFan. He's an eejit on stilts. The jerk's taunting people who are out of a job currently, which makes him empathy impaired or just plain mean. Stupid is one thing, but stupid AND mean is too much.
Actually, I like the comic strip. Probably too advanced for BJF, though. :(
HINT - "Get a job" isn't the right answer
Thank God, I had something to peruse, whilst I waited.
I was reading an English translation of Caesar's "The Gallic Wars", and exceptional study, but I prefer the original Latin version, not the English rendering. But that's my own predilection.