Is asking a question about a topic you don't know everything about admitting to being an idiot?

Question

I have this one charachter that sent me an email about one of my questions from this morning:
From: d j

Subject: Do you really not know the difference between 8 and 93? really kid?

Message: AS a conservative myself, i just wanted to point out that not knowing makes you look like an idiot. Reagan replaced all 93. So did Nixon. If a democrat wins in 08, they will also replace all 93. It has been done at the start of a new term when the party changes for the last hundred and some years. But firing the ones that put cunningham, ney, and abramoff behind bars in the middle of a term is wrong, and might be illegal. If you cannot tell the difference, i have a suggestion for you. Instead of looking like a complete moron, troll about other things.

Was my question http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Av0t3A1qz4uRvWqPGlpd3hnsy6IX?qid=20070828112956AAKADeI suggestive of trolling or did it ACTUALLY appear that I honestly did not know what the deal was in BOTH instances?

Geez, I didn't know that I had to know everything to participate in here!

Then the person either deleted their profile or blocked me and never answered the question! lol!

Bush Invented the Google - I honestly didn't know the complete underlying story on the matter. I knew that Clinton fired his attoneys (well, Reno....) and that Bush did the same. I was wondering AFTER I asked the question why it was illegal to fire the 8 that he did. After the answers... guess what? I found out! See, Conservatives can learn! lol!
P.S. Thank you for your answer to both questions :)

Answer 1

uh...don't you ask questions to learn more about the subject? Correct me if I am wrong. That's what questions are, to gain more knowledge. Any who....

Answer 2

There is a great deal of misinformation slung out there.
And a great deal of indignance when they get called on it.
In general though, if it can be looked up easily, do so.
The changing of the attorneys when a new president comes in is well known here, yet one does find persistent posts relating to Clinton's changing all of them as if that were indicative of his shady dealings.
In reality its simply the takeover of a Democratic president from a Republican one, and it is to be expected. As is the replacement of all 93 when Bush took office, nothing unusual about that.
What made Bush's firing so interesting, is that he fired his own appointees.
The why of that is the problem. Believe it or not justice doesn't have a political party, sure you get the job that way, but once in you go where the evidence leads, and you don't manufacture evidence to suit political purposes. Or ignore it.
Don't get insulted, an honest question is an honest question, you have people here who love nothing better than to stick it to other people. You might want to temper your questions in a manner not quite so insulting to Democrats until you have ascertained the truth behind your query.

Answer 3

It is a situation which has been endlessly discussed in the news {and on Y!A} for most of the past year. So, when somebody comes on and asks the question which equates the Bush administration firing 8 apppointees in 2006 to Clinton firing 93 at the beginning of his term and this same kind of thing has been asked 4,522 times before, yeah it could seem like trolling.

Now, I didn't think you were trolling. I just thought you were incredibly uninformed. So I tried to answer that question respectfully.

Answer 4

No you are not an idiot. Asking a question knowing the answer and refusing to admit the answer because it doesn't suit your agenda is being an idiot. You just asking a question makes you an idiot at all it makes you a participant. I like reading your questions and especially the answers you get - I get many peoples points of view - I thought this was the whole spirit of YA! Keep asking.

Answer 5

truthisback: Ney was Napoleon's Field Marshal, which is technically higher than a general.
Rumor has it that after Napoleon was defeated Ney escaped to America and settled in Wisconsin. There was an instructor at a university there who bore a striking resemblance to Ney; his portrait is still on display there.

Answer 6

the whole reason to ask questions is to find out what we don't know, get other people's opinions and to become more informed. Ignore that rude person. and never be afraid to ask a question about the topics that interest you.

Answer 7

Don't worry, you don't have to know it all or pretend to like the idiot that emailed you.
He proves his ignorance by denying that these atty's were fired because they wouldn't go on political witch hunts for the executive.You know king bush--the one that fires everyone around him that dares to bring up the constitution (which he calls "just a god&mn piece of paper)

Answer 8

My experience as a long time observer of idiots is that they seldom admit what they are, they just demonstrate it. Actions do speak louder than words.

Answer 9

there are no stupid questions, my friend
only stupid answers :)


... I'm sorry you put yourself out there like that and got hammered ... but, this is the court of public opinion, you've got to have thick skin, and never take anything personally ... learn from it, and next time come with research and facts to back up your hypothesis

Answer 10

I would think asking questions is the way to come to an INFORMED answer!!!


Too bad more people don't ask questions!

Answer 11

"Is asking a question about a topic you don't know everything about admitting to being an idiot?"

Nope, in fact it admits nothing. If you didn't know, you didn't know, it's as simple as that. It makes you neither dumb, stupid nor unintelligent if you don't know something. There are things all of us don't know, and some of us might. Does that make us all dumb?