I am excessively against any example of "consequent ignorance"---lack of DUE knowledge in someone. (In other words, when people talk about what they should know about, but have never bothered to learn.)
(I find that to be relatively common among those who tend to support Trump as a president.)
Edit: ---and I am so on purpose.
This post was edited by tom jackson at January 20, 2018 3:01 AM MST
I love it when you talk smart tom. Okay. I have not heard of "consequent ignorance". Connecting it to the donjohn adorers helps me to understand the meaning. Evangelicals despised Bill Clinton because he has the morals of a goat. They embrace/support/defend prez donjohn. Can you figger out why Clinton is damaged goods but donjohn is a shining delight and their savior? I can't. So now I can at least label them as being "consequently ignorant". I didn't know there was a polite name for it. Everything the donjohn does is based on self. His supporters see it differently. He has them duped into believing everything he does he does for them. They will viciously attack you for daring to say anything in the otherwise. Consequent ignorance. Consequential to be sure. If they weren't consequentially ignorant then the donjohn would not have been elected to an office for which he is so demonstrably unsuitable! :( Thank you for your reply tom! :)
tom jackson 