OK, I get it.
Matt Snyder

The ridicule, at least from me, comes from the people who use this phrase as a response yet keep avoiding to show let alone prove any merit to such statement. If they can’t prove something to be untrue or something that discredits their ideology of the topic then they resort to this.

After asking for valid and logical reasoning with credible evidence to support their claim they usually repeat something to do with being a “sheeple” and something like “what you know is all a lie and I have read the truth that you can’t find in any of your school textbooks of fables.”

I respond in a manner of respect and seriousness, even if it I find them linguistically humorous. They either don’t reply or give a link to an article, or of a similar type of source, that is just someone who speaks with great bias and states far more opinions than facts.

Some facts are vague as to differentiate cause and correlation, but assumptions of the cause are written as fact. Apparently they can not comprehend that if it is written with bias context and subjective statements then those sources first off are not credible evidence and correlation is not proof of cause.

Proof is presenting known facts that directly support the correlation to the cause giving little to no doubt a claim is true. Their “proof” is the equivalent of Obama saying it’s all Bush’s fault then using one of Hilary Clintons speeches a “credible” source.

So yeah, the term has been made into a mockery by the ones using the term. When you have seen a word only said by people who themselves have shown ignorance to use proper critical thinking and logical reasoning then there is no reason to take the word or it’s users as serious or credible.

I would not be shocked if there are any of these non-sheeples that could bring forth an argument of actual intellectual value that could improve society in some way. Unfortunately, the people who do try and give input often are the more dull-minded folk that all have the same couple of points they heard from some sort of media source. They tend to destroy credibility to ideals, so actual sharp-minded folk are too afraid to give input in fear of being associated with the others.

These “sheeple” type people from ALL parties are blocking the way for people that can actually advance society with valuable input. You are of no use to the rest of society if you just need your beliefs and values validated even if you can’t provide yourself with real reasons for actual them to have credible validation.

It’s not Liberals or Conservatives fault for overlooking the issue if the other side has nothing, but catchy phrases or words to argue seriously complex issues. I can say, with valid reason, that I will never take someone as credible, serious, or capable of meaningful discussion if they say “sheeple” after the numerous occasions I had with encountering people who wasted my time with vapid and feeble rhetoric for nothing more than a sense of self-validation.

At this point, well articulated persons whom will have valued input should be aware to not use such colloquialisms that instantly discredit their own credibility.