DICK, GORE, BUSH & COLIN (page 7)

Seeker

Danny,

Thank you for your words; they really helped. All is well between us.

DannyBear

Mornin Seeker,

I hoped that you would accept my appology. Thank you Seeker.

Danny

Darkchilde

Seeker,

Let alone the idiocy of announcing last week that he is determined "to rid the world of evil-doers."

That one'll likely keep me wincing for many years to come.

*Rochelle.

What Bush said in the passion of the moment is no worse than what any other politician says under high pressure circumstances. Taken in the context it was stated, as I noted to Seeker above, it is a very understandable statement. To take it literally, and blow it up into some major faux paux is to merely detract ourselves into yet another self-indulged set of debates over nothing. - Amazing

Darkchilde

Amazing,

To take it literally, and blow it up into some major faux paux is to merely detract ourselves into yet another self-indulged set of deabtes over nothing.

Who's debating? All I did was state my personal opinion in a single sentence, and my response was addressed to Seeker. You have your opinion; I have mine. I'm quite content to leave it at that.

*Rochelle.

Amazing

Darkchild: Yes, you are correct. You expressed your opinion and I expressed mine. I understand your intent. And I think that is fine. At the same time, I also think you are mistaken in your opinion, because of what this was really all about.

The original discussion I was having with Seeker on this was whether Bush's statement was 'sufficient evidence' to conclude that Bush lacked qualifications to be President. I believe that this statement is rather weak evidence to draw such a conclusion about qualifications. I also admitted that taken by itself, it is rather a poor goal for Bush to try and achieve. Taken in context, and the passion of the moment, it is an understandable statement. So my effort was not to debate, but to express different ways of looking at what Bush said, and see how context may affect meaning. - Amazing

Seeker

Amazing,

I never said that was the only evidence that Bush isn't smart, just a recent example. Still, a smart person would never think to say something like that, even under pressure. Under pressure you see what a person is like at their core, and under pressure Bush reached for something foolish to say. As I did say, whenever he opens his mouth, instead of a bold leader (a la when Guiliani speaks), you get a hesitant person who doesn't appear to be that deep a thinker. Even a week after the disaster, W. is still going on about how remarkable it is that we have unity in this country and in the Congress (as if we would have anything else after such a disaster). He doesn't seem to realize what an obvious point this is to everyone. Not a deep thinker.

Here are a couple of links to stuff that you will totally discredit, since it comes from that awful liberal media that is in a conspiracy to hide the truth about this brilliant president (yes, that was sarcasm, and not directed at you). However, these articles (one of which is deliberately humorous, not serious -- after all, it's by Al Franken) do contain a number of funny quotes from the president. As you read those quotes, ask yourself where such stumbles would come from. Is this a smart man saddled with a speech impediment? Or does his entire life arc indicate that this is a man who has been content to ride along, and for the first time his words take on a greater import. For the first time, people are noticing what he says with great scrutiny. What they see is a man who doesn't appear to notice how shallow his thinking appears to be. Maybe he has a brilliant mind trapped in there somewhere, but I certainly haven't seen it yet.

http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/11/02/dumb/index.html

http://www.uoregon.edu/~gmorgan/w/w.html

Now, I suppose one could counter-argue with school scores for Al Gore (though even Einstein had a problem in that area, so maybe it's not the best pure test of intelligence), though Gore has certainly applied himself (in a wonky way) ever since. But the best argument against Bush being that bright is the way Clinton's political enemies described his intelligence. They all marvelled at his intellectual capacity, and voracious desire for learning. These were his enemies! So where are Bush's enemies with their stories of his voracious desire for learning, his unquenchable thirst for books? Absent. Not even his political friends tell such stories.

So again, I ask, if this is all some liberal conspiracy to hide the truth about Bush being a smart guy, where is the positive evidence of his intelligence? Not scores in school, which can reflect a myriad of sources, but just plain smarts in real life. Let's see this evidence.

And finally I will point out that none of this matters. Bush being not the smartest whip in the lot is purely a genetic function. Oh sure, it would be nice if he wanted to develop his mind more than he seems to care to, but it doesn't make someone better or worse for being smart or dumb. We can't help that, and it doesn't matter. But since the subject was brought up, it's being discussed, even if it doesn't matter. And that's the only reason I wrote about the subject.

Englishman

Sticking in my 2 pennyworth.

Bush is no sweetheart as far as Europeans are concerned, we also loathe his record for executions whilst in Texas.

That being said, I have to say that so far in this crisis he comes across very well. I will watch his address tonight with interest.

Englishman.

Stay Alive 'Til '75!

Amazing

Seeker: You said,

"I never said that was the only evidence that Bush isn't smart, just a recent example."

True. But it was all that was offerred, and so it was all that I could address.

You said,

"Still, a smart person would never think to say something like that, even under pressure. Under pressure you see what a person is like at their core, and under pressure Bush reached for something foolish to say."

I don't find it all that foolish. And to disallow Bush some slack here is to disallow him some level of being human. His actions are far more noteworthy, and have the backing of not only Americans in high approval ratings, but of leaders over the rest of the planet. His actions are a better barometer to make assessments of his qualifications.

Example: Bill Clinton orders 60 missiles fired into Afghanistan, each costing about $2 Million, to do what? Kill a $14 empty tent? Bush patently stated that he was going to aviod such folly. This shows he is thinking and evaluating past errors. Will he make some of his own errors? Absolutely. But the measure will be the cost-benefit ratio. Only time can tell that.

I just think that his statement about ridding the world of evil doers, while a bit heady, is blown out of proportion, and not a good example with which to judge his intelligence and qualifications.

Amazing

Seeker

Amazing,

Yes, I also am impressed that Bush's team has shown initial restraint rather than rushing off with guns blazing. I also agree with your assessment of Clinton's missle strike (damn, I still can't write a sentence like that about Clinton without thinking of double entendres).

However, I maintain that an intelligent person, even after stumbling and stating he will rid the world of evil-doers, would immediately correct himself. But perhaps Bush is so religious that he really does see this as a righteous war against evil. In any case, the next 3 years will give us penty of opportunities to see if Bush is smart or dumb.

DICK, GORE, BUSH & COLIN

Share this