No, he's not a blundering idiot because of his wealthy family. Probably there is no causal connection. It's a luck-of-the-draw thing.

And yeah, Tim. Dubya has been packaged as a "regular Joe." Candidacies for POTUS are a matter of marketing. Regardless of party affiliation. In our country, it's totally form-over-substance. Our political system is decidedly not Porsche. It's more Ferrari. Or perhaps Jaguar. How else can you get struggling waitresses to vote for tax breaks for billionnaires.

And while I notice that your perception of me is elitist, haughty and egotistical, I assume you need to do that. You're not the first conservative to sidestep Dubya's very obvious intellectual weakness by shifting the focus to the asserted arogance of the person who is making the observations about Dubya. Like for example his renowned inability to construct a coherent sentence that is not printed on a page in front of him. Anyway, I'm not trying to "pile on," really. It's just that most folks make less comical/idiotic remarks in their lifetimes than this guy makes in a quarterly period. I undertand your need to villify me in your mind, and I even understand that making this statement will help to cement that belief of yours. Oh well........

And at least part of your belief is very true. I am brillyent.

Preach on Island. I have seen first hand what Al Qaeda Terrorists are capable of. Wait until they really impact our way of life here in the US.

I suppose we should have fired a couple of missles at Saddam, and then backed away....

whiners.....

Was Clinton from a wealthy family? I thought he came from modest beginnings??? Or, am I confused again?

- Skip

Seriously, you ar e not very brillyent (sic) if you cannot discern between a speech impediment and cognitive function.
MAny people, who's brains are thinking waaayyyy ahead of there mouth, have this problem.

One common thread, I've noticed; lib's listen to a slick talker (w/ poor actions) and conclude he is a genus. . .. lib's witness smart actions (w/ poor speach) and conclude he is a dunce.

. . .it's all about image, with you lib's.

Supe- Ever been in front of the camera? I have and it SUCKED!!! How about 10 with national coverage? How'd you do? If poorly, does that make you an idiot? Tongue ever get tied during presentations at work? Does that really make a person an idiot? Is public speaking really "the" trait we should measure someone on?

I've always heard, from both sides, that Bush is EXCELLENT when he is in small groups/one-on-one.

My father never graduated high school. Speaks like - well, someone that never graduated high school. But, he is a brilliant man. Built a business from nothing to the largest of it's kind in the state (which was one of the big ones). Fought and beat the full weight of the unions (that sprayed his business with bullets, threatened to kill me and my sisters - among other persuasive moves). Overall, I consider him quite a successful. Come on man, open your mind... The way someone speaks is not the definitive answer to their intellect!

- Skip

Harry Truman didn't start from Wealth
Dwight Eisenhower...started in Kansas
LBJ...was a poor school teacher from Texas
Richard Nixon..was the son of a failed Orange Rancher in Whittier
Gerald Ford...was from Grand Rapids and of modest means
Carter...came from the Navys Nuclear program
R Regan...was the son of a drunk
Billy Clinton...his uncle was a used car salesman

All these men started life from humble begiinings

Supe, I do not think I called you an elitist (maybe a little egotistical on occasion, but aren't we all), although I think I may have accused others in the past. I honestly think your assessment of W's intelligence is unwarranted.

Have you ever administered a test to the president? Have you ever discussed issues with him in person? If not, how do you know his level of intelligence? You must have based this on what the press has shown you right? You hate Fox, so who do you watch and read? I hope you do not mention CBS because if that is what you base your opinion of W on, well..... I think we get the idea.

I am sure you are not the first person to side step the fact that your canidate got beat by the better man by claiming the better man and his supporters are all mindless twits.
(tit for tat, I could not resist).

Re: Re: war motivation
 

I understand your assertion that this thing has a history, and that Iraq invaded Kuwait. True. And yes, GW is going to get some blame for the next terrorist attack. I personally have the strong opinion that he has done virtually everything in his power to attract the hatred of the ultra-conservative Muslims in the ME, and that he has dropped the ball in what I would consider the real fight against terrorism, both on a Military Intelligence and covert action basis, as well as in humanitarian and public image basis. I know opinions vary on this and I respect folks who believe that Dubya's efforts to bring democracy to Iraq, or rid them of WMD, or whatever is the excuse du jour, are appropriate. I just do not share those beliefs. Again, I would have preferred that he intensify intelligence and military actions against one of the real enemies, Al Queda. And I wish he were focusing on the other real enemy, which I believe is "perception" and economics/politics. It looks to me like he has completely missed both those targets. And I think the price we will pay for that is an even further eroded position against terrorists. I think we are WAY worse off than we were in September, 2001. And I think we're going to see more attacks. And we're not going to be looking with any degree of sophistication when it happens.

You guys are delusional. Sure, I assume he's got some intelligence. And I accept the notion that Dubya's legendary verbal foe-pahs are for the most part not illustrative of his actual intelligence level. In other words, I think the remarks he has made would suggest an IQ somewhere around fifty, but I think his is actually higher than that.

but yeah, you guys are indeed delusional. Speech impediment? give me a break! Who's got the link to the website containing the VOLUMINOUS litany of unfortunate remarks this guy has made. I'd probably like to post just a few up here and we'll consider whether it's a speech impediment problem.

Worse off than before September 11th?

Keep making the sheep noises Supe.

Supe- It'd be interesting to have some folks follow you around and few years and pick everything you say and do apart. How'd you come out of it? Would we be able to call you an idiot? Would it make it so?

Or, are you really W's intellectual superior?

- Skip

One more thing re: Bush's obvious intellectual deficiencies...

How did Bush graduate from Harvard and Yale? Daddy buy it for him? Threaten assignation by the CIA? Something else???

Now THAT would be a conspiracy I'd find interest in. How many professors & deans would it take to pull that off? How many of them have come out to break the silence? Seriously, if there are reports of the such, I'd be interested in reviewing.

-Skip

Supe, did you miss my prior question above regarding where you got your information that convinced you about W's intelligence? Or do you choose to skip that one? I think I already know the answer, not that you will see it (hint: liberal biased press).

Sup,

I gotta say you're just wrong here. I am the undisputed KING of not being able to spit words out. I see this in Bush as well. Many times I am at a loss for words, yet I can decribe what I want to say in forty different ways and even accompany it with a few pictures, but I'll be damned if the c0ck sucker will come out of my mouth!!!! I see Bush doing the same thing. You pause, then get pissed at yourself, then you spit out something/anything to break the awkward silence. Sometimes it works, often it doesn't. It sucks beyond all compare, I promise you. But it does not mean that he or I are mental midgets. I can assure you that my IQ is quite high and I imagine W's is as well (not that I think it really matters once you are above a certain level).

To get back on topic again . .

The intelligence was not just lacking, much of it was manufactured, spun and patently false.

Does anyone remember 'curveball', the lone iraqi defector who's tales of WMD largesse accounted for most of the administration's tall tales even though most middle east experts in the CIA and military claimed his stories were dubious at best.

And then there are his handlers, which read like a who's who of the bush administration and the PNAC. These people have been working for over a decade to start a full scale war against iraq and much of this so called 'intelligence' has been created by this group soley for this purpose.

For example someone went as far as to manufacture forged documents to make it look like saddam was trying to procure uranium from africa, strange concidering that iraq has enough uranium ore within its borders to not need to shop around for the stuff.

So what has the bush administration done to guard against such future 'intelligence lapses'? His cronies are forcing all the people who dared to do their job the first time around pointing out which intelligence was legit and which was false out of the US's intelligence organizations and promoting the ideologs and yes men who always say what the president wants to hear.

Just how far up one's ass does a person need shove their head to ignore such facts and claim that the manufactured concent that was used to launch a war of agression against a nation that did not attack us first was an accident?

Geeez, it's like one big justification of GWBs faults AND positive being seen as good points.

Apparently, Bush is a regular guy because he partied too much, became an alcoholic and struggles with public speaking.

However, at the same time he is obviously smart because he owned a baseball team and got tertiary qualifications from high zoot universities.

I think we're taking both of those just a little too seriously... For one, I would be completely confident that I could have been to Yale and Harvard and passed (how much harder than the good old University of Auckland can it be).

Its worse really - anyone who ever really thought about tertiary education will know that it is a really good way to find out if someone is good at university. Not a job, not being POTUS, just university.

Also, I'd dispute that all people who learned to fly in the National Guard are POTUS material.

IMHO, GWB's pathologically poor diction and "gut feel" decision making are no more acceptable than Kerry's prevaricating was. When other world leaders think your leader is an idiot, you have a problem (whether he's an idiot or not).

I for one am glad he's a coke-head alcoholic, I mean if he smoked pot...
It's kinda funny, Clinton was berailed every day of his office with a vengance and many democrats publically didn't support some of his actions.
The W people on the other hand still cling to this "do no wrong" mentality regardless of the Americans affected now and in the future by his spending policies. It's like a set of moral guides has been replaced by aliegence to an individual. Think about that for a little while.

I agree with 350HP930 and Superman, they appear to be the more logical unbiased thinkers around here who tell it like it is.
Too bad the lowest common denominator that make up the american public re-elected this war-criminal back into office. i say put W up there on trial with Saddam. have them cross examine each other. W doesn't stand a chance.

Lowest common denominator? Saddam>Bush? Bush=war criminal?

Wow, On-Ramp, I feel so stupid now. Thanks for turning on the light for me. I have to quit watching Fox and start watching CBS, maybe Rather will report on Bush in a more "enlightened" fashion (oops, I forgot he had to quit due to fraudulent biased reporting).
Well at least I have this forum with the likes of you lefty guys, who are so much smarter and unbiased, to "tell it like it is".

on-ramp!? what kind of tight bulls ass do you pull this BS? :cool: