He might be more "intellegent" than you...maybe...MattBrick said:George Bush is very intellegent. I'm not saying that he is as intellegent as many other former US presidents. He certainly is not as good a communicator as many of his predecessors. He is a good deal smarter than most of you though. ( and me too probably)
Matt
Which hits me as strange on this board that you see George as a a marionette since up until this poinht for the last couple of years I have read all around that George makes all the decisions himself and that is why he is to be viewed as an idiot. Now you tell me he doesn't n make the decisions that they are orders from othere people.Snakebyte said:Bush is smart?
where do you live? In Wonderland?
He's just a marionette of the oil and weapon lobby. Sorry, but in my humble opinion Bush is pretty dumb. I.e. his inability to discuss.
GoneA said:Originally Posted by grizzleyjake
Yes, I disagree with him on gay marriage [...] nor does that make him an idiot.
therefore,
Ughh, I hate to be the one to burst your bubble, but, yes it does.
madame_zora said:I just think bush is stupid, and that is a comment based on his behavior, not his IQ.
Nitrofiend said:Hell, one of the funniest things I enjoy doing is waltzing into a liberal/democratic honeycomb (like LPSG.org for example) and professing the depth of my love and admiration for 'ole Dubbya. Try it, it melts their faces. I swear, I've seen it...
Nitrofiend said:No one picked up on it the first time...
dong20 said:Perhaps because it's effect, not substance. Your point being?
Nitrofiend said:My point is that it seems to delineate the source of this thread...
The launch of the thread into substance-based arguments is exactly the kind of knee-jerk response the original poster intended for. Nearly everyone here hates Bush for one reason or another, and these points have been brought up numerous times, so this thread was mostly likely a joke played at the Bush-bashers' expense. Posting substance just continues the joke.
madame_zora said:Um, we've probably been "had" folks. Both chinagirl and grizzlyjake joined in aug. of this year and neither have many posts. Probably the same (stupid) person.
Stronzo said:My sense is that you're right. But it makes for good volley. Chances are neither will chime in again I say.![]()
However MZ, it's always revitalizing and reassuring to have another go at the man who once said;
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur".
What d20 says too has merit.
Intelligence? No. Yet personality traits like cleverness and deviousness generally go hand-in-hand with one who has a malevolent quicksilver quality to him.
Bush has that in good measure (let alone a rather canny ability to choose real intellects with whom to surround himself).
It's a toxic mix.
That's why he's monstrously dangerous.
mercurialbliss said:He's only intelligent enough to realize he needs assistance and that's why he's adept at choosing such people. ...
dong20 said:Merely having an unpopular view on a given does not make one an idiot, neither does holding to that view in the face of overwhelming evidence or opinion doubting it's validity or value; it may make one stubborn almost certainly, stupid - possibly not not necessarily - it could also make them a far sighted visionary, it has happened!
GoneA said:Um, if anyone has any qualms about (or takes even the slightest exception to) same-sex individuals finding a physical attraction towards each other, they're pretty much an idiot to me. Furthermore, let me assure that GWB is nothing approaching a far-sighted visionary – call it a hunch.
Barring that [not that you're opposed to it, I don't think], I agree with your overall point, however.
I think it is ashame that Virginia makes them demit office after they are found out. Why can't they carry on in their official capacities as gay men? Will the Republican Party ever be that mature?grizzleyjake said:believe it or not, Virginia, there really are gay republicans.
chinagirl73 said:He is definitely sexy and hung.
I have seen the pics
Um hum. I saw that point and I definitely agree. However, at the moment I thinks if safe to call GWB an idiot. He has shown us time and time again his refusal to reason and his desire to remain steadfast in his misguided ideologies. Unfortunately, he has left us no other option but to judge him for the man he really is -- judging is not a good starting point, but we are very much beyond that point with him.dong20 said:Thanks, that's the danger of personal views you see, they're personal and condemning those who hold views differing to ones own as idiots is hardly a good start toward overcoming or even understanding those differences. It was really only that general point I was trying to make; that judgementalism is not a good starting point.
Well, I only brought it up because that's what I was referencing in my first post -- the one you quoted. I know you were speaking to the general idea of my post (or purposely 'taking it out of context'), but I felt the need to elaborate/clarify nonetheless. (Are you sensing a pattern of tangentiality, yet?):wink:dong20 said:As for the subject to which you referred, which was not the subject of my post but which I was afraid it could become, you are right; I couldn't care less about who finds who attractive, or not.
I know you weren't actually suggesting that GWB is/was a visionary. You suggested that people like him can ultimately turn out to be one -- I was stating, generally, that he is not and my “hunch” tells me he won’t be viewed as one in the near or far future (by those who have originally opposed him, anyway).dong20 said:No, I wasn't suggesting that GWB was a visionary! I fail to see how anyone could infer that from that post or my previous posts about him.
GoneA said:
Um hum. I saw that point and I definitely agree. However, at the moment I thinks if safe to call GWB an idiot. He has shown us time and time again his refusal to reason and his desire to remain steadfast in his misguided ideologies. Unfortunately, he has left us no other option but to judge him for the man he really is -- judging is not a good starting point, but we are very much beyond that point with him.
GoneA said:At any rate, I'm going off on a tangent here; preaching to the converted, if you will. You're point above is one with which I agree....
GoneA said:Well, I only brought it up because that's what I was referencing in my first post -- the one you quoted. I know you were speaking to the general idea of my post (or purposely 'taking it out of context'), but I felt the need to elaborate/clarify nonetheless. (Are you sensing a pattern of tangentiality, yet?):wink:
GoneA said:I know you weren't actually suggesting that GWB is/was a visionary. You suggested that people like him can ultimately turn out to be one -- I was stating, generally, that he is not and my “hunch” tells me he won’t be viewed as one in the near or far future (by those who have originally opposed him, anyway).