President Bush: Is He a Liar?

100 is average on the IQ scale. It is based on the theory that roughly 50% of the people will fall below that number and 50% will be above that number.

Average is NOT the same thing as "normal".

Roughy 50% of the population will fall within the 'normal' range between 90 and 110. About 25% will be above that range and 25% will be below that range.

But average is still average.

Foxfyre wrote:

100 is average on the IQ scale. It is based on the theory that roughly 50% of the people will fall below that number and 50% will be above that number.

Average is NOT the same thing as "normal".

Roughy 50% of the population will fall within the 'normal' range between 90 and 110. About 25% will be above that range and 25% will be below that range.

But average is still average.

Were it not so.

But McG was making a funny (and a cute one, I thought).

But letting Bush off the hook on this issue is simply dishonest or it accepts a level of incompetence and irresponsibility which boggles. Cheney and Rumsfeld said what they said. Bush is responsible for his cabinet and what they do and what they say. If they are speaking falsehoods or inaccuracies, that falls within his responsibility to citizens to correct them or to have them correct themselves.

And that is the charitable view. Years ago, I posted a leaked memo from Republican strategist Luntz wherein he explicitly advised the administration to put "9/11" and "Iraq/Sadaam" together in speeches and other communications. It was a broadly accepted and utilized PR strategy which had the desired consequence of many citizens falsely identifying the two things.

To assume Bush was unaware of all this is silly beyond words. Or, it is to postulate a level of incompetence, disconnection, stupidity and irresponsibility on his part which his defenders probably ought to shy away from.

blatham wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

100 is average on the IQ scale. It is based on the theory that roughly 50% of the people will fall below that number and 50% will be above that number.

Average is NOT the same thing as "normal".

Roughy 50% of the population will fall within the 'normal' range between 90 and 110. About 25% will be above that range and 25% will be below that range.

But average is still average.

Were it not so.

But McG was making a funny (and a cute one, I thought).

But letting Bush off the hook on this issue is simply dishonest or it accepts a level of incompetence and irresponsibility which boggles. Cheney and Rumsfeld said what they said. Bush is responsible for his cabinet and what they do and what they say. If they are speaking falsehoods or inaccuracies, that falls within his responsibility to citizens to correct them or to have them correct themselves.

And that is the charitable view. Years ago, I posted a leaked memo from Republican strategist Luntz wherein he explicitly advised the administration to put "9/11" and "Iraq/Sadaam" together in speeches and other communications. It was a broadly accepted and utilized PR strategy which had the desired consequence of many citizens falsely identifying the two things.

To assume Bush was unaware of all this is silly beyond words. Or, it is to postulate a level of incompetence, disconnection, stupidity and irresponsibility on his part which his defenders probably ought to shy away from.

Do you have a link that verifies this "leaked memo' that is more credible than Common Dreams who regularly reports leaked memos authored by Luntz on various subjects, such as this one:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0404-01.htm

They purport to give replications of information from other sources but they say, IN THEIR DISLAIMER, that their reprintings may indeed be different than the original source.

Left wing dishonesty is rampant!

Would the memo itself do?

Blatham writes

Quote:

Would the memo itself do?

Well it didn't do it for me. Could you point out the specific phrase or paragrph in which the President is urged to word things that make people believe Saddam helped engineer 9/11 or had any other direct link to 9/11? I didn't find it.

I did find a positively marvelous document that emphasizes the importance of communicating what we have to do to fight terrorism and how to communicate this to the people. I wish the President had worked harder to get the message(s) out contained in it. Whatever they're paying Luntz, it probably isn't enough.

Blatham spins the wacko liberal left mantra and refuses to see things any differently than the way he wants them to be.

Foxfyre wrote:

Blatham spins the wacko liberal left mantra and refuses to see things any differently than the way he wants them to be.

He really should look at how unbiased and openly you approach things!

Because I read BOTH sides of the argument before taking sides. He doesn't.