"Now, we talked to Joan Hanover. She and her husband, George, were visiting with us. They are near retirement - retiring - in the process of retiring, meaning they're very smart, active, capable people who are retirement age and are retiring." -George W. Bush, Alexandria, Va., Feb. 12, 2003
"The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorize himself." -George W. Bush, Grand Rapids, Mich., Jan. 29, 2003
"Laura and I really don't realize how bright our children is sometimes until we get an objective analysis." -George W. Bush, CNBC, April 15, 2000
"I understand small business growth. I was one." -George W. Bush, New York Daily News, Feb. 19, 2000
To all the fukin' morons of the world:
I apologize!
George Dumbya Bush does not stack up to you good folks.
The mountains of Bushisms that have come to be in so few years have obviously been ignored by Bernard, otherwise he would not have launched such an assault on you for being frank.
Perhaps he'll use the "ordinary, straight shooter from Texas" line on us in defense of the Shrub's inability to even pretend to be an intellectual.
For someone who is so openly critical of "blind partisanship", he sure pays little attention to his own.
Again, I thank McG for his candid and honest response.
Ican't speak for all of the people on this thread but I,for one, am very content with the tax cuts pushed by President Bush. Only economic illiterates do not know that despite the tax cuts, revenue is up, as it was up in each previous tax cut program( that of Reagan and John Kennedy)
I am also very pleased with another accomplishment of George W. Bush.
Those who are incompetent in the area of knowledge about the Judicial Branch do not know how IMPORTANT the appointment of the two new USSC judges has been. Judge Roberts and Judge Alito have already demonstrated how vital George W. Bush's appointments have been.
I don't think George W. Bush ever claimed to be an "intellectual". Neither did Mayor Richard J. Daley. In the opinion of many, Daley was the best big city mayor in the last hundred years. He beat George Bush's malapropisms hands down.
I am very much afraid that Mr.Frank Apisa knows very little about Intelligence and how it is manifested.
Dr. Fred Greenstein, a Presidential Scholar, who, I am sure,knows far more about Presidents than Mr. Frank Apisa, said in his book, The Presidential Difference----quote---
"There can be no doubt about Clinton;s impressive intelligence, however, Clinton fits the description of the lawyer who masters issues with the speed of oil covering water but sometimes does so at the same depth.
Despite Clinton';s intelligence, the Clinton White House did not fit the existing models of presidential organization. The oxymoronic organization of the Clinton White House has been compared to a little boys's soccer team with no assigned positions and each player chasing the ball. Despite the freedom Clinton afforded his staff, he has not been the kind of president who is beloved by his aides. His associates found him difficult to advise, because of the inconstancy of his policy positions. He was subject to fits of anger...It is no wonder tha the memoirs of Clinton's former aides are uniformly ambivalent about him..Clinton spent most of his time in meetings in which participation was a function of who showed up."
This last point is crucial. Clinton became president in 1992. The Democrats had a stranglehold on the Senate and the House and had the majorities for years.
Clinton booted away that majority and now, twelve years later, they still have not won it back.
So despite the criticism of George W. Bush, the Democrats have been able to do very little since they do not control any of the chairmanships in the Senate or the House. As many people are aware, that is where the power comes from.
There was no President as intelligent as Bill Clinton. His memory and test taking ability was legendary. He could speak well and at length on many subjects, yet he is viewed as a failed president who lost the House and Senate for the Democrats and had a tenure which was famed only for his passage of NAFTA, China Most FAvored Nation and Welfare Reform.
All of those initiatives were Republican initiatives.
Clinton, the brilliant president, ended his career ignominiously as the second president to have been impeached.
Mr. Candidone- I have a solution to the problem of "generalization".
If you never generalize, I will not generalize either. I can win at that game since I have a deeper cache of SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAN YOU HAVE. If you are game, we'll begin.
We shall forever associate the phrase "fukin' moron" with you, Frank.
BernardR wrote:Ican't speak for all of the people on this thread but I,for one, am very content with the tax cuts pushed by President Bush. Only economic illiterates do not know that despite the tax cuts, revenue is up, as it was up in each previous tax cut program( that of Reagan and John Kennedy)
I am also very pleased with another accomplishment of George W. Bush.
Those who are incompetent in the area of knowledge about the Judicial Branch do not know how IMPORTANT the appointment of the two new USSC judges has been. Judge Roberts and Judge Alito have already demonstrated how vital George W. Bush's appointments have been.
Tax cuts and judicial appointments.
Got it.
BernardR wrote:Mr. Candidone- I have a solution to the problem of "generalization".
If you never generalize, I will not generalize either. I can win at that game since I have a deeper cache of SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAN YOU HAVE. If you are game, we'll begin.
I simply illustrated the fact that you hold others to a standard that you yourself are unwilling or unable to maintain.
This was never about caches of specifics Bernard, it was about generalizations and the fact that you may feel free to sweep the board with them, but I am not.
There's no denying the amount of spare time you have researching specifics.
I have other things to do and respect very much what you bring to the board.
candidone1 wrote:BernardR wrote:Mr. Candidone- I have a solution to the problem of "generalization".
If you never generalize, I will not generalize either. I can win at that game since I have a deeper cache of SPECIFIC EVIDENCE THAN YOU HAVE. If you are game, we'll begin.
I simply illustrated the fact that you hold others to a standard that you yourself are unwilling or unable to maintain.
This was never about caches of specifics Bernard, it was about generalizations and the fact that you may feel free to sweep the board with them, but I am not.
There's no denying the amount of spare time you have researching specifics.
I have other things to do and respect very much what you bring to the board.
me too Bernard... I hold you in high esteem.
WhoodaThunk wrote:We shall forever associate the phrase "fukin' moron" with you, Frank.
:wink:
There was always that danger!
I want so badly to be "reasonable" about our president...but the bottom line for me is that it is my opinion that "reasonable" (in consideration of him) should evoke almost overwhelming feelings of indigation, resentment, scorn and rage...from anyone looking at what he (his administration) is doing to our country and the world.
I abhor what is happening in our country right now...and I abhor what this terrible American conservative bent is doing to our place in the world.
I truly feel I am being "reaonable" when I rage against the man...that raging against him is what an intelligent, patriotic, concerned individual should be doing.
I had such a hard time understanding why so many conservatives loathed Bill Clinton with the intensity some of them did...but I am now able to understand and appreciate it with no trouble.
I read Mr. APisa's post on President Bush. He is, of course, entirely entitled to his opinon. But, in light of the fact that he gives no evidence or documentation to back up his statements that President Bush's actions as President are deleterious to our country, I really cannot give Mr.Apisa much weight. Until the time that Mr. Apisa gives evidence that Mr. Bush's actions are deleterious to our country, I must regrettably file his comment in the circular file as completely meaningless as a statement of fact but of course meaningful as an OPINION!
It is my opinion, BUTTRESSED BY THE FACT THAT 62,040,610 citizens of the USA voted for President Bush to be President, that 62,040,610 voters, decided that President Bush was indeed the President they wished to have to CONTINUE as President.
BernardR wrote:I read Mr. APisa's post on President Bush. He is, of course, entirely entitled to his opinon. But, in light of the fact that he gives no evidence or documentation to back up his statements that President Bush's actions as President are deleterious to our country, I really cannot give Mr.Apisa much weight. Until the time that Mr. Apisa gives evidence that Mr. Bush's actions are deleterious to our country, I must regrettably file his comment in the circular file as completely meaningless as a statement of fact but of course meaningful as an OPINION!
Why don't you take off your tie, unbutton your shirt...and stop being such a goddam prig.
Bush is an insult to our country.
If you cannot see that....you're the one with the problem.
I am chastened and stunned by Mr, Apisa's forceful rebuttal. I must, however, demur from one of his demands. I usually do not wear a tie.
I am indeed fortunate to be on a venue which has such logical and well informed debaters. I am overwhelmed by the evidence presented by Mr. Apisa.
you have to admit that Frank's argument is brilliant. "I nose em, when I sees em". It is proof positive that the American Electorate is made up of "fuken morons" that they haven't been persuaded by the Democrat's primary political doctrine, as so eloquently put by our friend.
