Gallup: Americans Say Country Ready for a Female President

I believe my eyes and ears. If that man reads classic literature, then the mission was accomplished in Iraq three years ago.

snood wrote:

I believe my eyes and ears. If that man reads classic literature, then the mission was accomplished in Iraq three years ago.

What a perfectly asinine comment.

Your ears, if they had been listening, would have heard representations by both the president and his spokesman that he did, indeed, read The Stranger. They would not have heard anything other than the sort of snide opinion you offer to prove he did not.

Unless your eyes have come across a test concerning The Stranger, miserably failed by Bush, they have not come across any evidence to contest the assertion that he read the book.

This is a perfect example of the particularly distasteful and utterly unfounded conceit of Liberals: Conservatives, in general, and Bush in particular are low grade morons when compared with the enlightened Left.

I suggest that you have no idea of what books Bush may or may not have read, but simply assume that if he reads at all, his favorite authors are Zane Grey and Tom Clancey.

Clearly the man is not an intellectual giant, and whether or not, as president, he needs to be is a subject for another debate. His remarks about the Camus novel: "It was interesting and a fast read," are perfectly consistent with the man's literary proclivity. There is nothing but prejudice to suggest that the claim that he read the book is a lie.

Your comments are, unfortunately, so typical of the knee-jerk responses of Liberals in general and specifically A2K Liberals whenever the subject of Bush comes up.

Dianne Rheames (sp?) had an excellent show on NPR relative to The Stranger and sparked by the "news" that Bush had read the book.

Her guests were a Philosophy Prof. at Georgetown, an author, and a reporter for the Washington Post. Interestingly enough, not one of them even hinted at disbelieving the assertion that Bush read the book. Only one, the Post reporter (surprise surprise) made any political assertions about the "news," and it was singular and lame.

When was the last time you had a discussion concerning the First and Second Awakenings in America? Oh wait, that involves religion and can't, therefore, be intellectual. My mistake.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

snood wrote:

I believe my eyes and ears. If that man reads classic literature, then the mission was accomplished in Iraq three years ago.

What a perfectly asinine comment.

Your ears, if they had been listening, would have heard representations by both the president and his spokesman that he did, indeed, read The Stranger. They would not have heard anything other than the sort of snide opinion you offer to prove he did not.

Unless your eyes have come across a test concerning The Stranger, miserably failed by Bush, they have not come across any evidence to contest the assertion that he read the book.

This is a perfect example of the particularly distasteful and utterly unfounded conceit of Liberals: Conservatives, in general, and Bush in particular are low grade morons when compared with the enlightened Left.

I suggest that you have no idea of what books Bush may or may not have read, but simply assume that if he reads at all, his favorite authors are Zane Grey and Tom Clancey.

Clearly the man is not an intellectual giant, and whether or not, as president, he needs to be is a subject for another debate. His remarks about the Camus novel: "It was interesting and a fast read," are perfectly consistent with the man's literary proclivity. There is nothing but prejudice to suggest that the claim that he read the book is a lie.

Your comments are, unfortunately, so typical of the knee-jerk responses of Liberals in general and specifically A2K Liberals whenever the subject of Bush comes up.

Dianne Rheames (sp?) had an excellent show on NPR relative to The Stranger and sparked by the "news" that Bush had read the book.

Her guests were a Philosophy Prof. at Georgetown, an author, and a reporter for the Washington Post. Interestingly enough, not one of them even hinted at disbelieving the assertion that Bush read the book. Only one, the Post reporter (surprise surprise) made any political assertions about the "news," and it was singular and lame.

When was the last time you had a discussion concerning the First and Second Awakenings in America? Oh wait, that involves religion and can't, therefore, be intellectual. My mistake.

Bush says he read The Stranger. You say its asinine, my not believing him - I think you're asinine for believing it.

If you think the man has, during his time in intense public scrutiny as president, demonstrated the type of thinking that suggests an interest in existentialism, that's your privilege. I don't.

If you think we should just take him at his word that he read and understood this story, that's your privilege. I don't.

No need to make a frikkin speech. We just disagree.

Not at all, Finn - I find your penchant for public mental masturbation fascinating - continue at your conveinience. I'm just through with this particular hubbub about your stalwart president's literary proclivities.

You're not paying attention - I'm not going anywhere. Please continue. The horse is not quite glue yet.

Sure snood - another example of leftie "cut and run."

Tolstoy and Camus...

now there's a pair.

I'm out of it since I haven't read Camus.

Any way any of you could describe why we should think of these two differently, however obvious, and delineate the various reasons why?

ossobuco wrote:

Tolstoy and Camus...

now there's a pair.

I'm out of it since I haven't read Camus.

Any way any of you could describe why we should think of these two differently, however obvious, and delineate the various reasons why?

I'm sorry, I was otherwise engaged with snoodly.

Somewhere in this thread there may be a reference to Tolstoy, but I missed it.

If you've not read Camus, how do you know that "now there's a pair" (in all its sarcastic glory) is accurate?

If your request to compare Tolstoy and Camus is truly based on intellectual curioisty and a desire to learn rather than than some sort of childish test, post the question on the appropriate forum, PM me as to its existence, and I will be happy to respond---as I'm sure snood will.