That's our Bush....
- Thread starter smurphy
- Start date
I have to chuckle when these anounous cyber inepts like Spy- can read above post by terry Ray then add to those fact he was elected gov and 2 term pres and call anyone a failure--if so what pray tell would that make you?
Hmm Edward you back--in only been 3 weeks--those wounds from last posting healed quick this time
on the VN vets condemning--are you talking about those sought out by media or the ones that showed their asses to Billy Bob t the wall inpromptu.
You been listening to too many of your liberal coharts/media/pollsters
if you want to look at the factual polls of people for GW before war and after look at the facts--if you dare
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
Hmm Edward you back--in only been 3 weeks--those wounds from last posting healed quick this time
on the VN vets condemning--are you talking about those sought out by media or the ones that showed their asses to Billy Bob t the wall inpromptu.
You been listening to too many of your liberal coharts/media/pollsters
if you want to look at the factual polls of people for GW before war and after look at the facts--if you dare
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/countymap.htm
Terry: This is an argument right out of the DTB bag of tricks. You remove the man from the situation at hand (his presidency) by putting him in another (a fighter jet). You might think the change of scenery makes him look like a genious, but the fact is that he's proven his lack of intelligence time and time again in his current role as President. In other words, your argument is nonsense.
. . . says the guy who brings up Kerry and the gas tax every six months and bumps the "junk science" post.
Wayne: That link is really impressive, until you cut to THE FACTS:
And better yet
You are guilty of which you accuse everyone else.
And better yet
You are guilty of which you accuse everyone else.
question...
question...
does a person lack intelligence if he doesn't speak well ?
i say no....& am curious as to how people know if another person is intelligent or not wothout inter-acting with that person....
question...
does a person lack intelligence if he doesn't speak well ?
i say no....& am curious as to how people know if another person is intelligent or not wothout inter-acting with that person....
There is a big difference between people that don't speak well and people that make ignorant, idiotic statements over and over.
gmroz22: as usual, you misunderstand the argument.
Bush may have proven his "lack of intelligence time and time again in his current role as President", which may make him a moron or idiot president, but not a moron or idiot as a man. Clearly someone who has completed his education, training and winning all those elections isn't a moron and idiot---tho he may be in this "situation at hand", as we all would be in some situation well beyond our competence. Even infidels.
Yes, kind of a small point, but you da folks always goin' on 'bout precision in language and speaking, eh?
Bush just might be a moron running my retirement fund (don't know his competency here either), so no, I wouldn't have him do that either Spytheweb. I'd take someone with proven track record and qualifications for it. Like one of our fine past Fed Chairmen, Great Americans of Accomplishment that they are.
I believe Bush would have been a better baseball commissioner than Selig. Fay Vincent always (only half jokingly) took credit for Bush being President as Bush told him that MLB commissioner is his real dream job, but Vincent advised Bush that Selig really wanted it (despite Selig saying he didn't) and Vincent advised Bush that the powers that be would probably not give it to him--so told Bush he oughtta pursue his second choice, running for Governor of Texas. Bush took that advice.
Bush may have proven his "lack of intelligence time and time again in his current role as President", which may make him a moron or idiot president, but not a moron or idiot as a man. Clearly someone who has completed his education, training and winning all those elections isn't a moron and idiot---tho he may be in this "situation at hand", as we all would be in some situation well beyond our competence. Even infidels.
Yes, kind of a small point, but you da folks always goin' on 'bout precision in language and speaking, eh?
Bush just might be a moron running my retirement fund (don't know his competency here either), so no, I wouldn't have him do that either Spytheweb. I'd take someone with proven track record and qualifications for it. Like one of our fine past Fed Chairmen, Great Americans of Accomplishment that they are.
I believe Bush would have been a better baseball commissioner than Selig. Fay Vincent always (only half jokingly) took credit for Bush being President as Bush told him that MLB commissioner is his real dream job, but Vincent advised Bush that Selig really wanted it (despite Selig saying he didn't) and Vincent advised Bush that the powers that be would probably not give it to him--so told Bush he oughtta pursue his second choice, running for Governor of Texas. Bush took that advice.
Can you please elaborate on how I misunderstood your argument? I believe I said he was an idiot. Then, you countered saying that he can't be an idiot because he used to fly fighter jets. I replied saying that you can't say the guy isn't an idiot of a president because he used to fly jets.
Terry, there are a lot of situations in which I would be the model of incompetence. The difference? I don't seek them out......especially twice.
Are you saying that I use poor grammar and spelling? I don't quite follow your impression of the average Republican voter.
Gary The fact is that after war he gained support in 04 over 00 after Iraq invasion--
The map is also is quite revealing on tying in Dem voters with the demagaphics of voters--also makes one wonder about the middle class that Dems keep speaking of?
Bobby Its Edward that keeps bumping the Junk Science thread--but there is thread that does need bumping that relates to this that was apparently ignored by the left or they had no rebuttles--
Subject: : Bush Quits
We all have our disagreements with President Bush. Immigration, U. S. Attorney firings, Iraq, Darfur, North Korea, etc. are all hot topics
these days.
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans."
Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible
has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer. I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit......... Now before anyone
gets al in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office. The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you
have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. The majority of
you have NOT done your homework to figure it out. You've been sold a bil of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the
majority of you think the economy is in the tank. That's despite
record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. While I'm mentioning minorities, I'll point out that
minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the 8 yrs of the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't
seem to have sunk in.
Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is complain about gas prices, and most of you do not realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world,
and because a small handful of people are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security. We are facing real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" stuff. If I was trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq's oil
fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. Don't give me this "Bush Lied People Died" crap either. If I was the liar you take me
for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they
could be discovered. Instead, I owned up to the fact that the
intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world
thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that
regime change in Iraq was official US policy BEFORE I came into
office. Clinton established that policy. Bet you didn't know that,
did you? You need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic
models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We
were simply able to outspend and out-tech them. That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive.
In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But
they are. They want to kill you. And these people are all over the globe. You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us
here in the United States since September 11. But you're not the least bit grateful. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small
number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland
security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight.
Im disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'.
Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops. Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run political campaign, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing. In this day and
age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet.
It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But
even if it were, I doubt you'd Take the time to read it. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.
I could say more about your expectations that the government will ALWAYS be there to bail you out, even if you're determined not to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.
I could say more about your insane belief that government, not in your own wallet, is where the money comes from. I've come to the
conclusion if I were to explain this to you, it would sail right over your heads.
So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream of) and the capability to
be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever
hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall. Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for
it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough
to turn this thing around in 2008.
God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean.
.................................................. ....
The map is also is quite revealing on tying in Dem voters with the demagaphics of voters--also makes one wonder about the middle class that Dems keep speaking of?
Bobby Its Edward that keeps bumping the Junk Science thread--but there is thread that does need bumping that relates to this that was apparently ignored by the left or they had no rebuttles--
Subject: : Bush Quits
We all have our disagreements with President Bush. Immigration, U. S. Attorney firings, Iraq, Darfur, North Korea, etc. are all hot topics
these days.
Normally, I start these things out by saying "My Fellow Americans."
Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible
has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer. I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit......... Now before anyone
gets al in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: there's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office. The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you
have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. The majority of
you have NOT done your homework to figure it out. You've been sold a bil of goods by politicians and the news media. Polls show that the
majority of you think the economy is in the tank. That's despite
record numbers of homeowners including record numbers of MINORITY homeowners. While I'm mentioning minorities, I'll point out that
minority business ownership is at an all-time high. Our unemployment rate is as low as it ever was during the 8 yrs of the Clinton Administration. I've mentioned all those things before, but it doesn't
seem to have sunk in.
Despite the shock to our economy of 9/11, the stock market has rebounded to record levels and more Americans than ever are participating in these markets. Meanwhile, all you can do is complain about gas prices, and most of you do not realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world,
and because a small handful of people are more worried about polar bears and beach front property than your economic security. We are facing real threats in the world. Don't give me this "blood for oil" stuff. If I was trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq's oil
fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. Don't give me this "Bush Lied People Died" crap either. If I was the liar you take me
for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they
could be discovered. Instead, I owned up to the fact that the
intelligence was faulty. Let me remind you that the rest of the world
thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that
regime change in Iraq was official US policy BEFORE I came into
office. Clinton established that policy. Bet you didn't know that,
did you? You need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic
models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We
were simply able to outspend and out-tech them. That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive.
In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But
they are. They want to kill you. And these people are all over the globe. You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us
here in the United States since September 11. But you're not the least bit grateful. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small
number of intelligence, military, law enforcement and homeland
security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight.
Im disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor'.
Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops. Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy. Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run political campaign, you might just as well FedEx a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing. In this day and
age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet.
It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times or on NBC News. But
even if it were, I doubt you'd Take the time to read it. Most of you would rather watch American Idol.
I could say more about your expectations that the government will ALWAYS be there to bail you out, even if you're determined not to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.
I could say more about your insane belief that government, not in your own wallet, is where the money comes from. I've come to the
conclusion if I were to explain this to you, it would sail right over your heads.
So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream of) and the capability to
be fully self-sufficient. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever
hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall. Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for
it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there're just enough of you remaining who are smart enough
to turn this thing around in 2008.
God bless what's left of America. Some of you know what I mean.
.................................................. ....
Last edited:
Wayne: Do you honestly think he gained support, or do you think people voted for him out of fear....the fear of changing Commanders in mid-war? Even with that being the case, Bush nearly lost.
Can you explain what is so revealing about the map? Is it that people that live in BFE vote conservative? If you didn't realize that most of the population was concentrated in very small areas, that map would be very impressive. I guess I don't get it.
are you saying that intelligent people never repeatedly say stupid things ?
however, if i was bush's pr person i would try to limit his off the cuff remarks...even if meant that i would lose my job for doing this..
Last edited:
If it's one thing we should know by now about the Bush administration...the important things are having a lot of land (i.e.: Wayne's Mapquesting), especially the kind with oil on it.
I do believe that we base our elections not by land area, but more by popular or electoral college voting (which could be argued, of course). So, to say he has more support because more rural areas voted for him and a larger land mass is covered by his supporters, hardly makes it REAL, now does it?
And, I think in 2006 the blue coverage probably became more prevalent, and probably will grow in the Presidential election. How many red flag holders still are happy with Bush now, after people realize the truth about what they were told to garner their support? I think there are about 2 here, not sure about all the tumbleweed areas...
I do believe that we base our elections not by land area, but more by popular or electoral college voting (which could be argued, of course). So, to say he has more support because more rural areas voted for him and a larger land mass is covered by his supporters, hardly makes it REAL, now does it?
And, I think in 2006 the blue coverage probably became more prevalent, and probably will grow in the Presidential election. How many red flag holders still are happy with Bush now, after people realize the truth about what they were told to garner their support? I think there are about 2 here, not sure about all the tumbleweed areas...
chad...
i would agree with the above if the dems had a strong candidate running...but i don't think they do. although hillary would be my choice if i voted democratic (i won't) in the upcoming election, i think her negatives are much too strong for her to win. and i'm not too sure how many people will hold accountable the republican's, who are running as "outsiders (guiliani,romney,thompson), for bush's blunders.
i think the american people are so sick of wash. politicians (both parties), that they will vote for somebody who is considered an outsider. the dems don't have anybody that is presently running & the reps have the 3 that i mentioned....& eventhough thompson has been a senator & a lobbyist, he has been out of politics for a few years & i think people will consider him an outsider.
but we'll see..
Al, people say dumb things all the time. Nobody's perfect. I'll stand by my statement.
hey gmroz22 (Kafir):
I never said " the guy isn't an idiot of a president because he used to fly jets". Distinctions on that point is explained in the very next line of mine you quote!
precision of language involves exact wording and careful definitions and distinctions, not so much grammar and spelling. Re-read what I wrote to try and grasp the point, or ask someone next to you---I'm too busy to re-write it again to make the same point yet another way.....I got riled-up this morning discussing another issue with a friend and worked up piece on this, will post it and it's much more along the line of your posts! Whaddya think of it?
I never said " the guy isn't an idiot of a president because he used to fly jets". Distinctions on that point is explained in the very next line of mine you quote!
precision of language involves exact wording and careful definitions and distinctions, not so much grammar and spelling. Re-read what I wrote to try and grasp the point, or ask someone next to you---I'm too busy to re-write it again to make the same point yet another way.....I got riled-up this morning discussing another issue with a friend and worked up piece on this, will post it and it's much more along the line of your posts! Whaddya think of it?
I just read through part of it and I don't think you are going to get an argument out of me if you think the line about this country being founded upon Judeo-Christian ethics is a myth. I'll read the full post when I get home from work tonight.
-Gary
That's a simple calculation when you have a plotter and flight computer with you at the exam, as all test candidates did. (These are slide-rule like devices for pilots that help them calculate speed and distance). Please, this is not rocket science.
I won't disagree that the man has some modicum of intelligence, specifically in the areas of piloting jet aircraft and weed-whacking. But these are not the measure of a great political leader, one who should be President of the United States. If they were, then Chuch Yeager would be the perfect candidate to run for the highest office in the free world.
Alas, no. These admirable strengths of Dubya are overshadowed by a distinct lack of wit, tact, depth of thought, sincerity, and an overabundance of puerile social behaviour.
Thought this interesting concerning GW and polls--
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402263_pf.html
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 25, 2007; A03
President Bush is a competitive guy. But this is one contest he would rather lose. With 18 months left in office, he is in the running for most unpopular president in the history of modern polling.
The latest Washington Post-ABC News survey shows that 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's job performance, matching his all-time low.
In polls conducted by The Post or Gallup going back to 1938, only twice has a president exceeded that level of public animosity -- Harry S. Truman, who hit 67 percent during the Korean War, and Richard M. Nixon, who hit 66 percent four days before resigning.
Amazing what truman polled then and what history found out later
---and who are they polling anyway--surely not those in market--looking for jobs-loans ect as employment is at all time highs--interest rates low-market running rampant--
Only thing I can make of it is they're polling people that none of above are of any consequence to.:shrug:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/24/AR2007072402263_pf.html
By Peter Baker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 25, 2007; A03
President Bush is a competitive guy. But this is one contest he would rather lose. With 18 months left in office, he is in the running for most unpopular president in the history of modern polling.
The latest Washington Post-ABC News survey shows that 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's job performance, matching his all-time low.
In polls conducted by The Post or Gallup going back to 1938, only twice has a president exceeded that level of public animosity -- Harry S. Truman, who hit 67 percent during the Korean War, and Richard M. Nixon, who hit 66 percent four days before resigning.
Amazing what truman polled then and what history found out later
---and who are they polling anyway--surely not those in market--looking for jobs-loans ect as employment is at all time highs--interest rates low-market running rampant--
Only thing I can make of it is they're polling people that none of above are of any consequence to.:shrug:
