Mourning in America

[rgraham666]

How odd, Harold.

I was just thinking how Shrub II could have avoided all the rancour happening if he had the sense to use one of Abe's speeches.

With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds… to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

As opposing the cute little victory dance and throwing around of salt that Shrub's acceptance speech boiled down to.

 

[cantdog]

History is a fairly easy discipline to get a degree in, but then I don't expec politicians to be rocket scientists.

However, the mention of history did remind me what this thread reminds me of: Reading the history of the Civil War and the comments made about Lincoln by his detractors.

Yep, Lincoln failed at business too, over and over. And whether you think he was a good president always always depends on what happened, whether you agree with what happened, and whether you think he had a role in what happened.
Every time, with every president. No matter how stupid.

And rg? HShrub couldn't have put together that sentence.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

simple facts always screw up Joe's self said 'reasoning.'

Did I fucking kill your dog or something, Pure? I mean, damn, you don't have to agree with me--that's fine, and easily put--but why do you have such a goddamn hard-on for the little personal attacks? Its entirely unnecessary.

 

[Pure]

Joe, IT doesn't take a hard on, only a limp noodle to deal with such weird 'reasonings' as

"He went to Yale, he's gotta be pretty smart." [my paraphrase](above average intelligence).

Sher, the 'history' thing was NOT a joke! Sorta illustrates the above point, and 'reasoning,' also.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

History is a fairly easy discipline to get a degree in, but then I don't expec politicians to be rocket scientists.

However, the mention of history did remind me what this thread reminds me of: Reading the history of the Civil War and the comments made about Lincoln by his detractors.

Pffft.

meanie

 

[Weird Harold]

Yep, Lincoln failed at business too, over and over. And whether you think he was a good president always always depends on what happened, whether you agree with what happened, and whether you think he had a role in what happened.
Every time, with every president. No matter how stupid.

And rg? HShrub couldn't have put together that sentence.

I was thinking more of the comparisons to apes and aspersions about Lincoln's intelligence than his business acumen, but that too.

Harry Truman wasn't the greatest businessman ever, and U.S. Grant was absolutely incompetent as a businessman -- I can't think of many Presidents who were good businessmen; apparently business acumen isn't a requirement for the presidency?

History has judged Lincoln a "great president" -- even southern histories that villify him concede that the slurs and slanders directed at him were unjustified.

I wonder how history will judge GWB? I suspect the slurs and slanders will largely ignored as they have been for Lincoln and are slowly disappearing from the historical analyses of Nixon.

I doubt that GWB will ever be judged a "Great President," but I'm not all that sure that Lincoln should have been either. OnlyTime will tell, and I'm unlikely to live long enoug to see the final verdict.

 

[Weird Harold]

I was just thinking how Shrub II could have avoided all the rancour happening if he had the sense to use one of Abe's speeches.

Would GWB's oppenents pay any more attention to to Lincoln's wise words than Lincoln's opponents did?

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Lincoln did poorly in business having started from absolute abject poverty.

Shrub failed miserably in business even with the aid of a millionaire family, rich and famous cronies, and a billionaire foreign investor propping up his attempts.

Hardly a fair comparison.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Pure
Joe, IT doesn't take a hard on, only a limp noodle to deal with such weird 'reasonings' as

"He went to Yale, he's gotta be pretty smart." [my paraphrase](above average intelligence).

Sher, the 'history' thing was NOT a joke! Sorta illustrates the above point, and 'reasoning,' also.

I would absolutely love to hear the reasoning behind "He went to Yale, got a masters at Harvard.... thus its unreasonable entirely to believe he may be intellectually above average". I don't think it is unreasonable to think of a person "They graduated Yale and got a masters at Harvard, they're probably bright". That's neither a crime nor the great big fallacy of reasoning you're making it out to be.

I never said anything was conclusive, only that his background does not speak for him being a stupid man. It may be that he isn't bright at all, but his history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that.

 

[LadyJeanne]

I would absolutely love to hear the reasoning behind "He went to Yale, got a masters at Harvard.... thus its unreasonable entirely to believe he may be intellectually above average". I don't think it is unreasonable to think of a person "They graduated Yale and got a masters at Harvard, they're probably bright". That's neither a crime nor the great big fallacy of reasoning you're making it out to be.

I never said anything was conclusive, only that his background does not speak for him being a stupid man. It may be that he isn't bright at all, but his history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that.

If he had been accepted into Yale and Harvard on his own merits, based on his academic achievements and potential, I would agree with you, Joe.

I doubt Bush would have been accepted without being an alumni legacy from a wealthy family with the best of connections. Once you are accepted in those schools, however, they will allow you to graduate with C's as long as you show up.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by LadyJeanne
If he had been accepted into Yale and Harvard on his own merits, based on his academic achievements and potential, I would agree with you, Joe.

I doubt Bush would have been accepted without being an alumni legacy from a wealthy family with the best of connections. Once you are accepted in those schools, however, they will allow you to graduate with C's as long as you show up.

See, its that part that I don't know about.

I have only one friend at Yale, but three at Harvard (one of those working on his Masters). They're much of the opinion that unless something was dramatically different in the seventies, everyone has to work for what they get... especially the graduate programs.

I'm not saying the man is a genius, but I can't look at what we do know about him (not what we suspect about how he got into college or why he got through it--facts not excuses) and say "OH, he's DEFINITELY a moron!" because everything about his history (right down to why his first business failed and what he did in his next ventures correcting a lot of those mistakes) says "This guy knows a thing or two".

And, most of all, I really get tired of being made out to be some kind of moron myself because I think that's a reasonable thing to believe.

 

[Weird Harold]

Lincoln did poorly in business having started from absolute abject poverty.

Shrub failed miserably in business even with the aid of a millionaire family, ...

Apparently you missed the rest of my point about business success -- I can't think of a single president noted for his success in business, but several who were notable for their lack of business success.

Rich or Poor, self-made or propped up by family connections, ALL of our presidents have failed in some business venture if the were invovled with business at all.

Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were both in debt when they died -- Jefferson so much so he would have filed bankruptcy under our modern laws.

 

[LadyJeanne]

See, its that part that I don't know about.

I have only one friend at Yale, but three at Harvard (one of those working on his Masters). They're much of the opinion that unless something was dramatically different in the seventies, everyone has to work for what they get... especially the graduate programs.

I'm not saying the man is a genius, but I can't look at what we do know about him (not what we suspect about how he got into college or why he got through it--facts not excuses) and say "OH, he's DEFINITELY a moron!" because everything about his history (right down to why his first business failed and what he did in his next ventures correcting a lot of those mistakes) says "This guy knows a thing or two".

And, most of all, I really get tired of being made out to be some kind of moron myself because I think that's a reasonable thing to believe.

I think he's a moron despite his background. Think of it this way - he's had the advantage of education, but how likely is it that he would have become president without the advantages afforded by wealth, family, and the opportunities that came his way because of his connections?

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by LadyJeanne
I think he's a moron despite his background. Think of it this way - he's had the advantage of education, but how likely is it that he would have become president without the advantages afforded by wealth, family, and the opportunities that came his way because of his connections?

Less likely, but how /much/ less likely is entirely speculation.

 

[shereads]

I think he's a moron despite his background. Think of it this way - he's had the advantage of education, but how likely is it that he would have become president without the advantages afforded by wealth, family, and the opportunities that came his way because of his connections?

"The real threat to America isn't Osama bin Laden. It's his slightly smarter brother, Jeb bin Laden."

~ David Letterman

 

[shereads]

David Letterman, after a satellite interview with candidate Bush before the 2000 election:

"It was a little awkward because of the satellite delay...And on top of that, there was Bush's own, natural delay."

"Honestly, doesn't this guy Bush make Dan Quayle look like Winston Churchill?"

 

[Pure]

Word of Joe:

his [GWB's]history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that [he isn't bright].

[later]
I really get tired of being made out to be some kind of moron myself

OK, though the 'm' term doesn't come from me, let's just say linguistically and cognitively challenged (hmmm, sounds like the topic person!).

===
Joe in part

I never said anything was conclusive, only that his background does not speak for him being a stupid man. It may be that he isn't bright at all, but his history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that.

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Pure
OK, though the 'm' term doesn't come from me, let's just say linguistically and cognitively challenged (hmmm, sounds like the topic person!).

What the fuck's your problem, man? Linguistically and cognitively challenged? I mean, Christ, does bearing down on other people (and thinly) get you off or something or boost your self-esteem or what?

First of all, I'm not linguistically challenged--and I entirely call you out to prove otherwise, you spineless shitlick. Past that, even if we have the ability to access guaging for cognition (which we don't), I don't see how experentially we can confirm anything about my cognitive ability that would leave it challenged, either.

Or are you just another troll?

 

[Somme]

He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."

~ Ann Richards, former Texas governor

...and I was, stupidly, drinking coffee when I read the above.......

 

[Pure]

Joe: I'm not linguistically challenged--and I entirely call you out to prove otherwise,

Recent example:

his [GWB's]history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that [he isn't bright].

Consider subject/verb agreement. Consider whether a 'history' can 'conclude' anything.

Most recent example:

even if we have the ability to access guaging for cognition (which we don't), I don't see how experentially we can confirm anything about my cognitive ability that would leave it challenged, either.

Granted this particular piece speaks to linguistic challenge: spelling 'guaging' and awkward phrases, such as "the ability to access guaging [sic] for cognition."

As to cognitive embarrassments, let's just say the cognitive processes are 'fragile,' 'easily perturbed,' hence all the name calling.

J.

----
Joe's logical musings:

//What the fuck's your problem, man? Linguistically and cognitively challenged? I mean, Christ, does bearing down on other people (and thinly) get you off or something or boost your self-esteem or what?

First of all, I'm not linguistically challenged--and I entirely call you out to prove otherwise, you spineless shitlick. Past that, even if we have the ability to access guaging for cognition (which we don't), I don't see how experentially we can confirm anything about my cognitive ability that would leave it challenged, either.//

 

[bg23]

He was born with a silver foot in his mouth."

~ Ann Richards, former Texas governor

...and I was, stupidly, drinking coffee when I read the above.......

*giggle*

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

Originally posted by Pure
Joe: I'm not linguistically challenged--and I entirely call you out to prove otherwise,

Recent example:

his [GWB's]history of accomplishments don't actually conclude that [he isn't bright].

Consider subject/verb agreement. Consider whether a 'history' can 'conclude' anything.

It may be possible for a history to conclude something, as it isn't impossible by definition or essential property. That's just logic.

Most recent example:

even if we have the ability to access guaging for cognition (which we don't), I don't see how experentially we can confirm anything about my cognitive ability that would leave it challenged, either.

Granted this particular piece speaks to linguistic challenge: spelling 'guaging' and awkward phrases, such as "the ability to access guaging [sic] for cognition."

If you prefer... "the ability to access measurement". Doesn't really matter. At this point, you're reaching for straws and just trying to piss me off by being offensive. I'm taking everyone else's advice on this matter and just writing you off as a troll. Later

 

[sweetnpetite]

Filing suit, step one: find lawyer and convince him he can make a buck or become famous by taking your case.

I would recomend Geofry Fieger.

He's already famous for taking controversial cases. (as well as a failed run for governer in michigan)

And he's got SPIRIT! Yes he do! He's got spirit how bout you?!

 

[sweetnpetite]

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

Are you sure that isn't exactly what he meant?

 

[LadyJeanne]

sweetnpetite:

"Shh, don't worry. It's going to happen, you don't really have a choice. I'm calling the shots. You just do what you're told and everything will be fine, got it?"
His voice was soft and reasonable yet his words were anything but.
from: THE STRANGER by Amy Sweet.


Hmm, this quote sounds like something Bush or Cheney might say.