Kerry & Bush Grades The Same!

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]JeffR wrote:
lumpy wrote:

"Note:
Most rethugs won’t be talking about what was buried on page A7 in the Globe (by the so called liberal media). Oh yeah Swift Boat Veterans for truth are still liars, gee I’m stunned.

What will the “liberal media” do though?
Discuss more important things like grades in college—I don’t remember when grades in school were a reflection of ones I.Q.–for either canidate. Does this mean that Cheney’s the dumbest idiot on the planet? I’m sure apologies are forthcoming by all to Mr. Kerry. Let’s see will Hannity talk about grades, or apologize for slandering Kerry? I’m guessing—grades."

As usual, lumpy, you missed the entire point.

I’ll type it again: Too many of your pals think that Bush’s lack of orational polish means he is ignorant.

Imagine if Bush would have come out the loser at Yale. I Guaran-fucking-tee you and your pals would be all over this website with, “See I told you.”

Makes us laugh our ass off at you!!!

We don’t really give two farts and a shit about what grades Bush got in Yale. Lincoln had exactly one year of formal schooling.

You, and your pals, are the ones we are laughing at. Once again, your “chosen candidate” comes up short against W.

I love it!!!

JeffR

[/quote]

You’re confusing (of course) ignorance with incompetence, his favorite success to date is “Record Housing” (seriously he’s still saying that). And of course you’re deliberately missing the point–I don’t remember college grades ever being an issue during the campaign, But I feel like I remember the constant slandering of Kerry’s military record by a drunken liar and vast majorities of the right–slander rendered baseless, and no apologies. Intellect isn’t really a question anyway we all saw the smackdown Bush got in the debates. My favorite display of Bush’s quick feet:

What do you feel is the greatest threat to america’s security?

Kerry: Nuclear Proliferation

Bush, same question:

Bush: Uhhhhh… Nucular Proliferation?

Mind you I don’t think Bush is dumb, and smarts come in all forms, clearly one could say Bush has vastly greater political intelligence than Kerry. But why are we even bothering discussing intellect?

102

[quote]ZEB wrote:
100meters wrote:
ZEB wrote:

JTBS, you do know Bush’s social security proposal is voluntary and will not eliminate SS don’t you?

Shh…you will ruin the liberals scare tactics!

By voluntary you mean not voluntary right? Because your benefits would still be “cut”. And by not eliminate you mean step one in dismantling Social Security?

And of course by now you realize that it’s dead in the water, because oh just about every real american hates the plan.

Yea…those are the scare tactics I was talking about! Good job!

Oh wait…you forgot: All of the old people will be living in the streets. AND IT’S ALL BUSH’S FAULT! LOL

[/quote]

Gee, I thought the scare tactic was “if we don’t do something social security will be bankrupt.”----not mentioning at the time his plan does nothing to fix solvency. Calling Dems’s strategy of pointing out the problems in Bush’s scare tactic a “scare tactic” is kind of funny…

And zeb you forgot? Old people don’t have to live on the streets anymore. AND THAT IS ALL LIBERALS fault! Hilarious.

103

[quote]Joe Weider wrote:
well, during the campaign we were told over and over that Just For Kerry was incredibly bright and nuanced. A real intellectual.

And as it turns out, GWB’s grades were a point higher, and his Armed Forces Aptitude test score was higher.

Of course, Just For Kerry laughed it off by saying he’d been partying the night before…SHIT! I thought GWB was the party animal.

My mistake.
[/quote]

The funny thing is, We were told this by the uhhhhh Right. They used it to great effect I assume to distinguish Kerry’s “elitism” from Bush’s “average guy”. I think you can remember Bush pointing out his averageness at just about every single campaign speech (look how I talk, look how I walk, etc.). I don’t remember Kerry bragging about how much smarter he was than George? Or Pre-debate–the right hyping Kerry’s skills, and deliberately downplaying Bush’s…It’s funny because the left kept trying to point out how Bush schooled Gore… So the right downplayed Bush’s intellect all campaign, and now points at the left…they’re always doing that for some reason…

104

Some how much of bush’s re-elctioin has to do with intelligence–obviously none. The vast majority of the voters are average and certainly felt more comfortable having an incumbant in the administration than taking on a new administration. It was close though. I think we can all agree grades have nothing to do with intelligence–they are olny a predictor of how one MIGHT perform overall. And lets not forget that most college courses are curved to make up for a class being too easy or too hard.

105

[quote]ZEB wrote:
vroom wrote:
How long ago was the most recent comparable test between the two anyway?

What do we have to go on, realistically, these day… anything at all?

I think you are sort of missing the entire point. Kerry was supposed to be far superior intellectually!

Now it matters not if you go back to their college grades and they look about equal?

No wonder Kerry wouldn’t release the grades during the campaign. That would have blown his entire “I’m smart you are stupid” attack plan…

LOL I get a big kick out of Kerry!

[/quote]

As constantly mentioned by…the Right pre-debate. And this would have only blown Bush’s I’m more average than him routine constantly repeated before handpicked crowds…

106

[quote]ZEB wrote:
vroom wrote:
Joe, there is no hate. Look, the stuff you typed isn’t really what the general public sees…

So…beyond his grades, beyond his accomplishments (you tried becoming a jet fighter pilot? The great McCain crashed several planes in training. GWB never did), beyond becoming the first re-elected Republican govenor in forever in Texas, beyond being elected twice to POTUS…shit, beyond all this stuff you’re right…there’s nothing to judge him by.

If the general public paid that much attention they wouldn’t fall for all the slanderous bullshit that occurs right at election time.

Joe, let go of the bias!

Joe:

You have to remember the number one rule when it comes to the far left:

  1. It’s always okay to hate President Bush! The issue matters not. Right or wrong matters not. It’s how much you can put the boots to Bush! That is the only thing that counts to the far left.

Their hate is something that they cling to hoping beyond hope that something bad will happen. It could be to the economy, or in Iraq, heck anywhere will do. Then they can blame Bush and will once again feel “empowered.”

At least until the next time Americans (which leaves out vroom) go to the polls!

[/quote]

And the one rule when it comes to Rethugs!

Kookiness Rules the Day!
Run on a campaign of promoting your canidates complete averageness and turn opponent into cartoon character of an elitist intellectual, booksmart, french speaking aristocrat—and slander his military service, then when military records are released (including grades) proving baseless the slander of said opponents military service, attack opponents grades and insert your own campaign rhetoric into his mouth! Whew! that’s rich.

107

Interesting…who woulda thought?

All I know is this:

If someone made you bet, say $1000, during the election (particularly after the first debate) on whose grades you thought were better in college, all you mofos would have put your money with Kerry!

108

[quote]vroom wrote:
Republicans have for years and years overestimated Dems.
The rank and file–hell, even the elected officials and party bosses.

I’m not seeing that reflected in these parts Joe. Statements such that they are dumb enought to try to impeach GW with nothing but a single memo have abounded lately.

That’s overestimating?

Show me. Show me this overestimation that you talk of. I’m pretty convinced both parties play these silly reindeer games…

I think maybe thinking your party isn’t playing these games is a little bit of self-delusion on your part, not a bias on my part.

I grew up conservative, cheerleading Ronald Reagen, so I do have a bit of background with respect to being a sycophant for the party in power.

[Side Note: Please, readers our there, spare me the god awful quotes you think are so witty about who is a liberal or conservate and why they later change.]

So, in return, no attackage, but I think you are biased… and can’t see that both parties play the same games.[/quote]

we here don’t, no. And also as I think I said the tide is changing.
I can’t argue with you. You’ll slip and slide wind up calling me the idiot and the wrong one…

109

[quote]jodgey wrote:
Who gives a shit? ZEB, dont you have some pull ups to do?[/quote]

Are you one of those johnny one notes who just can’t get beyond the fact that I can do more Pull-ups than you? Otherwise, why would you bring that up on this thread?

Hey…maybe you better get back to a thread where you are more comfortable like the “T-Nation shaker” thread.

110

[quote]vroom wrote:
The next erection is a couple years away,[quote]

Maybe yours is…:slight_smile:

111

100meters:

According to both parties a few years back, Social Security would be bankrupt by 2036.

Now that Bush is trying to fix the problem, the democrats say there is none.

Politics at it’s very lowest!

112

[quote]ZEB wrote:
100meters:

According to both parties a few years back, Social Security would be bankrupt by 2036.

Now that Bush is trying to fix the problem, the democrats say there is none.

Politics at it’s very lowest!

[/quote]

I haven’t heard any Democrats state there is no problem and I have been following this fairly closely. What is being proposed as of late is a sit down with the president to discuss alternatives if he will drop his push for the individual accounts.

113

[quote]we here don’t, no. And also as I think I said the tide is changing.
I can’t argue with you. You’ll slip and slide wind up calling me the idiot and the wrong one… [/quote]

Joe, I’m not sure you’ve noticed, but I really don’t slam people for having an opinion. It’s really the snide comments or personal attacks that I enjoy responding to in kind.

I don’t (generally) slip and slide at all… I state what I intend to state, but it is often interpreted as what someone wants me to say so that it can be attacked.

If you honestly feel that around here there is no bias on behalf of republican minded people, that is your perogative.

However, at the same time I do get to suggest you may be blinded by your own bias. It’s totally up to you if you choose to take offence at a simple statement like that.

Me having and stating that opinion is my perogative.

114

[quote]ZEB wrote:
endgamer711 wrote:
Comparing Bush with Kerry is so last year, dudes. Comparing them on the basis of their college careers is truly stupid, real hide your head in the sand stuff.

Wrong!

We had to hear for the better part of one year how much smarter Kerry was than Bush.

Therefore, for the next few days you are going to have to hear about how, based upon their college grades that is just not the case!

I also remember SAT scores and military IQ tests being higher for GW Bush!

Why do these guys always want to change the conversation when it doesn’t come out the way they planned?
[/quote]

That’s the point, guy. This whole discussion is as broken as last year’s election. And don’t ‘you guys’ me, thanks. You think I’m a Kerry fan?

Both candidates for president in the 2004 election sucked. Y’all should be asking why the system is so broken it puts you up to a choice between two morons.

115

[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
ZEB wrote:
endgamer711 wrote:
Comparing Bush with Kerry is so last year, dudes. Comparing them on the basis of their college careers is truly stupid, real hide your head in the sand stuff.

Wrong!

We had to hear for the better part of one year how much smarter Kerry was than Bush.

Therefore, for the next few days you are going to have to hear about how, based upon their college grades that is just not the case!

I also remember SAT scores and military IQ tests being higher for GW Bush!

Why do these guys always want to change the conversation when it doesn’t come out the way they planned?

That’s the point, guy. This whole discussion is as broken as last year’s election. And don’t ‘you guys’ me, thanks. You think I’m a Kerry fan?

Both candidates for president in the 2004 election sucked. Y’all should be asking why the system is so broken it puts you up to a choice between two morons.[/quote]

This might be a huge shock to you…but dammit, I like GWB. I think he’s funny, I think he’s a good guy, I’m disapointed in few of his postitions…but I like him and don’t think he’s a moron.

116

[quote]vroom wrote:
we here don’t, no. And also as I think I said the tide is changing.
I can’t argue with you. You’ll slip and slide wind up calling me the idiot and the wrong one…

Joe, I’m not sure you’ve noticed, but I really don’t slam people for having an opinion. It’s really the snide comments or personal attacks that I enjoy responding to in kind.

I don’t (generally) slip and slide at all… I state what I intend to state, but it is often interpreted as what someone wants me to say so that it can be attacked.

If you honestly feel that around here there is no bias on behalf of republican minded people, that is your perogative.

However, at the same time I do get to suggest you may be blinded by your own bias. It’s totally up to you if you choose to take offence at a simple statement like that.

Me having and stating that opinion is my perogative.[/quote]

But where did I say there was no bias?
When were we even talking of bias?
I said the republicans–the national party leaders–have long overestimated the democrats.

If you want to talk of bias, fine, but for cryin’ out loud tell me you’ve changed topics before you start putting words in my mouth.

117

end

2 morons!?

Neither is a moron. I can’t believe, as a people, that there exists this idea that anyone at that level in any given field would be a moron.

I agree with the crowd that says grades are only a partial indicator of intelligence. A leader, a President, is more than an intellectual figure–personality to a company or country.

Charisma, intuition, solid work ethic, approachability, trust, IT–all have as much to do or more with the success of a leader.

And I think that those that feel that Bush comes off as an idiot in his speeches are wrong. Is he as polished, no. Is he as technically sound as a Clinton, no. But his points and stance are clear and his message very straight forward. So If you want to get all critical, like those on this forum for speling errors and such, fine. but look throught that to the message and I think you see it loud and clear.

118

[quote]Joe Weider wrote:

This might be a huge shock to you…but dammit, I like GWB. I think he’s funny, I think he’s a good guy, I’m disapointed in few of his postitions…but I like him and don’t think he’s a moron.
[/quote]

The so-called candidate debates were a travesty, carefully sanitized to allow even the dimmest scion of privilege to run for the office as if it were a popularity contest. No unscripted questions! Even now the real issues still remain to be discussed, even in this forum.

In the end it doesn’t matter whether anyone liked GWB or hated him, whether Bush is a moron or the intellectual giant of our times. The question we were supposed to be concerned about was: are his policies any good for the country? Are they any good for us and our families?

So let’s get the discussion onto something useful, like where do you think Georgie is falling down on the job? Where does he deserve an ‘A’ this quarter? Time to get our heads out of the sand.

119

[quote]endgamer711 wrote:
Joe Weider wrote:

This might be a huge shock to you…but dammit, I like GWB. I think he’s funny, I think he’s a good guy, I’m disapointed in few of his postitions…but I like him and don’t think he’s a moron.

The so-called candidate debates were a travesty, carefully sanitized to allow even the dimmest scion of privilege to run for the office as if it were a popularity contest. No uncripted questions! Even now the real issues still remain to be discussed, even in this forum.

In the end it doesn’t matter whether anyone liked GWB or hated him, whether Bush was a moron or the intellectual giant of his age. The question we were supposed to be concerned about was: are his policies any good for the country? Are they any good for us and our families?

So let’s get the discussion onto something useful, like where do you think Georgie is falling down on the job? Where does he deserve an ‘A’ this quarter? Time to get our heads out of the sand.[/quote]

I’m not happy with–off the top of my head–immigration, the medicare bill, and that he didn’t poke his head further into the recent filibuster crap.

You?

120

ILOVEGEORGEWBUSH1 wrote:

"All I know is this:

If someone made you bet, say $1000, during the election (particularly after the first debate) on whose grades you thought were better in college, all you mofos would have put your money with Kerry!"

I agree that Bush’s performance in Debate 1 was lackluster.

I think he smoked Kerry in debate number two.

Three was probably a draw.

I also agree with the rest of your paragraph because W. has candidly said he was a lackluster student.

JeffR