Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Mr.Conley said:Sarcasm again I assume.
Joe Lieberman
Plus remember, this is Congress we are talking about. We can expect at least some maturity.
Mr.Conley said:Come on, admit it. You know that Democrats aren't all that bad.
I might be wrong, probably am. GW claims to have wanted to play nice in 2000, even before the election kerfuffle. In any case, didn't happen. Hell, they can't play nice over people trying to kill their electorate, think they'd do better for those abroad?Mr.Conley said:Not one single person?
Mr.Conley said:Do you have a credible link detailing the problems in President Bush's thought processes?
Mr.Conley said:Your whole argument is based on this fallicious assumption and, with the assumption invalid, your whole argument fails.
Mr.Conley said:He is how I see it. President Bush is admittedly a terrible speaker, but, as anyone who has heard Bill Gates at a conference will tell you, speaking ability is a very poor indicator of intelligence or ability. Everything you've said so far comes with the prefixes like, "from how he speaks," or, "based on what I've seen of him," and the like. Your observations of President Bush's speaking ability are, at best, very poor support for the notion that President Bush is dumb. Ultimately, without a battery of IQ and personality tests it will be impossible to determine President Bush's level of intelligence. The best indicators we have, however, are his excellent educational background and his personal habits such as reading. These indicators all speak to a high level of intelligence.
Dr Grump said:No, just my own observations..
It is not based on assumption. It is based on his answers to questions and having heard him talk and read interviews. Over a period of six years, a person can come to certain conclusions about another person based on their own observations.
What a load of poppycock. Are you telling me that you cannot tell the intelligence of people you know and work with, hell you post with, by the way the talk/post/read aloud? Total BS. Bush's speaking ability is very GOOD support and indictation of his intelligence. You want him to be scientifically measured - only that will be good enough for you. That is not going to happen. Every day people make judgements on peoples' intelligence - especially politicians - on what they say and do. And he does not have an excellent educational background. He went to an excellent educational institute and got a C average. Hardly excellent. His scoring 25/100 for his pilot aptitude test is more of a true indication of his intelligence IMO. As for personal habits such as reading being an indication, all I can say is :rotflmao:
Exactly.Dr.Grump said:No, just my own observations..
the comment you are replying to is for liberalogic. I wasn't saying anything there about your post.Dr.Grump said:It is not based on assumption. It is based on his answers to questions and having heard him talk and read interviews. Over a period of six years, a person can come to certain conclusions about another person based on their own observations.
Not if they have an impediment. If you saw my reading comprehension a decade ago you'd think I was borderline retarded. While it is an indicator, speaking ability is not the sole criteria for intelligence.Dr.Grump said:What a load of poppycock. Are you telling me that you cannot tell the intelligence of people you know and work with, hell you post with, by the way the talk/post/read aloud?
And that is why I suggested we look at his education and personal habits, as well as his speaking ability.Dr.Grump said:You want him to be scientifically measured - only that will be good enough for you. That is not going to happen.
But just because a lot of people make judgments does not make them accurate.Dr.Grump said:Every day people make judgements on peoples' intelligence - especially politicians - on what they say and do.
Andover and HBS are at the top of their fields. Although Yale is shitty.Dr.Grump said:And he does not have an excellent educational background.
A C grade is supposed to be average. That means he was average in a room of highly intelligent people.Dr.Grump said:He went to an excellent educational institute and got a C average.
Okay, I'll make sure to never get in a plane piloted by President Bush, but pilot ability isn't my criterion for the Presidency.Dr.Grump said:Hardly excellent. His scoring 25/100 for his pilot aptitude test is more of a true indication of his intelligence IMO.
Actually, personal habits such as reading are a good indicator of intelligence, especially books.Dr.Grump said:As for personal habits such as reading being an indication, all I can say is
Kathianne said:Just a point. Thomas Jefferson considered himself and was a less than adequate speaker of his time. Does that mean that he was subpar intelligence?
I think you are overstating your case.
Seriously, based on what? You are guessing?Dr Grump said:How many times do I have to say it isn't just his speaking ability? It is the content (or lack thereof) that is the giveaway, not his delivery (which does need working on).
Thomas Jefferson has a huge legacy. Bush has none at the moment. I would also hazard a guess that a lot of Jefferson's words are his own. I doubt that re Bush...very much...
Mr.Conley said:the comment you are replying to is for liberalogic. I wasn't saying anything there about your post.
Mr.Conley said:Not if they have an impediment. If you saw my reading comprehension a decade ago you'd think I was borderline retarded. While it is an indicator, speaking ability is not the sole criteria for intelligence.
Mr.Conley said:And that is why I suggested we look at his education and personal habits, as well as his speaking ability.
Mr.Conley said:Andover and HBS are at the top of their fields. Although Yale is shitty.
A C grade is supposed to be average. That means he was average in a room of highly intelligent people.
Mr.Conley said:Okay, I'll make sure to never get in a plane piloted by President Bush, but pilot ability isn't my criterion for the Presidency.
Mr.Conley said:Actually, personal habits such as reading are a good indicator of intelligence, especially books.
Kathianne said:Seriously, based on what? You are guessing?
Why don't you determine? Either seems fair.Dr Grump said:Does the above relate to the Bush or Jefferson aspect of my post?
Kathianne said:Why don't you determine? Either seems fair.
Dr Grump said:Seem strange questions to ask. First of all with Bush I am guessing nothing in regard to his speaking ability and how he comes across. And I can hazard a guess that the vast majority of his "writings" are written by others - that is the nature of the beast these days. His personal correspondence is another matter.
As for Jefferson, there are a myriad of written materials available in his own hand, that are well documented. What's to guess?
Kathianne said:What are you asking me? You asked which to take on. I replied either. Now this? What do you want?
Dr Grump said:I'm asking you nothing. You asked two questions, one being "are you guessing?" My last "what's to guess" was rhetorical in answer to said question. And I answered your other question (unless you would like to be more specific)...
Kathianne said:Ok, so you say. I'm missing it, but I'll keep looking.
Dr Grump said:Ok, you have lost me. I have no idea what you are going on about....
