Skip to main content

View Diary: Need A Laugh? (277 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Check this out... (none)
    I'm a sadist, so I signed up for an account at Free Republic. The top post at the time was Rove is a traitor meme

    I won't link the whole post here, but here's one of the choice bits.

    To the FundieDems, President Bush must be stupid. If he were admitted to be a Yale and Harvard-educated student of strategy, a visionary seeking to transform domestic and world politics, they would have to take seriously the arguments he makes and respond on a sober level. The last thing they want is to get bogged down in a discussion of what to do about saving the world from Islamofascism, securing Social Security's future, or keeping the economy growing at the healthy clip it enjoys courtesy of the tax cuts they vociferously opposed.

    This was my response:

    1) Clear examples of the President's base stupidity are abundant. Whether misprnouncing or redefining words, falling off bikes, or choking on pretzels, he is not a clever man. 2)But, just for kicks, I will seriously consider one of the arguments he presents... how about social security?

    Q -- to the way you're proposing? THE PRESIDENT: Yes, she's asking about the cost of the transition. It's estimated about $600 billion over a 10-year period of time to get the personal accounts started on the -- the way we've suggested they grow. It's a good question. Yes, ma'am. Q -- really understand how is it the new plan is going to fix that problem? THE PRESIDENT: Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised. Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled. Look, there's a series of things that cause the -- like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate -- the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those -- if that growth is affected, it will help on the red. Okay, better? I'll keep working on it. (Laughter.) (source:http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/02/20050204-13.html)

    Parsing through the confusion, he seems to be saying that Social Security benefits ought to rise proportionally to the rate of inflation, instead of the rate at which wages increase. I have no problem with this. BUT what does this have to do with Personal Accounts? That's all I've heard him talk about, and it's not even addressed. To me, this feels like a distraction.

    Most regrettably, I misspelled "mispronounced." A very embarassing situation. Anyway, I've been trolled so they'll never here from me again...

    Here's the part that concerned me though:

    Don't forget GWB had a higher SAT score than Kerry. As for the National Guard, while he barely squeaked by on the flighter apititude test, he got extremely high scores on the leadership test which is far more important than being a genius at the controls. Think of it this way: the world's best pilot is worthless if he panics in a high-stress situation.

    So if a perceived lack of intelligence is such an important reason for the hatred of GWB, then why were liberals trying so hard to elect someone dumber than GWB?

    Is this true? What's up with that? I was proud of my scores, but now... (shudder)

    Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job. -Douglas Adams

    by DelusionalLiberal on Thu Jul 28, 2005 at 09:25:12 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Intelligence (none)
      Intelligence isn't really the issue. SAT scores, IQ scores, Mensa membership test -- what these things measure is a certain type of intellectual capacity. That's it. Bush might be a genius, technically, I don't know and frankly don't care.

      Bush does two things that convince us he is stupid.  Number one, he expresses himself incoherently.

      But it has been observed that Bush does not verbally stumble when he is talking about killing or otherwise hurting people. This indicates his incoherence is probably not the result of a simple lack of intelligence, rather, it is the result of his "compassionate" persona being entirely false and every word that comes out of his mouth being a lie (unless it involves violence).

      The second thing he does that seems stupid to us is that he will continue to stick to his plans no matter how badly they work out, never admits to a mistake, etc. He seems out of touch with reality. But again this does not seem to come from a simple lack of intelligence -- it comes from his personality type and from a "leadership" strategy that was deliberately chosen.

      Bush does try to come across as "just folks" and this is what makes it easy to believe he is stupid. Because the reality is that he is either stupid, or he is evil.

      I'm banking on evil.

      •  Definition of insanity (none)
        To attempt the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

        I'm banking on evil too.

        1984: Orwell wrote a cautionary tale. George Bush mistook it for a manifesto.

        by mungley on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 04:53:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (144)
  • Community (68)
  • Elections (42)
  • Bernie Sanders (39)
  • Environment (38)
  • 2016 (38)
  • Hillary Clinton (33)
  • Culture (31)
  • Media (30)
  • Republicans (29)
  • Climate Change (29)
  • Education (24)
  • Spam (23)
  • Congress (23)
  • Barack Obama (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Labor (22)
  • Science (21)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Texas (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site