In article ,
Clark Magnuson wrote:

[...]

With Bush, you get a guy that is self made rich,

Wow! My bull**** meter just blew off the ****ing wall!

[...]

Being humble is how Bush got so successful.

Good thing the meter can't explode more than once....

No one that wastes time on this forum has as much brains as Bush in
quite a few of the multi dimensions of intelligence.

Eeh, whatever. As I see it, Bush is reasonably intelligent when held
to task. For example, in the debates he obviously learned how to handle
himself rather rapidly. Lost the first, draw on the second, and won the
third. Beating a Senator at debate is like beating a welder at welding.
Yeah, I know, a bunch of republicans in this group will now go off on
a tangent about just how awful kerry was and bla bla bla. Save it--I'm
not fond of him either.
But, that said, Bush still sucks at his job. Perhaps somewhere out
there is a job that suits Bush's own personal form of smarts, but being
President of the USA obviously ain't it. Between dooming the economy,
wasting the military, lying his ass off about everything OTHER than a
blowjob, acting like a dick every time he was supposed to act like a
diplomat, appointing an endless stream of incompetent cronies, and
having a disturbing affinity for interrogation that borders on torture,
I'd say he's due for a job hunt.

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 05:04:48 GMT, ff wrote:



Clark Magnuson wrote:



People of HIGH intelligence discuss IDEAS......

People of AVERAGE intelligence discuss THINGS.....

People of LOW intelligence discuss PEOPLE.........


Author unknown......




Bush is probably too smart and too productive to read this forum.



You're right, he has the NSA reading it for him.



Chuckle...the ABC agencies have been reading the newsgroups..the
militia, dope and other newsgroups since the inception of Usenet.

I know for a fact..that they have been poking their heads into some of
the newsgroups, rec.guns, misc.survivalism and so forth..since they
were created. It didnt bother me when Clintons droids were reviewing
my posts and emails via Echelon..why should it bother me when Bush;s
do it too?

Gunner




Clintons droids were not torturing anyone. Unless we count their
cutbacks in Welfare :-)

Gunner wrote:

You're right, he has the NSA reading it for him.


Chuckle...the ABC agencies have been reading the newsgroups..the
militia, dope and other newsgroups since the inception of Usenet.

I know for a fact..that they have been poking their heads into some of
the newsgroups, rec.guns, misc.survivalism and so forth..since they
were created. It didnt bother me when Clintons droids were reviewing
my posts and emails via Echelon..why should it bother me when Bush;s
do it too?


I don't know how anyone can complain about anything about else about
privacy, in a country with both the second amendment AND ATF form 4473.

The next phase of gun control will probably be daily body cavity searches.


Clark
--
Accidental creation should not be taught as a fact.
Intelligent creation should not be banned from teachings as
unconstitutional.

On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think about
it.

Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 07:31:29 GMT, ff wrote:

Gunner wrote:

On Tue, 03 Jan 2006 05:04:48 GMT, ff wrote:



Clark Magnuson wrote:



People of HIGH intelligence discuss IDEAS......

People of AVERAGE intelligence discuss THINGS.....

People of LOW intelligence discuss PEOPLE.........


Author unknown......




Bush is probably too smart and too productive to read this forum.



You're right, he has the NSA reading it for him.



Chuckle...the ABC agencies have been reading the newsgroups..the
militia, dope and other newsgroups since the inception of Usenet.

I know for a fact..that they have been poking their heads into some of
the newsgroups, rec.guns, misc.survivalism and so forth..since they
were created. It didnt bother me when Clintons droids were reviewing
my posts and emails via Echelon..why should it bother me when Bush;s
do it too?

Gunner




Clintons droids were not torturing anyone. Unless we count their
cutbacks in Welfare :-)

Using the IRS as shock troops against their political enemies isnt
torture? Then we have the women and children burned to death at
Waco..need me to go on? College of the Americas ring any bells?

What was that line in Hamlet about bloody hands....?

Gunner

"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.

Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner

Dave Hinz wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress wrote:

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...

What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think about
it.


Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?

He never released anything, but some sleuthing and interpolating
indicated he wasn't in danger of being on the Dean's List. What little I
saw indicated his record was slightly below Bush's.
The trend continued

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think
about
it.

Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?

Yeah, I think so, and I really wondered why that was. He seems brighter than
that. In Bush's case, I think it's because he really didn't try...nor did he
try at very much else, before he was born-again.

I never heard much about Kerry in college. Maybe he was a general screw-up,
too.

--
Ed Huntress

Kerry definately sounds smarter than Bush. Part of that is his
Bostonian accent and that he does not stop after every sentence as Bush
does. But if you just pay attention to the actual words, he pretty
much says nothing. Bush does equally well at saying nothing.

My understanding is that Kerry spent his time in college being active
in politics.


Dan


Ed Huntress wrote:


Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?

Yeah, I think so, and I really wondered why that was. He seems brighter than
that. In Bush's case, I think it's because he really didn't try...nor did he
try at very much else, before he was born-again.

I never heard much about Kerry in college. Maybe he was a general screw-up,
too.

--
Ed Huntress

"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

ROTFLMAO

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
"Hawke" wrote in message
...

I'm not sure that's true. While some folks over rate their intelligence
there are plenty that under rate themselves or don't really know how
smart
they are. In Bush's case he comes across as not being that bright, which
may
be why so many average people think he's one of them, and why they think
they are as smart as he is.

For what little it's worth, my own impression is that he's quite smart,
but,
as one pundit put it, he's "an incurious man."

I doubt if his supporters think he's just of average intelligence. What
they
like about his clumsy rhetoric and mispronunciations is that he disvalues
the same things they disvalue: the personal behaviors that they associate
with an elite education from an exclusive (meaning "excluding," to them)
institution (Andover, Yale, and Harvard). They resent those behaviors and
institutions and they hold negative connotations of people who have elite
educations, if they presume to speak and write like they have one. It's
clear that Bush never bought into the program. That's what they like.

Yale graduate, Harvard Business School graduate. Won two presidential
elections. Works for me. Kerry ran on being smart. Bush was smart
enough not to do that.

Well, at least that is an argument that has some merit as far as proving
Bush is a smart guy. Even though there is no correlation between winning
elections and intelligence. However, consider that without being a Yale
legacy he could never have qualified on his own merit to go to that
school.

No question. From the limited evidence that people will talk about, he
apparently had poor recommendations from Andover. The Ivy League in those
days put the legacy issue first -- especially if your parents had achieved
some degree of notoriety.

--
Ed Huntress

From the available metrics, Bush has an IQ of about 120, above average for
regular schmucks but not exactly stellar for the leader of the free world,
particularly combined with his aversion to serious reading/analysis and his
dry drunk personality.

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
College of the Americas ring any bells?

Clinton did not start the College of the Americas. He also did not cook up
any gun/drug/hostage schemes to benefit rogue states.

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think
about
it.

Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?


Yep, Kerry's academic performance at Yale was equally as bad as Bush's.
Although listening to them talk you would never know it. The thing I don't
understand is how could Bush ever get into grad school. There is something
very fishy there. From personal experience I know that the standards to get
into grad school are high. From what I know there is no grad school that
would accept "C" level students in their program. I would suspect that in
the Ivy league it would be even harder than most schools. In Bush's case I
can only chalk it up, like everything else, to his connections.

Hawke

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think
about
it.

Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?


Yep, Kerry's academic performance at Yale was equally as bad as Bush's.
Although listening to them talk you would never know it. The thing I don't
understand is how could Bush ever get into grad school. There is something
very fishy there. From personal experience I know that the standards to
get
into grad school are high. From what I know there is no grad school that
would accept "C" level students in their program. I would suspect that in
the Ivy league it would be even harder than most schools. In Bush's case I
can only chalk it up, like everything else, to his connections.

As a long-time resident of Princeton, I can confirm that connections in the
Ivy League were all-important in those days. The old timers resisted the
attempts to make the whole thing merit-based. In fact, even today, having
had a parent who graduated from Princeton is still a very positive thing to
have on your application.

My son just applied to Georgetown. They wanted to know about every relative,
living or dead, who had attended. And that's just the almost-Ivy-League. g

--
Ed Huntress

Why is everyone so down on C level students at Yale? Many posts have
described Yale as an elite institution that generally has the cream of the
crop for the student body and they would likely be right.

Yale, like virtually every other accredited college and university assigns
grades based on the standard bell curve. This means that exactly 60% of the
student body gets a C for a grade, C being the average or center part of the
bell. In other words, everyone between the 20th percentile and the 80th
percentile are C students. One would have to be either quite outstanding or
quite the buffoon to get anything else.

So, you have a couple of guys - Bush and Kerry - who are average among an
elite population. That still leaves them both in some pretty outstanding
company!

Robert

"Hawke" wrote in message
...

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 22:49:13 -0500, Ed Huntress
wrote:
"Martin H. Eastburn" wrote in message
...
What was Bush into Engineering ?

History. He was a history major at Yale, and got a C average. Think
about
it.

Didn't kerry eventually release his academic records, which showed he
was an equally iffy student?


Yep, Kerry's academic performance at Yale was equally as bad as Bush's.
Although listening to them talk you would never know it. The thing I don't
understand is how could Bush ever get into grad school. There is something
very fishy there. From personal experience I know that the standards to
get
into grad school are high. From what I know there is no grad school that
would accept "C" level students in their program. I would suspect that in
the Ivy league it would be even harder than most schools. In Bush's case I
can only chalk it up, like everything else, to his connections.

Hawke

Actually the economy is doing extremely well especially in the face of
high oil prices.
Growing about 4% a year is good. However the media reports the things
that make news, and that tends to be anything sudden and bad.

Bush is obviously going to have to find something else to do. There is
an amendment to the constitution that limits presidents to two terms.


Dan


B.B. wrote:

But, that said, Bush still sucks at his job. Perhaps somewhere out
there is a job that suits Bush's own personal form of smarts, but being
President of the USA obviously ain't it. Between dooming the economy,
wasting the military, lying his ass off about everything OTHER than a
blowjob, acting like a dick every time he was supposed to act like a
diplomat, appointing an endless stream of incompetent cronies, and
having a disturbing affinity for interrogation that borders on torture,
I'd say he's due for a job hunt.

--
B.B. --I am not a goat! thegoat4 at airmail dot net

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:19:19 -0500, "ATP*"
wrote:


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
College of the Americas ring any bells?

Clinton did not start the College of the Americas. He also did not cook up
any gun/drug/hostage schemes to benefit rogue states.

He just cooked em up to benefit rogue polticians and the Democratic
Party.

Gunner

The aim of untold millions is to be free to do exactly as they choose
and for someone else to pay when things go wrong.

In the past few decades, a peculiar and distinctive psychology
has emerged in England. Gone are the civility, sturdy independence,
and admirable stoicism that carried the English through the war years
.. It has been replaced by a constant whine of excuses, complaints,
and special pleading. The collapse of the British character has been
as swift and complete as the collapse of British power.

Theodore Dalrymple,

wrote

Actually the economy is doing extremely well
especially in the face of high oil prices.
Growing about 4% a year is good.


What's growing at 4%? Total GDP?

If so, the first thing to ask is: how fast is population growing? Having
4% GDP growth with 5% population growth is like getting a 4% raise when
there's 5% inflation.

The second, and more important, question is: how is the increase
distributed? If 4% growth happens by virtue of the Forbes 400 doubling
their income, while everybody else's stays flat, does that make you feel
just as good as if _you_ got a 4% raise?

I'm not saying I know the answer to either question. I'm only saying that
"4% growth" is a meaningless statistic all by itself.


Bush is obviously going to have to find something else to do. There is
an amendment to the constitution that limits presidents to two terms.


Ah, but Dubya is a "war President" ...

-- TP

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:19:19 -0500, ATP* wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
College of the Americas ring any bells?

Clinton did not start the College of the Americas. He also did not cook up
any gun/drug/hostage schemes to benefit rogue states.

Instead, he invented a danger ("assault weapons") and made it
inconvenient to get new ones unless they were cosmetically changed. Net
result to crime: even his own researchers said it did exactly nothing at
best.

"Dave Hinz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:19:19 -0500, ATP*
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
College of the Americas ring any bells?

Clinton did not start the College of the Americas. He also did not cook
up
any gun/drug/hostage schemes to benefit rogue states.

Instead, he invented a danger ("assault weapons") and made it
inconvenient to get new ones unless they were cosmetically changed. Net
result to crime: even his own researchers said it did exactly nothing at
best.

I agree the assault weapons ban was BS but we're getting a little bit afield
here of the original point. But on second thought, I guess the only point
was "yeah, but Clinton........."

Hawke wrote:

I have to admit that I can't remember where I came across the correlation
between stubbornness and lack of intelligence. Maybe it came from the
comparisons of the stupidity of a mule which goes along with it's
stubbornness. On the other hand, it's more likely that I read that somewhere
for a psychology class I took.

Hawke

I think you are mistaken about the "stupidity" of the mule. From all
I've heard from "equine" folks (maybe not mule skinners) the mule is
a lot smarter than a horse. Now stubborn, maybe. :-)
...lew...

As a data point, Einstein was an incredibly stubborn man. So was Isaac
Newton. They're not exactly on my list of morons... (No, I don't have
links to loads of quotes opining that either one of them were stubborn
- it's just an observation I made after reading their biographies.)

I tend to think Bush is smarter than people give him credit for (well,
at least his detractors) and my basis for that is his dry wit. I find
him pretty humorous when he's throwing off-the-cuff remarks about. He
was quite witty during the 'town hall' debate with Gore in 2000. And
Bush really out-debated Gore who was being flagged as the brilliant
intellectual and debater.

Letting his opponents brand him as a moron has worked out well for him.
It's fairly difficult to warn people to be wary of someone you've
repeatedly called a moron.

"Lew Hartswick" wrote in message
ink.net...
Hawke wrote:

I have to admit that I can't remember where I came across the correlation
between stubbornness and lack of intelligence. Maybe it came from the
comparisons of the stupidity of a mule which goes along with it's
stubbornness. On the other hand, it's more likely that I read that
somewhere
for a psychology class I took.

Hawke

I think you are mistaken about the "stupidity" of the mule. From all
I've heard from "equine" folks (maybe not mule skinners) the mule is
a lot smarter than a horse. Now stubborn, maybe. :-)
...lew...

A mule is smarter than a horse in one particular. If a horse gets into a
bin of sweet feed, (molasses-grain mixture that horses and mules both
crave), he'll eat until he makes himself sick to the point of dying in some
cases. A mule won't do that, he'll always stop before he sickens. I have
this on what I consider very good authority from my stepfather who was quite
a horse person. A vet that came to treat one of his horses once told me the
same thing. Useless information, but there's been a hell of a lot of that
passed around on this newsgroups lately.

Garrett Fulton

On Fri, 06 Jan 2006 00:25:32 GMT, Lew Hartswick
wrote:

Hawke wrote:

I have to admit that I can't remember where I came across the correlation
between stubbornness and lack of intelligence. Maybe it came from the
comparisons of the stupidity of a mule which goes along with it's
stubbornness. On the other hand, it's more likely that I read that somewhere
for a psychology class I took.

Hawke

I think you are mistaken about the "stupidity" of the mule. From all
I've heard from "equine" folks (maybe not mule skinners) the mule is
a lot smarter than a horse. Now stubborn, maybe. :-)
...lew...

Yes indeed.

Gunner

The aim of untold millions is to be free to do exactly as they choose
and for someone else to pay when things go wrong.

In the past few decades, a peculiar and distinctive psychology
has emerged in England. Gone are the civility, sturdy independence,
and admirable stoicism that carried the English through the war years
.. It has been replaced by a constant whine of excuses, complaints,
and special pleading. The collapse of the British character has been
as swift and complete as the collapse of British power.

Theodore Dalrymple,

On 5 Jan 2006 17:09:20 -0800, "
wrote:

As a data point, Einstein was an incredibly stubborn man. So was Isaac
Newton. They're not exactly on my list of morons... (No, I don't have
links to loads of quotes opining that either one of them were stubborn
- it's just an observation I made after reading their biographies.)

I tend to think Bush is smarter than people give him credit for (well,
at least his detractors) and my basis for that is his dry wit. I find
him pretty humorous when he's throwing off-the-cuff remarks about. He
was quite witty during the 'town hall' debate with Gore in 2000. And
Bush really out-debated Gore who was being flagged as the brilliant
intellectual and debater.

Letting his opponents brand him as a moron has worked out well for him.
It's fairly difficult to warn people to be wary of someone you've
repeatedly called a moron.

In some ways..he reminds me of Winston Churchill. Often times called a
drunk, with at least one memorable reply..he lead England quite well
during a time of great need.

Lady Astor, aghast at a party. "Mr. Churchill you're drunk!"
Mr. Churchill: "And you, Lady Astor, are ugly. As for my condition, it
will pass by the morning.
You, however, will still be ugly."

"Sir, if you were my husband, I would poison your drink."
Lady Astor to Winston Churchill

"Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."
--Churchill's reply


Gunner

The aim of untold millions is to be free to do exactly as they choose
and for someone else to pay when things go wrong.

In the past few decades, a peculiar and distinctive psychology
has emerged in England. Gone are the civility, sturdy independence,
and admirable stoicism that carried the English through the war years
.. It has been replaced by a constant whine of excuses, complaints,
and special pleading. The collapse of the British character has been
as swift and complete as the collapse of British power.

Theodore Dalrymple,

You take one lousy week off to join Thorax at the Elvis concert, and this
is what happens: Gunner writes on Fri, 06 Jan 2006
09:48:33 GMT in rec.crafts.metalworking :
On 5 Jan 2006 17:09:20 -0800, "
wrote:

As a data point, Einstein was an incredibly stubborn man. So was Isaac
Newton. They're not exactly on my list of morons... (No, I don't have
links to loads of quotes opining that either one of them were stubborn
- it's just an observation I made after reading their biographies.)

I tend to think Bush is smarter than people give him credit for (well,
at least his detractors) and my basis for that is his dry wit. I find
him pretty humorous when he's throwing off-the-cuff remarks about. He
was quite witty during the 'town hall' debate with Gore in 2000. And
Bush really out-debated Gore who was being flagged as the brilliant
intellectual and debater.

Letting his opponents brand him as a moron has worked out well for him.
It's fairly difficult to warn people to be wary of someone you've
repeatedly called a moron.

In some ways..he reminds me of Winston Churchill. Often times called a
drunk, with at least one memorable reply..he lead England quite well
during a time of great need.

Lady Astor, aghast at a party. "Mr. Churchill you're drunk!"
Mr. Churchill: "And you, Lady Astor, are ugly. As for my condition, it
will pass by the morning.
You, however, will still be ugly."

"Sir, if you were my husband, I would poison your drink."
Lady Astor to Winston Churchill

"Madam, if you were my wife, I would drink it."
--Churchill's reply

I believe it was Churchill who reflected that he had taken more from
Brandy, than Brandy had taken from him.
That he lived to be 80 something, despite a diet of strong drink, red
meat, and cigars, says something for the old regime.

tschus
pyotr

I recall reading of an English expat, talking about the pub in his father's
day. To drink 12 pints was common, and all through the evening, a steady
hand at the dart board was expected. Slurred speech, or unsteady steps,
all were signs of someone not quite able to handle their drink.
--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."