Bush a moron

The other tried and true spin was that the president is not bright so any success has to come from smart people around him. This was also the attack tried with Reagan,Bush (Sr.), Nixon......

One of the other tactics is to try and minimize tremendous accomplishments. Well, it really wasn't him. Berlin Wall?

These are in undeniably smart people around our president. He picked them for that reason. This at least makes him a little intelligent in one area. Take a look at what underestimating his intelligence did to the democratic party in Texas. They called him stupid right up until republicans had taken over the majority of a state that was democratic since statehood. Take a look at the Florida legislature, think that happened by accident?

It is unfortunate that most people with a liberal mindset consider conservatives stupid. They believe inherently if something happens during a conservatives term it is by accident or someone else must have done it, I can't identify who but it had to be someone else.

Pelosi was a wierd move. A liberal from the San Francisco area will never mobilize a centrist base. Appoint Hillarysenate minority leader and alienate the rest. At least the NPR vote will be there.

 

I believes this refers to handing the keys to a 737 to a guy with a thick foreign accent and saying have a good flight to New York. Insulting a politician is not only expected, it is ones civic duty.

 

As far as I'm concerned, it takes more intelligence to listen to a good staff of advisors than it does to run off bullheaded without listening to them. The myth of the President as infallible Philosopher-King--who is the world's greatest expert on all areas of policy--doesn't do any favors to those presidents when do they happen to fail at something. Just ask Bush (Sr.), Nixon, et. al. You won't catch me saying that Clinton was the greatest foreign policy mind of my generation, but sometimes he did listen to the right people.

I also think it's a silly colonial affectation to credit the United States with bringing down the Berlin Wall when there were so many courageous reformers in Eastern Europe who put their lives on the line and played a far more engaged role. In fairness to Bush Sr., he has done a far better job of acknowledging their contributions than his PR people did in 1992. I recognize that a candidate cannot always control the direction of his campaign, so I do try to distinguish between what he said about himself and what other people said about him.


Cheers,

 

I believe that there's many on both sides that consider the other side stupid. For example, have you ever listened to Rush Limbuagh (sp?). (Note, I'm not saying that Rush is stupid but that he loves to insult the intelligence of people that he disagrees with.) I also consider statements like "most people with a liberal mindset consider conservatives stupid" to be yet another example of one side just insulting the intelligence of the other side.

 

BTW Mr. Head (soon to be Dr.) Before I reply, I have followed this forum and might be taking some of your advice on foreign schools.
Thanks.

That having been said, I was more referring to (and you may not apply here) a strategy by the DNC employed over the last couple of decades. Every president, no matter how republican, makes mistakes. They are definitely not infallible, however to the converse there are those who would give no credit because they are republican.

I agree in part with your premise on eastern europe, but it was not the arms race with Poland (although Walesa was huge) that broke the bank of the USSR. They may have been trying to keep up with the might and power of Greece or Italy, but somehow I doubt it. There was one superpower on their mind and one president who said "Tear down this wall." In the almost thirty years of the Berlin wall only one president spoke directly to the leader of Russia to tear it down. It soon came down. Could Kohl have pulled that off? Even Margaret Thatcher? Walesa? America and Reagan undeniably played a part.

If that is silly colonial affection, I'll take it.

 

Thanks--I'm glad to be of help! Please feel free to contact me privately if specific advice might be useful.

Ah, you mean the "Reagan was an idiot who let his advisors make his decisions for him" soliloquy. Well, I'm with you on that--yes, Reagan had a good advisory team and, yes, he probably gave them more of a say than most presidents do. But that, to my mind, is exactly what should happen--the president should very much be a team player, and recognize his own limitations. If any Democrat ran on the platform of "I'm going to ignore my staff and make decisions solely on my own," that would be a good case for me to vote Republican. The things that get a president elected are charisma and the ability to articulate ideas; he's supposed to make a case for his policies, but not necessarily come up with them on his own. There is no way any president of the last 25 years could have been a Harvard-level scholar of economics; he wouldn't have time, what with all the politicking. But all of them had access to Harvard-level economists, and took their advice into consideration.

I agree that this is silly--the best example is when Bush called for a war on Afghanistan and some on the ultra-left who had called for the Taliban to be overthrown in 1998 because of its oppression of women suddenly felt that a sort of cultural Prime Directive needed to be applied. This is a case where liberals opposed Bush because he was Bush. I'm never in favor of that sort of thing, and I suspect the folks who are (since they're to the left of even me) make up a vocal minority of liberals, just as theocrats make up a vocal minority of conservatives.

It's funny you should mention this--I just finished editing a high school reader on Mikhail Gorbachev (set for publication in 2003), and while the reader of my anthology would have no way of knowing this (I maintained strict editorial objectivity), I do feel that the arms race played a major role in the collapse of the USSR, which in turn played a major role in the democratization of Eastern Europe. And, of course, the well-funded ideological war--the Cold War--between the U.S. and the USSR probably helped. I'm certainly not saying that Bush and his team deserve no credit at all for the collapse of the Berlin Wall, just as internal forces of reform within the USSR can take credit for some of the progress; but I feel that they were supporting players, and that the most critical protagonists were the ones who stood the greatest chance of being shot for their trouble.

But the statements leading up to that phrase acknowledged the huge reform movement that was already taking place in Eastern Europe. The fact that Reagan was even there to make the statement speaks volumes.

This was a poor choice of words on my part; I apologize. Sometimes I bear a nasty resemblance to that kid from Boondocks.


Cheers,

 

Officers do not forfeit the right to criticize. UCMJ Article 88 states, in part:

"If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of this article."

Where do you find this civic duty to insult?

 

So, which Flame Warrior Personality do you guys think Charles falls under?

Would it be the Archivist
(Referring to a post Rich made several months ago made me think he could be this personality.)

OR!

Is Charles a Nitpick?


Maybe a hybrid of both personalities (a Nitpicky-archivist, if you will).

This is called humor, Charles. Very similar to the comment about politicians and civic duties Dennis mentioned. Are you a politician or something, Charles? If so, I understand your attitude about this. Perhaps former/active duty military? Whats your M.O.?

Best Regards,
Bill

 

I'm sorry. If I would of bothered to look at your profile I would of known you are Navy.

BR,
Bill

 

What I find amazing is that for every blue-collar joe here and elsewhere that calls the President a moron or worse, they would give their eye teeth to be him.

Let's see:

-- he flew fighter jets;

-- he has two Ivy League degrees earned the old-fashioned way (and not in 4 weeks or by posting once a week on the internet);

-- he ran a professional baseball team;

-- he was governor of a major state;

-- he has an excellent wife and is faithful to her;

-- and he's leader of the free world.

Not too bad for a "moron"! Perhaps we all should be as gifted!

 

At this point I almost wish I thought Bush was a moron so's I could do my, uh, civic duty...but I don't so I guess I won't.

 

No unk, you shouldn't call Bush a moron. You should call those you think are morons morons.

Your civic duty would be to criticize to help remove from power, those with whom you disagree.

Doing your civic duty would not specifically involve calling someone a moron, but if the shoe fits.

Now, how do you spell potato?

 

spud (The way it's spelled in Idaho.)

 

I am impressed by the number of carcasses lying on the national and state political landscape after this mid-term election. If an inferior opponent continuously kicks one's hindquarters, it may be wise to consider whether the opponent is being under-estimated.

 

g-o-r-e

 

Bill,

Happy Thanksgiving. Good call! "Nitpicky-archivist" is accurate in this case. My original reply to Dennis was much longer. I deleted much of it before posting it, because I did not want to come across like I was trying to slam Rich.

I do not challenge anyone's right to free speech. I did question the appropriateness of Rich's comments because he has posted here with authority as a retired officer. I have a great deal of respect for Rich, both because he gained his commission after spending some time as an enlisted man and because of his continuing work in the field of distance education.

While my politics may be apparent, I have not discussed them here. Too many other places for political discussion and I don't think its appropriate for me.

Not to long ago, Steve said that we sometimes take ourselves too seriously on this board. In this case I did get carried away just a little bit.

Charles Fout
Who is still working on his repartee

 

No doubt. We all do at one time or another on this board. Think about it, a whole forum filled with adult learners (alot w/ degrees) pursuing higher education. Of course, there will be pissing matches about certain topics (sometimes, however, it is not to prove who is right or wrong, but, to see who knows the most about a particular subject ).

One thing you have to put in consideration about Rich is that even though his comments in that post were a little on the unprofessional side, he does have a valid excuse....

He is a nasty Air Farce Zoomie (JK Rich [if your still on the board])!

Best Regards and have a good Thanksgiving too,

Bill