• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

W. tonight

From Rik:

".that a vial containing enough live botulinum toxin was found that could have been used to kill hundreds of thousands"

Glad to see that you're still repeating claims that have been thoroughly debunked. How many time to I have to correct you on this, Rik? Three? Ten? A million?
 
I must admit Rikzella does provide some yin to this yang. I certainly don't agree with anything he wrote, but enjoy the rebuttals.

The editorial in todays "Dallas Morning News" was also very kind to Bush. I kinda suspect they were watching Idol re-runs, and just slapped some bushy platitudes together and called it an editorial.

Charlie (Rik, please post more!) Monoxide
 
Has any president admitted a major mistake in a public press conference/forum such as last night? If so, what was the result of such confession. I am truley asking this, as I can not think of one single time (although I dont really follow politics much so I wouldnt be surprised if it has happened). I, as much as anyone else, would like the Pres to admit he was wrong about the WMD's and other things, but I wonder if it would actually do him more harm than good with the US public.

Also, I am by no means a Bush supporter, but I find it utterly ridiculous that people think Bush is stupid because of his public speaking. He is a horrible public speaker and seems to not be capable of thinking on his feet in these things, however, if that is how you judge intelligence I believe you are wrong. Is it a part of the presidents job, yes. Is it something I believe a leader such as the Pres needs to have, yes. However, does it mean he is stupid, no. I believe anyone who basis his intelligence on this is vastly underestimating him. I believe I am at least reasonably intelligent, and am highly educated, but I wilt under public speaking pressure (and conversely there are other times where I perform at my best under pressure). I cannot think on my feet and sound like an idiot unless i recite something word for word that I have practiced forever. So, am I stupid?

In my experience, some of the most brilliant people I have come in contact with are some of the slowest thinkers and are often not very charismatic. Indeed, I am somewhat wary of anyone who is extermely charasmatic as they are often not very sincere/honest. Although, there are plenty of bright people who have charasima, intelligence, and honesty/sincerity, and certainly you would hope a leader such as the pres would have all of these qualities. Bush does not seem to.
 
Chas, I'm not so concerned with his lack of agility with respect to extemporaneous speaking as I am his apparent inability to answer any question asked of him by the American press.
 
rikzilla said:
Geoff, you can ad-hom me all you want...I don't care.
Click to expand...

I know you are a nice guy, Rik. :)

I may be politically unpopular here....but you ARE AN ACTUAL CARD CARRYING WOO-WOO! You are Under Cover Friggin' Elephant.
Click to expand...

I am, yes.

The man who smokes DMT and thinks the hallucinations are REAL! The man who "CHEERED WHEN THE WTC CAME DOWN!" The man who said to Dr. Stupid that "The laws of physics sometimes cease to exist" in your apartment!!
Click to expand...

Not exactly, no. But I don't do philosophy at this site now.

Do you actually think you can ad-hom me??? So, you think I'm politically naive...fine....but what the f*ck are YOU??
Click to expand...

A commie! :D
 
It's not that Bush couldn't come up with a mistake, any mistake, he might have made in the past three years that bothers me. It's that apparantly he and his political team didn't even bother to prepare a response to such an obvious question. That smacks of arrogance more than anything else. Mistake? Us? They wouldn't dare!

There is one question that I wished had been asked last night: "Mr. Pesident, why don't you have more press conferences?" Let the squirming begin..

Mike
 
JustGeoff said:


I know you are a nice guy, Rik. :)



I am, yes.



Not exactly, no. But I don't do philosophy at this site now.



A commie! :D
Click to expand...


Friends need not agree in everything or go always together, or have no comparable other friendships of the same intimacy. On the contrary, in friendship union is more about ideal things: and in that sense it is more ideal and less subject to trouble than marriage is.
George Santayana (1863 - 1952)
Click to expand...

I'll forgive your tirade if you forgive mine.

You friggin' COMMIE!!! ;)

-z
 
"So what if hes not a good public speaker."


Uhhhh isnt that a big part of the job description of President?

I for one was quite shocked that he had such a big press conf. He never does that.

I only wacthed about 5 minutes. THE BRUINS GAME WAS ON! Go B's.!!!
 
Charles Livingston said:


In my experience, some of the most brilliant people I have come in contact with are some of the slowest thinkers (...)
Click to expand...

I think it's not easy (other than via tests) to really measure the velocity of people's thinking.

Now wait, let me draw my mind's breath... :p

If people pause a lot between thoughts they express, it doesn't necessarily mean that they're thinking slower than others. It could mean that, but it could also mean that they're thinking more.
 
LFTKBS said:
Chas, I'm not so concerned with his lack of agility with respect to extemporaneous speaking as I am his apparent inability to answer any question asked of him by the American press.
Click to expand...

First off, what politician does answer the actual questions, none I've seen, although bush is one of the worst offenders. Kind of hard to blame bush and not point the finger at almost every other political. That being said, it bothers me too and he really avoided that question about why he and Cheney insist on appearing together, kind of makes me suspicious, although of what I dont know.

Second, poor public speaking skills could easily cause you to not answer questions correctly or even at all when under pressure. It has happened to me plenty of times. Like I said before, I pretty much need a script read word for word to not sound like an idiot.
 
Nitpick said:


I think it's not easy (other than via tests) to really measure the velocity of people's thinking.

Now wait, let me draw my mind's breath... :p

If people pause a lot between thoughts they express, it doesn't necessarily mean that they're thinking slower than others. It could mean that, but it could also mean that they're thinking more.
Click to expand...

I somewhat agree with what you wrote above. However, I work in a very technical field and I can evaluate my peers when we are discussing things. When I say slow thinking I am not saying that because they pause between what they say, I am talking about how long it takes them to grasp a difficult concept. Some of them routinely take longer than others to grasp concepts, but can also grasp ones that the quicker thinkers can never get a handle on. But I agree that slow responses could mean either of what you mentioned above. The quickest wit is not necessarily the smartest was my point.
 
deep down I was hoping he was going to announce something important like Bin Laden , or WMDs. The naive part of me wants to believe that America is that special place where we don't do all the bad sh**. unfortunately the more I read the more I relizse most of the bad sh** starts here.


Virgil
 
I think that is a false dichotomy...If a brilliant person is slow at speech or even has trouble communicating, their brilliance would show elsewhere say in the field that is their reason d'etre. Mr.Bush has shown neither.
 
Well, rikzilla's initial post in this thread makes for a jolly good read. Meanwhile, back at the ranch...
To Bush, credibility means that you keep saying today what you said yesterday, and that you do today what you promised yesterday. "A free Iraq will confirm to a watching world that America's word, once given, can be relied upon," he argued Tuesday night. When the situation is clear and requires pure courage, this steadfastness is Bush's most useful trait. But when the situation is unclear, Bush's notion of credibility turns out to be dangerously unhinged. The only words and deeds that have to match are his. No correspondence to reality is required. Bush can say today what he said yesterday, and do today what he promised yesterday, even if nothing he believes about the rest of the world is true.
Click to expand...
And later:
Three times, Bush repeated the answer he gave to Edwin Chen of the Los Angeles Times: "Had there been a threat that required action by anybody in the government, I would have dealt with it." Outside Bush's head, the statement was patently false: The 9/11 threat required action, and Bush failed to deal with it. But inside Bush's head, the statement was tautological: If there were a threat that required action, Bush would have dealt with it; Bush didn't deal with it; therefore, there was no threat that required action. The third time Bush repeated this answer—in response to a question about whether he owed an "apology to the American people for failing them prior to 9/11"—he added, "The person responsible for the attacks was Osama Bin Laden." This is how Bush's mind works: Only a bad person can bear responsibility for a bad thing. I am a good person. Therefore, I bear no responsibility.
Click to expand...
From Slate.com: Bush's Incredible Definition of Credibility, by William Saletan.
 
To other nations, the gap between Bush's statements about Iraqi weapons, on the one hand, and the emerging evidence about those weapons, on the other, has become the central reason to distrust the United States in other matters of enormous consequence, such as North Korea's nuclear program.
Click to expand...

Good observation. Very good observation.

Now what was that line...

Fool me once, blame on you,
fool me twice, blame on...???
 
No Chaos the Quote is :
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
 
TillEulenspiegel said:
I think that is a false dichotomy...If a brilliant person is slow at speech or even has trouble communicating, their brilliance would show elsewhere say in the field that is their reason d'etre. Mr.Bush has shown neither.
Click to expand...

First, I never said brilliant when talking about Bush, I just said he may not be stupid. Second, how would you know if his intellect has shown elsewhere than public speaking, do you work with the man, do you see the information he is presented with and his decisions on such info, have you been with him at his fancy ivy league schools to know that he didnt earn any of his grades, etc.?
 
You want to quibble about adjectives? Then what your saying that he is not brilliant? How about bright? Smart?

I said nothing about his schooling or GPA and I don't have intimate knowledge about the formulation of his views and edicts. What I DO know is that the measure of a man is by his words and his deeds. This president has consistently shown poor judgment via deed and doctrine which far outweighs any lack of elocutionary skills. So as I said in another thread, I and many other people see that lack of communication skill as a deeper reflection of depth of the man.

Evidently some of his own apointees who were privy to the process inside of the oval office agree with me. Just look at the best seller list of books.
 
TillEulenspiegel said:
You want to quibble about adjectives? Then what your saying that he is not brilliant? How about bright? Smart?

I said nothing about his schooling or GPA and I don't have intimate knowledge about the formulation of his views and edicts. What I DO know is that the measure of a man is by his words and his deeds. This president has consistently shown poor judgment via deed and doctrine which far outweighs any lack of elocutionary skills. So as I said in another thread, I and many other people see that lack of communication skill as a deeper reflection of depth of the man.
Click to expand...

Regarding the adjective deal, I guess I was quibbling a bit, but I was just trying to point out that all I was saying is he may not be stupid, not that he is a particular level above stupid.

I'm strictly talking intelligence here, not the measure of him as a man. As far as his judgement, we dont really know all the facts he is basing his judgement on, and he has some pretty tough calls to make, so although we can criticise them, I dont think we can declare he is stupid because of them. But really, most people declare him stupid just judging him on his speechs and the Bushisms, and my original point was that I think its a mistake to call him stupid just because of how bad he is at public speaking and public q and a's. If you would like to add his judgement in there as well, fine, I disagree wiht a lot of his judgements but as I said we dont know all the facts and even if we did I wouldnt go so far as to say that his judgements show him as stupid, more misguided (ie religion, etc.).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom