It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Democrats Lied About Kerry's Intelligence

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 12:58 PM

Originally posted by ImmortalTechnique
Your claims are overblown, why would the democrats purposely try to deceive the american people by saying Kerry was smarter, i think anyone would have come to the assumption by just watching the two of them. Your evidence to the contrary, is two cumalitive grades, for differing subjects where the diveregence is 1%, overwhelming. This thread is insignificant.

Answer: Because the democrats will do and say anything to try and win an election (by still following the old communist doctine of the ends justify the means). Kerry's whole campaign, no wait, his entire life has been a deception. Proven many times.

[edit on 6/7/2005 by centurion1211]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:00 PM
Sorry thematrix, but this is not a dead horse. Kerry wants the Democratic nomination again in 2008.

This is quite relevant and the proof is in the source article, everything is there.

People blowing this off as nothing are being ingenuous IMHO.

I refuse to continue to feed the trolls.

[edit on 6/7/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:03 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
This is quite relevant and the proof is in the source article, everything is there.

The article said nothing about how the Democrats or Kerry deceived the people about his Yale record.

Please provide some evidence that this happened.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:05 PM
If you want to have a smart person as president, vote libertarian Michael Badnarik for president

If hes running again that is(and I sure hope he does)

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:11 PM
Your title uses the word 'intelligence', but then you do not supply any IQ scores. Instead you cite grades. Grades are not always indicative of intelligence.

The article you read seems to be the same one that I read....why didn't you mention that Kerry's highest grade was 89, GB's highest grade was 88? It didn't 'fit' your argument......are you 'covering up' something? ( not accusing you of it, just mentioning it as an example of how one might leave out something he didn't think helped his position.) The article didn't seem to make the leap to....'all democrats lied' more or less stated that the two guys were 'equals' in the grade dept, average wise.

By the way, Kerry didn't technically 'lie', he just didn't release the info on the grades, while George was known to be a C student, by his earlier statements...... Kerry simply came across as more intelligent by being a better speaker.

I don't recall him actually saying that his IQ scores were higher....but during the election, I don't recall George saying that Kerry's scores were the same or lower that his, either. I say George's own handlers also believed that Kerry was more intelligent!

[edit on 7-6-2005 by frayed1]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:15 PM

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Traitor,Coward,collaborator and now i guess we can add moron to that list!
Still though, he is still smart enough to be a mass. senator

I thought you were talking about Bush until the last part! I guess you could say at least Rove was smart enough to get Bush elected.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:16 PM
Don't you think this belongs in PTS

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 01:55 PM
First, belongs in PTS

Second, Kerry's highest grade was higher then Bush's

Third, when did Kerry, or anyone, say Kerry's IQ was higher? I don't mean Bush is a dumbass, I mean "Kerry's IQ is 123, Bush's is 45." On National Television?

Fourth, My IQ is high, but if you based it off of my math grades, I am almost as bad as Bush. Or other grades, but that was mainly me being bored and didn't care. I got a 100% A first quarter of America at War, a 32% F second cause I did 0 homework cause I didn't feel like it, and 105% on the Exam.(extra credit questions at the end)

Hell, in English was 97-100% A all year till I had to do a report, 5-10 pages. I did a 17 page report, all sources George Carlin, I had fun, I just kept going and going and going with all kinds of things, and got a 34% F. I didn't care, I had fun, wasn't bored.

SO grades don't say much. I mean, one kid, Izzo(not sure what his real name was, think Billy) was a fricking genius, but he didn't care for school, did just enough work to pass. hell, smarter then I was anyday, but worse grades everyday, cause he didn't care. So again, grades mean what?

Also, fine, he got a C. But when Bush was given a C cause daddy bought it, all you republicans act like it makes him a genius. But when Kerry gets 1-2 Cs he a dumbass? WTF? HIS HIGHEST GRADES WERE HIGHER THEN BUSH'S! AND HE CAN SPEAK ENGLISH!!!!!!! Hell, a blind deaf mute can speak english better then Bush. Hell, I can when I first wake up in the morning before my first can of Mountain Dew then Bush at his best. A Russian can speak english better!(Putin)

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 02:09 PM
This thread is kinda' lame but who cares. I don't believe the Dems lied about anything and if you will do your homework you should concur.

This in the news just today:

They cite Kerry and Bush had 'similar' grades hence the title

"Kerry's Yale Grades Similar to Bush's"

Within the article you will find this:

"Kerry had a cumulative average of 76 and got four Ds his freshman year — in geology, two history courses and political science, The Boston Globe reported Tuesday.

His grades improved with time, and he averaged an 81 his senior year and earned an 89 — his highest grade — in political science as a senior."


"Bush's highest grade at Yale was an 88 in anthropology, history and philosophy. He received one D in his four years, a 69 in astronomy, and improved his grades after his freshman year, the transcript showed."

Hmm.. Bush' highest grade was 88 and Kerry's was 89. I guess based just on THAT Kerry is smarter.

Come on Kerry haters, get a CLUE.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 02:21 PM
To be fair, I think this story is legitimate only because the Kerry campaign set themselves up by making college grades an issue. It was a cheap, lazy and foolish way of showing that Kerry was some superior intellect while Bush was this idiotic subhuman lifeform.

I still do see Kerry as a more accomplished man than Bush. As a student, his articulateness was well acknowledged, and he addressed his graduating class. He was a highly decorated soldier. As a peace activist, he was singled out to speak before Congress. He excelled as an attorney, and as a politician, being re-elected many times by his state before running for president.

Now lets look at Bush, he wasn’t much of an achiever in school, he deserted the military during the time of war. He’s a failure at business who was under constant investigation by the SEC. He basically rode into being the governor of Texas based on his name and father’s takeover of Texas media. Last but not least I’ll add that Bush’s speaking abilities are less than to be desired…need I point out the hundreds of examples? I’ll spare you of that. As the representative of the United States he has embarrassed our country numerous times.

How come the media ignores every damn speech Kerry makes, on the economy, Iraq, the Downing Street Memo, etc. THEY treat him like a former story, and they point out that now he is just a senator, not a presidential candidate. Why are his public opinions on current hot topics not worthy, but his grades in college are?

It’s pretty obvious Kerry is planning on campaigning again in 2008. While this story is fair and shows a legitimate fact about Kerry’s grades, why doesn’t our “liberal” media do more to point out trivial details to slam Kerry but not print urgent current news that may help him and our nation? I believe that to be more of a conspiracy.

[edit on 6/7/2005 by Lecky]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 02:40 PM

Syntaxer, any proof that Kerry attended classes while Bush did not? Or is this just your opinion?

Just to be fair, if Kerry's attendance in Congress is an indicator, then he probably wasn't there any more than Bush.

As for the debates, both the Dems and the GOPs, etc. I know all conceded that Kerry won hands down, in all categories.

Personally, neither Bush nor Kerry were attractive candidates. As South Park says..."it's often a choice between a duechebag and a turd sandwich". I chose the duechebag...and either most chose the turd sandwich, or the other turds got their buddies to fudge the machines a bit...

Kerry was an idiot to use his questionable war record. Bush was an idiot when he opened his mouth. They both were rather pathetic choices, for a job that should only go to the creme of the crop, instead of the ones with the bankrolls.

Just for fun, I hope everyone votes Libertarian in 2008, hehe....
Man, that'd show 'em....

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:02 PM
Please delete

[edit on 7-6-2005 by brimstone735]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:06 PM
DJ, you weren't here in October of 2004 I guess, but Bush backers were posting Bush IQ Higher then Kerry IQ with abandon. The Internet was full of it actually with links to Drudge revelations of SAT scores, officer test results, made up stuff, anything you could think of to "quantifiably" prove the walking talking Einstein that is Bush. Even the 101st Fighting Keyboarders were ripe with the patriotic logic that obviously Bush is smarter than Kerry because he managed to get out of going to Vietnam and Kerry didn't.

When the fact is they were relatively similar performers in their teens and early 20's. Their paths diverged quickly thereafter, but really these guys (like most guys) through at least 22 shared a brain.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:24 PM

Well it just proves my theory that Republican conspiracists are usually right while Democrat conspirators usually come up short...

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:32 PM
Look what DJ77 is not only posting as "news", but look at where he's posting it & what he's running for.
Not an endorsement or a detraction, just an observation.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:45 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Well it just proves my theory that Republican conspiracists are usually right while Democrat conspirators usually come up short...

"It's On..."

What? What? Hello? What? Okaaay.

You picked the wrong day to try that one friend.

Kerry Answers All the Wet Dreams of WingNut Conspiracy Theorists by Signing the Dastardly FORM 180 They've Been Crying Over for Years Like Pissy Pants Little Girl Sissies Drinking Milk Though a Straw That Got Some on Their Pretty Pink Dresses Convinced They Could Finally PROVE the Claims of Their SwiftLiar Boyfriends, but it Only Proved Them All to be Non-Stop Whiney Liar Wingnuts Unworthy of Further Attention or Serious Consideration, Ever. Infinity.

And you STILL got NOTHING punks!

Senator John F. Kerry, ending at least two years of refusal, has waived privacy restrictions and authorized the release of his full military and medical records.

The records, which the Navy Personnel Command provided to the Globe, are mostly a duplication of what Kerry released during his 2004 campaign for president, including numerous commendations from commanding officers who later criticized Kerry's Vietnam service.

The lack of any substantive new material about Kerry's military career in the documents raises the question of why Kerry refused for so long to waive privacy restrictions. An earlier release of the full record might have helped his campaign because it contains a number of reports lauding his service. Indeed, one of the first actions of the group that came to be known as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was to call on Kerry to sign a privacy waiver and release all of his military and medical records.

But Kerry refused, even though it turned out that the records included commendations from some of the same veterans who were criticizing him.

On May 20, Kerry signed a document called Standard Form 180, authorizing the Navy to send an ''undeleted" copy of his ''complete military service record and medical record" to the Globe. Asked why he delayed signing the form for so long, Kerry said in a written response: ''The call for me to sign a 180 form came from the same partisan operatives who were lying about my record on a daily basis on the Web and in the right-wing media. Even though the media was discrediting them, they continued to lie. I felt strongly that we shouldn't kowtow to them and their attempts to drag their lies out."

[edit on 7-6-2005 by RANT]

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:47 PM
Yeah Bout Time, really smart comment does the Political Conspiracies forum have to do with ATSNN? As usual your personal attacks are full of ignorance. :shk:

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:51 PM

It's obvious that these "records" were "fixed" during the Carter administration to me, isn't it to you?

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:54 PM

Originally posted by FlyersFan
STILL WAITING for full disclosure from Kerry on his Military Records.
He still hasn't signed the paperwork. He said he was going to a
few weeks ago ... after his people took a look to see what was
inside first. Now .. if you haven't done anything wrong and you
haven't LIED to America about something, why would you need
to have your lawyers check the records?

SIGN the form Kerry!! So we can all see that you were

That was Kerry's biggest lie ... that he was a war hero and that
the Republicans were making the Vietnam war THE issue. Kerry
walked up to the podium at the DNC and saluted saying he was
reporting for duty. HE made it the issue. HE did it.

Sign the form Kerry! Sign it! Triple-dog-dare ya!!

He signed it weeks ago (see above). You know, like Terri Shiavo died inside 15 years ago. It amazes me how you people can actually be in total power, yet remain so completely out of touch.

Oh, and thanks again for the timely update on the 2004 election DJ77.

posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 03:57 PM

Originally posted by RANT
Oh, and thanks again for the timely update on the 2004 election DJ77.

More like an early warning for 2008...hint: this time try Hlllary

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in