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.


So you think Bush is stupid?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 06:20 AM
Prove it!
I keep seeing people post that they have "evidence" that bush is stupid, show me.
Put it here in black and white.
I will look at it with an open mind and who knows maybe you will even convince me.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 08:23 AM
I like this thread already:

People who think Bush is so stupid should take a look at this:
Harvard Business School.


According to most rankings, Harvard is considered a top five business school in the United States.

And another quote, in the Alumni section:

George W. Bush

I'm not sure stupid people get into that school, but I';m sure Bush-haters will say that his Daddy pulled strings...

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 08:25 AM
Quote from the man it-self;

"I think they misunderestimated me"


"Most of our imports come from over sea."

the list goes on, I just don't know them all by heart. I'm sure if you search, you'll find it all here, on ATS.

[Edited on 1-7-2004 by m0rbid]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 08:28 AM
Actually that second statement is true. While most of our imports do come from overseas some also come from canada and mexico which is not overseas.

edited for definition of overseas
overseas ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vr-sz, vr-sz)

Beyond the sea;


Of, relating to, originating in, or situated in countries across the sea.

[edit on 1-7-2004 by mwm1331]

[edit on 1-7-2004 by mwm1331]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 08:37 AM
"If you're sick and tired of the politics of cynicism and polls and principles, come and join this campaign."
-Hilton Head, S.C., Feb. 16, 2000

"Other Republican candidates may retort to personal attacks and negative ads."
-Fund-raising letter from George W. Bush, quoted in the Washington Post, March 24, 2000 (a LETTER!)

"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it." -Reuters, May 5, 2000

"I think we agree, the past is over."
-On his meeting with John McCain, Dallas Morning News, May 10, 2000

"The fact that he relies on facts...says things that are not factual...are going to undermine his campaign."
-New York Times, March 4, 2000

"States should have the right to enact reasonable laws and restrictions particularly to end the inhumane practice of ending a life that otherwise could live."
-Cleveland, June 29, 2000

"They want the federal government controlling Social Security like it's some kind of federal program."
St. Charles, Mo., Nov. 2, 2000

"Natural gas is hemispheric. I like to call it hemispheric in nature because it is a product that we can find in our neighborhoods."
Austin, Texas, Dec. 20, 2000

"The important question is, How many hands have I shaked?"
-Answering a question about why he hasn't spent more time in New Hampshire, in the New York Times, Oct. 23, 1999

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:12 AM
Allow me to make a point, while I agree that Bush's language skills are not as great as say clintons, that in and of itself is not evidence of a lack of intelligience.As anyone who has read my posts can clearly see I have very bad spelling, however that does not mean that my posts are stupid it simply means I'm not a great speller. In point of fact based on the standardised I.Q. test I took as a child I am in the top 10% of people as judged by intellect, however I simply cant spell well. The fact that Bush is not well spoken may be due to dyslexia, (BTW albert einstein was dyslexic and I dont think anyone here would call him dumb.) or a variety of other speech disorders but it is not evidence of stupidity.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:19 AM
You're opening a can of worms here, mwm1331. And this particular can, I guarantee, will not amuse you.

It's not Bush's grammar skills that highlight his inbred defects pertaining to stupidity, necessarily. You are obviously not reading the quotes, and are not paying close attention to his speeches.

It's what he says that clearly demonstrate his lack of understanding of the topics he discusses. Furthermore, he also seems to have a general problem with taking things seriously unless they become personal. For instance, if I were to say, as a first lieutenant to a commander "let's smoke 'em out of their holes" that would pass as a "can-do" statement.

If I were to say that very same statement as a the leader of a nation like the US, I would have to be an idiot. Make no mistake.

But I have to give the man something; he is a riot if you can detach yourself from reality for a moment.

[edit on 7/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:21 AM
Why would that same statement make you an Idiot?

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:26 AM
I thought this mght put the whole "hes stupid because he cant talk" idea into perspective
Voices of experience
A Column for Adults with LD by Veronica Lieb

Well into adulthood, Dr. James Russell discovered that he is intellectually gifted. He has known since childhood that he has a learning disability. Dr. Russell earned his Ph.D. from St. Louis University in 1996. He currently instructs undergraduate students at Webster University on assessment of exceptional students while maintaining a private practice in counseling and assessing adults and adolescents with learning disabilities. The misconceptions about people who are both gifted and learning disabled has personal and professional relevance for Jim. I asked Dr. Russell what the most difficult aspect is when working with the Gifted/Learning Disabled population.

Dr. Russell. This is a complex question. What comes to mind first is that being gifted and learning disabled (GT/LD) means being misunderstood. The difficulties that GT/LD people encounter in everyday living are overwhelming. For instance, they tend to experience perfectionism that all but "stops their progress." I wonder how many potential Einstein's have been lost because they were completely misunderstood?

People who are GT/LD tend to be supersensitive. It's as if they see a reality that is hidden from the conventional world. They march to the beat of a different drummer - one wherein they may have unrealistic self expectations, where they can experience a high level of frustration.

Experiencing chronically low self-esteem, they endure the callous remarks of uniformed others, such as, "If you are so smart, why can't you spell?" After hearing that statement several hundred times (actually it's more like several thousand times) even the most gifted people begin to wonder if they are even marginally intelligent.

GT/LD people are the least likely group to receive special education support services during their school years. They can be "average" students because their areas of strengths pull up the areas of weaknesses. But at what cost to the person?

At this point, you may be thinking that I am jaded. I am. Recently a wonderful young GT/LD man, a potential Einstein, ended his life. His family is left with an absence that is surreal. His perfectionism, super sensitivity, unrealistic self-expectations, incapacitating frustration, and low self-esteem, encumbered him. Even though burdened with so heavy a load, he was courageous, kind and good until the very end. I am angry because society didn't seem to understand him. Ii am sad for our loss because we couldn't nurture the "gifts" of this young GT/LD person. His life is over but his essence may live on. Hopefully, the memory of this gifted person can serve as a beacon guiding us toward a road less traveled.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:28 AM
Simply because I am addressing Congress as well as the supposed people who elected me. As I edited in the post above, I would have to demonstrate an understanding of the situation that I am within in order to be considered smart. If I were the President of the United States speaking before the Congress and the public of this nation, you would think that I would speak more intelligently, not to mention with a bit more class. And class mandates intelligence, one way or the other. You can be rich, but that doesn't make you classy by default.

BTW, I think that last article by V Lieb has more to do with autism than anything else. Maybe not. I could be wrong. GT/LD seems to be a degree of autism.

[edit on 7/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:39 AM
Also, if Bush were so intelligent, why would he say virtually nothing and allow Cheney to say nearly everything in their 911 testimonies? Which were not under oath, by the way. This is one of my favorite pictures that highlights their relationship with each other. If Bush were truly intelligent, he would have no need for such a relationship:

I have some damned good videos of Bush acting like an idiot. Let me see if I can find them on the net for your enjoyment. Give me a moment please

Sure anyone can be silly when drunk, but this silly? hmmm:

Ok, so maybe some people like to dig for gold, but at a public venue like a baseball game? Maybe not...

Sometimes we need to clean our lenses but doing it in this manner is well... rude:

Now, this is from a "leftist show", the daily show, but it's got Bush debating himself from the past. For the most part, at least. rt%2Fjon_7131.html

OK this one is a parody, but it's about Bush and Blair expressing their love for each other and its very well-produced. Nothing to do with stupidity, but it's very funny nonetheless.

[edit on 7/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:49 AM
In reference to the "lets smoke em out of thier holes" comment I dont see it as a lack of class but more as an attempt to show that he is one of the common man. I have personally met some truly brilliant people with the most low class cockney/southern etc. accent you ever heard.
Class is a VERY subjective measurment and every person has a different way of determining whos classy and whos not.
The article was in fact about Dyslexia here is the link
The purpose of the vice president (one of them anyway) is to shield the president from unpopular, politically dangerous situations. Personally I think allowing Cheney to do the bulk of the speaking was a brilliant decision. As a result of that if people don't like what was said they blame it on cheney as opposed to Bush. It wasnt about inteligence it was about washingtons first rule CYA

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 09:54 AM
I will try to watch those later but the fact is My only computer is at work and I have neither speakers nor video plugins.
Regardless what i am looking for is proof of stupidity.
Does anyone have any proof.
I mean AlnilamOmega everything the people on these boards point out as proof is to me pretty subjective. Now maybe I'm a fanatic, maybe I have a higher standard of proof and maybe I'm the one who is stupd but thats my view.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 10:10 AM
You're forgetting that stupidity falls victim to judgment, thus making it at least partially subjective by nature. To date, there is no 100% accurate method of objectively defining whether or not someone is dumb. This means, yes, even IQ tests fall prey to subjectivity because they cannot comprehensively gauge mental prowess without featuring some kind of opinionated design. I sincerely hope you do watch those videos because they are great comic relief. Most of them are not anti-bush as they are actual, unedited footage of the man in action.

As for class, just because someone has an accent doesn't mean they don't have 'class'. It's a degree of sophistication that determines whether or not someone is chic. Anyone can agree that if someone has a sophisticated personality, that will mean that they are probably intelligent. Anyone can also agree that in order to have class, you have to be well-educated. For instance, you don't have class if you don't have manners or do not exhibit a higher state of mind. Bush had to be groomed... and severely, at that, over his time in office. You can easily see a dramatic shift between his personality now in comparison with the one before... say, during his presidency before 9/11/01. The grooming combined with this shift demonstrates how ludicrously idiotic this man really is. Many leaders are 'groomed' before and during their time in office, but they dont exhibit the immense change that Bush has featured. Both of those kinds of activities are not subjective in any shape or form, even if you put the best spin you can on it.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 10:30 AM
In order to have class you must be well educated? No I dont agree. Not everyone goes to finishing school or an Ivy league college. MY grandmother was one of the classiest women I ever knew and she never finished grade school. But she had a dignity and class that no amount of education could impart. I know many well-educted men with impeccable manners who are among the most low class people on earth. And while to some extant stupidity is subjective I think you just blew your own argument out of the water. You mention the major changes due to his grooming (which in fact were in my opinion no more than cosmetic changes designed to broaden his appeal, and the natural changes that a man in his position would go through following tragedy of that magnitude) But doesnt it take intelligence to modify your behavior that fundamentally? Intelligence is defined as

1. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge
2. The faculty of thought and reason.
3. Superior powers of mind.
If what you say about his grooming is true then he has shown an above average abillity to "acquire and apply knowledge"

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 10:42 AM
"Prove Bush is stupid!"

That's like "Prove he's smart" or "Prove Evil Doer's hate Freedom" or "Prove Santa Claus is fake".

Anyway, I particpated in this thread once already when another bright eyed Bush fan (who I think is banned now) challenged the board similarly and in response I credit Gazrock, Bout Time and Colonel with making one of the funniest threads I've ever read.

And when about 10 pages of dumb things Bush has done and dumber things he's said only made the original poster say "well you can't go on language skills or dumb things he did previously you have to prove he's dumb now" :shk: those of us with enough sense to know a lost cause walked away...

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 10:49 AM
Man, you are spinning everything I say into a fashionable yarn for you to knit, arent you? This is going to be endless if it continues. Well-educated doesn't necessarily mean 'went to an ivy league school' it just means having above-average background knowledge. You can go to Harvard or Oxford and come out with a doctorate, but that doesn't automatically mean you are well-educated. You could still be a total moron, as a matter of fact. No, I don't mean you, personally, in this context so please don't spin that one if you can resist. A simpler example are dunderheads who are in advanced classes within high schools and get really nice grades, but in fact, are about as well-educated as a laser printer. So in short, yes you have to be well-educated, in this context, in order to produce a certain degree of class. Also, let me enlighten you on what I mean by 'class'. I don't mean class as the higher sections of different castes. I mean it in the manner that you suggested with your grandmother. I am presuming that she is a polite, well-mannered, well-spoken individual who demonstrates many excellent virtues. That is what I mean by class, and Bush demonstrates none of these traits.

You, yourself, however just blew your own counterargument out of the water with your smart-aleck listing of the definition of the word 'intelligence'. Yeah, thanks, as if I really don't know what it means. Please pardon my sarcasm.

You destroyed your own counterargument with the listing of reason number one "1. The capacity to acquire and apply knowledge". You see, that means the internal capacity to do such a thing. Bush was groomed by others meaning he didn't take it upon himself to become better than he was. He was forced to do so by advisors such as Karl Rove and Poppy Bush. What you may not understand by my use of "grooming" is that he didn't learn how to shave better or something like that; he had personal trainers and the like teaching him how he should act and present himself. Bush didn't read books or make a personal effort to improve himself because if he did, the changes would have been more dramatic and would have taken place decades ago when he grew out of being a teenager.

Rant, if it is something I lack at times is that I can be too perisistent to walk away. It may be logical to do so at this point, I agree with you, but I feel that I have to at least try to penetrate as many hardheads as I can when I am at least 95% sure I am correct. Usually I know when to just walk away when that fight or flight trigger is activated, but sometimes I can fail to do so. Believe me, although I doubt this conversation will elevate into something abusive, if it does turn into something arbitrarily argumentative and derogatory, I am not going to act in a similarly disrespectful manner.

[edit on 7/1/2004 by AlnilamOmega]

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 11:09 AM
The problem is neither you nor I have the abillity to know whether this "grooming" was to change his personality or his Public Image. If as you contend his father and advisors had to train a new personality then perhaps you are correct. If however as I believe they merley helped him tp change the public image which he projects, then your argument does not hold water. As I have not met President Bush in a social setting, all that I see of him is the public image he chooses to project. But to assume that the public image is the same as the private personality is I think a fallacy.
The reason I posted the definition is that, in my experience most people confuse intelligence with knowledge.
Also I have to contest your addition of the term "internal" in your statement. The drive to increase ones knowledge and understanding of the world is quite seperate from the abillity to do so. I have known many intelligent people who had no wish to gain further knowledge, now while I could accuratly characterise them as Ignorant I could not call them stupid. While they choose not to exercise thier ability to gain knowledge they still have that abillity. The fact is you have graciously proven my point by stateing that the president does have the abillity to aqquire and apply knowledge. Furthermore by comparing him to other leaders you have shown his abillity to be as good or greater.

BTW I'm not trying to spin anything I am simply trying to apply a more critical standard towhat I consider to be baseless statements.

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 01:00 PM
So in summary, all you guys are stating that the criteria for labeling someone as 'stupid' is if they misspeak something or stumble over some words? Usually in front of a camera, transmitting to bazillions (not a word, does that make me stupid?) of people?

In all this thread so far, no one had anything to say about my link to Harvard Business School... Hmmm...

Maybe we should start listing Gore's mistakes as well.. I'm sure Kerry has some too...

posted on Jul, 1 2004 @ 01:07 PM
OK, I have to chime in here. I personally know someone who has been in the room with Georgie while he was having a meeting with some other world leader (forget which country). Well, my friend was hired by the translator to help with things like getting coffee and stuff like that. Anyway, what my friend told me is that George's advisors told the translator that if he said anything stupid, to translate it to something else that makes sense. Well, guess what......Georgie said alot of stupid things that the translator had to reinterpret into something that didn't sound like a three year old was speaking. Hell, GW couldn't even keep it straight what country the other guy was from. Oh, I remember was one of the Russian countries and GW kept saying another Russian country....which would have seriously pissed the other guy off if the translator had said actually what the president was saying. Enough proof as to the stupidity of our beloved president?

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in