George W. Bush is Smarter Than You. (A Disturbing Essay, Episode 2)

reply to post by Mr Tranny

Dear Mr Tranny,

I can't thank you enough, wonderful post. I was hoping the thread would discuss issues such as the ones you've raised. Let me walk along with you for a moment.

When do you think this may have started? Certainly, no one thinks the Alamo was defended by stupid people.

I picked one Southern state, Arkansas, and looked at Wiki for famous people from Arkansas. The list of clearly intelligent people from there is much longer than I thought. The founders of Tyson Foods, Wal-Mart, Holiday Inn, Klipsch Audio, J.B. Hunt Trucking, Ranger Boats, are all from there.

Besides the Clintons, America's first woman Senator, William Fulbright, and Jocelyn Elders are Arkansans. Johnny Cash and Douglas MacArthur are also on the list.

Some of the people that liberals think are "big time" come from that state. Maya Angelou, Helen Gurley Brown, John Grisham, are some. And, I assure you, that is only a small fraction of the list.

In addition to the question of when did this idea start, I wonder why it started? My first guess is that the Southerners did something the Northern Liberals didn't like. Could this go back to the Civil War? The North carrying on prejudices from 150 years ago? Were southerners smart before that?

Just a thought, if Northern Liberals can accuse people who disagree with them in the South of being stupid, they don't have to address their arguments. They can't call Northeners who disagree with them of stupidity, perhaps they switch to "Racist, bigot?" If place of birth and culture determine intelligence, it seems they'll end up condemning many nations they currently seem to support. I doubt that will happen.

As for the rest of your post, simply brilliant. You bring up several issues which I hope are discussed here.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by thePharaoh

Originally posted by Wanderer777
I gotta say if it was a choice to have another 4 years with Bush rather than Obama finishing his term, then I'd choose Bush. .

oh come off it

bush left the office at the perfect time... he pushed his international affairs to the limit

obamas legacy would be that he returned america to neutrality in the international arena...while diffusing the reaction to bushs campaign.

and dude, that wasnt a light feat...thats magic

at home...he returned some of the power back to the public sector, and he addressed the opinion polls


what you liked about bush...im just learning mate...is the power of the GOP and its effect on the internal affairs, especially of the state economy..... but most people liked bush because he addressed 9/11.....

but it could be seen that him and his father affairs with the binladen family maybe jeoperdised the state...

but its all dead noise...

my view is

i like bush...i like obama....i hate whiners....
theres no different levels of smart...only different types

peace

Let me guess... You aren't even American. Am I right? Dude I shared my opinion. I don't care what you think. I am not a GOP fan, and I liked Bush because he didn't take sh*t from anyone. Obama works so hard to make sure he's liked about everyone and if someone doesn't agree with him then he throws a tantrum and points the blame onto someone else. You say you don't like whiners? Well you're supporting the biggest whiner of them all.... OBAMA! He's a big baby, so sell you're little speech to someone else, cause I'm not buying

reply to post by Wanderer777

Someone made the distinction earlier between Intelligence and Wisdom. I think you've presented a good example of Bush's wisdom.

I liked Bush because he didn't take sh*t from anyone. Obama works so hard to make sure he's liked about everyone and if someone doesn't agree with him then he throws a tantrum and points the blame onto someone else.

Obama's popularity in the Mid-East is lower than Bush's when he left office. I suspect they appreciated strength as well. A comment complaint about our current President is that he encourages our enemies and discourages our allies. Not doing that was wisdom on Bush's part.

As far as the thread in general? "You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil must be lead." -- Stan Laurel

But, hey, I'll go along for the ride.

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by Drunkenparrot

 

You might not agree with the guy or his policies but if you honestly believed Bush 43 is some kind of idiot you bought the MSM's usual smear of any sitting conservative President in modern times hook line and sinker.

No I haven't. You have.

The content of our brief post exchange adequately illustrates our respective positions well enough to roughly infer our comparative knowledge of geopolitical mechanics comprehension.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, we our not entitled to our own facts.

Can you provide any fact to support your position? A grade school synopsis acknowledging the executive branch of government participates in the legislative process really all you've got?

Will you be doing a book report on George Washington next? Macaroni noodles glued to craft paper in the shape of the Liberty Bell?

Baack on topic though... I might not be entirely convinced by your argument that George W. Bush is not Smarter Than You but....

Just to prove what a good sport I am if you want to send me your macaroni art Liberty Bell I promise to post a photo of it hanging on my refrigerator.

Deal?

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
So, it boils down to… If they resign their mind to the idea that he is “stupid” then they can dismiss anything from him, or his supporters that may challenge their world view.

Excellent post and an observation worth a moment of consideration by anyone unsure that liberal MSM bias writes the popular narrative.

How many reading this thread remember the comic strip Doonesbury's focus on a single theme throughout the 1980's?

reply to post by charles1952


academic intelligence and common sense are 2 very different things

No surprise here for me. I'm not surprised by the observations of an accomplished person who has first hand knowledge of GWB's intellect. I'm not surprised by the speculative naysayers who have no real perspective, nor any personal insight into his mind.

Nero was smarter than the population of Rome, Hitler was smarter the population of Germany, Pharoah was smarter than his slaves,, all tyrants are smarter than the population they rule over if you define being smart as preserving your own self at the expense of other humans without remorse.

Your definition of smart would be better stated as, "more sociopathic and narcissistic " than the rest of us. Psychopathic would work as well.

If you define smart as the ability to innovate, create, and advance your fellow human than obviously he's not smarter.

reply to post by Silicis n Volvo

Dear Silicis n Volvo,

Thanks for posting. I think I agree with you, but I'm not sure.

academic intelligence and common sense are 2 very different things

By "academic intelligence" do you mean learning? If so, I agree completely. But are you saying that Bush had no common sense? I understand if you disagreed with his decisions, but consider his history. Governor of Texas, managing Partner of a MLB team, founder of independent oil exploration companies, President. There has to be some common sense there, no matter how you define it.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


A few Questions struck me when I read this thread. If George Bush is so clever, why would he want to give the persona of an idiot if he was trying to woo voters?. Why would he let the entire world except a few 'in the know' people believe he was/is an idiot? Does that in turn make him look like the elite think American voters are idiots or just don't matter? Surely a smart president would've wanted his fellow Americans to believe he was the best man for the job? I know I would rather have someone believable. And...
Who's to say the old professor isn't part of the same secret society and is covering for him? Old cronies looking out for one another? Future University president maybe? Anyway,
To say that Bush looked like a moron sometimes in the media is an understatement, if he was acting then i'm a zebra. The thread I think just leads to more questions, but it gives an insight into the lies being fed to the future leaders.

reply to post by EA006


This video should leave zero doubt that Bush's dummy persona as president was all a big ACT.

www.youtube.com...
Obviously this act was the perfect cover to his involvement in 911.
www.whodidit.org...

If you'd like to see an article taking the position that Bush is dumb (and not merely disagreeing with his decisions), try this one: www.slate.com...

Just trying to present both sides.

reply to post by Wanderer777


tut tut

wheres the love

i aint american...and if i was.... id be a better one than you

im british
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN

Originally posted by thePharaoh
reply to post by Wanderer777

 

tut tut

wheres the love

i aint american...and if i was.... id be a better one than you

im british
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN

edit on 3-5-2013 by thePharaoh because: (no reason given)

I'm not talking about who would be a better American, but since you wanna go there. I am a true American Patriot, afterall I'm going to basic training for the Army on Sunday. So get your facts straight, because I'm going to fight for the people of this great country. So since you have no more argument why don't you just stay out of this thread, because your lack of intelligence has just been shown to everyone on here.

reply to post by Drunkenparrot

Can you provide any fact to support your position?

You mean that politics is a dog and pony show for "smart" people to oogle at? How about a teleprompter? It gives the illusion that a "speech" is from the heart and the man (any man) is intelligent enough to remember his lines and convey impromptu and spontaneity "from the heart".



Really it's an illusion, part of the construct. But you already know that and still "buy it". There is no convincing one who has (been bought) to be objective about it. That would be like trying to get you to stop believing in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Well maybe you don't Believe... just practice the rituals? Because... everyone else is doing it?

"Smart enough to become a fighter pilot"? How about smart enough not to? Because one can learn to operate a complex killing machine (you would say for defense, I would say murder...) does not make one "smart".

Of course it depends on ones perspective, or leaning. You have your "goals" and I haven't any

delusion… I mean "ill" - usional

reply to post by EA006

Dear EA006,

Thank you for your response, just what I was looking for.

I think the author's position is that he was trying for two goals. One, to seem more average, closer to the people. And two, to encourage people to underestimate him.

Who's to say the old professor isn't part of the same secret society and is covering for him? Old cronies looking out for one another? Future University president maybe? Anyway,

That's an excellent question. The question I would ask in exchange is "What's the point?" Bush isn't going to run for anything ever again. He enjoys a life largely out of the spotlight where he can paint. I don't see any ulterior motive in bringing it up now.

The thread I think just leads to more questions, but it gives an insight into the lies being fed to the future leaders.

Wonderful! That's the whole point. These "disturbing essays" are being posted because they're new ground for me and I'm grateful when ATSers can help explore it with me. I don't want to accept false ideas, but I can't tell which are false until they're out there and being discussed. Thanks for helping me with that.

With respect,
Charles1952

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by Silicis n Volvo

 

Dear Silicis n Volvo,

Thanks for posting. I think I agree with you, but I'm not sure.

academic intelligence and common sense are 2 very different things

By "academic intelligence" do you mean learning? If so, I agree completely. But are you saying that Bush had no common sense? I understand if you disagreed with his decisions, but consider his history. Governor of Texas, managing Partner of a MLB team, founder of independent oil exploration companies, President. There has to be some common sense there, no matter how you define it.

With respect,
Charles1952

The only thing though is that he failed at each of these things. Doesn't mean he is dumb but it most certainly doesn't make him smart. And simply because the opinions of one man, no matter how close to the President or how respected he is, says he is smart does not make him so.

One may dislike Hitler's system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as indomitable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations.

- Winston Churchill

Lots of smart famous people say stupid things about other "smart" people

CJ

reply to post by ColoradoJens

Dear ColoradoJens,

I have to agree with you here. (Have to? I want to.)

And simply because the opinions of one man, no matter how close to the President or how respected he is, says he is smart does not make him so.

You're very right. I started this thread because the author presnted an idea which I had never considered, and wanted to explore it.

The only thing though is that he failed at each of these things. Doesn't mean he is dumb but it most certainly doesn't make him smart.

Here, I'm not sure I can agree with you. He was successful with the Rangers, was the first Governor in Texas to be elected to two four-year terms, and he started Arbusto, an oil company which merged with the larger Spectrum 7, where he was Chairman. Spectrum 7 was absorbed by HKN and Bush became a member of the board. None of those things were failures.

Failure as a President? Some think so, some don't. It largely depends on your policies and expectations. We might not know for 50 years. Who knows? Lots of people think Obama is a success. All to be decided later.

With respect,
Charles1952

Bush came into a plethora of bad circumstances that the public demanded him to personally relieve every single one of by himself.

Never mind he had to get past Congress for 95 percent of every action he wanted to take.

The only real blunder he had was that Iraq didn't end up having Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Wasn't his fault.
They had a suspicion.

Oh and people cried,"We're only at war for their oil resources"
Well, that was one reason.
Our country is heavily dependent on oil, and prices were only rising. Is it any different from going to war for gold?

We also ousted a dictator in Iraq. Anyone remember Saddam Hussein who threatened us with Bio-Warfare?

Something needed to be done on every front, and he tried his best. But when things go wrong is it automatically the fault of the one who tries to correct it? NO.

Blamed him for the collapse of the housing and automobile markets. Not his fault that businesses were failing
left and right due to decrease in demand, and all the shady loans that were being granted.

Seriously, companies were giving loans left and right to people who weren't eligible, and they were selling the contracts and making money off of them.
People lost their livelihood from these deals while the ones granting these loans were making killings.

So many things Bush was blamed for. It seems he was the ultimate scapegoat of it all.

If Bush were to somehow be able to run again, I would vote for him a hundred fold.

reply to post by charles1952

Three times during his years in Midland, Bush was saved from financial trouble or stagnation by the appearance of new partners or financial angels who gave him a fresh start. One was a Princeton classmate and friend of James A. Baker III, who was to serve as his father's secretary of state; another was a fellow Yale man who shared Bush's love for baseball.

The third was Harken, which was to save Bush from humiliating failure but also create a target for later criticism. Reporters would scrutinize the deal as early as 1990. Led by then-Texas Gov. Ann Richards, Bush's opponent in the 1994 gubernatorial election, his political critics have asked whether Harken used Bush's name to obtain oil business. Even now, questions linger about a 1990 sale of Harken stock by Bush that was the subject of a probe by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

When it was over, Bush's oil career had merely perpetuated the nagging pattern that marked his life until past the age of 40: Once again, he had followed his father's path but failed to achieve his father's success

saved only by his last name

As for the Rangers:

"Looking at it from the perspective of a businessman, this was an awfully sweet deal for the business," said Sodd. "Looking at it as a public official, we think it's lousy policy to use government money to subsidize billionaires in the pursuit of their business interests."

So Bush the businessman did prosper. But not by his bootstraps -- with help from wealthy friends and taxpayer subsidies.

Mmmhmm

Accomplishments in Previous Positions

•
Changed pollution laws for power and oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state in the Union.

•
Replaced Los Angeles with Houston as the most smog-ridden city in America. Cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas government to the tune of billions in borrowed money.

•
Set record for most executions by any governor in American history.

•
Became president after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes, with the help of my father's appointments to the Supreme Court.

sadly, from a humor site

He was not the reason he was influential. He was a pawn by name.

CJ