Dubya: "do you have blacks too?" - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-24-2002, 01:01 PM   #31
Refugee
 
rafmed's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: On the moon's belly button
Posts: 1,253
Local Time: 04:39 PM
Truman may be a "great" president in your text book, for the rest of the WORLD he was the guy that "pulled " the trigger to kill in a single day 60,000 persons in Hiroshima leaving 100,000 wounded, and 200,000 homeless, 3 days later "pulled" the trigger again in Nagasaki, 40,000 deads and similar numbers of wounded and homeless.
__________________

__________________
rafmed is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:03 PM   #32
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:39 PM
Normal

When I said great this is how the Media/Historians portray him as.

Peace
DB9
:idea:
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:05 PM   #33
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by rafmed
As always Bubba show how smart he is, I think is very hard to defend Mr. Bush intelligence (or lack of it), is more easy to attack someone else, I guess we all know who Bill Clinton was. this makes Bush IQ higher?
No, it is easy to defend Bush's intelligence. I did so above: I think the evidence to the contrary is overblown - and only evidence of his tendency to get tongue-tied, not any innate lack of intelligence.

I bring up Clinton not because it "makes Bush IQ higher," but because the ability to wax eloquent is NOT the most important thing: Clinton was a great speaker, but he was also a liar. Bush may not be an eloquent speaker, but he is much more honest. I prefer the latter.


And while we're on the subject of connecting eloquence in communication to innate intelligence, I must remind everyone here that there are a LOT of forum members here who cannot spell, who have trouble with subject-verb agreement, who do not use proper capitalization and punctuation, and who tend to create run-on and fragment sentences.

It would be VERY poor form for me to accuse everyone who makes some sort of error on this forum of being a "moron." I too occasionaly blunder, and I generally withhold such comments as long as the gist is easily found.

But as I demonstrated in my first post in this thread, it is at least ironic that those who criticize Bush for getting facts wrong or misspeaking also THEMSELVES get facts wrong or mistype. It is at least ironic; it is probably hypocritical.

Ask yourself this: do YOU want to be judged by how well you communicate on this forum?

Your wish can be easily granted.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:07 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 11:39 PM

And why are we talking about Truman now???

More fun with Dubya:
"Over 75 percent of white Americans own their home and less than 50 percent of Hispanos and African Americans don't own their home. And that's a gap, that's a homeownership gap. And we've got to do something about it."

__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:07 PM   #35
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by rafmed
Truman may be a "great" president in your text book, for the rest of the WORLD he was the guy that "pulled " the trigger to kill in a single day 60,000 persons in Hiroshima leaving 100,000 wounded, and 200,000 homeless, 3 days later "pulled" the trigger again in Nagasaki, 40,000 deads and similar numbers of wounded and homeless.
Those acts, if I remember, had three beneficial results:

1) It ended the most devastating war in human history.

2) We won.

3) The terrible power of nuclear weaponry was made so clear that it has not been used since.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:12 PM   #36
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by DrTeeth
And why are we talking about Truman now???

More fun with Dubya:
"Over 75 percent of white Americans own their home and less than 50 percent of Hispanos and African Americans don't own their home. And that's a gap, that's a homeownership gap. And we've got to do something about it."

Wherefore are you scratching your head?

Is the quote not easily understood? Many people do NOT own their homes - they live there through paying off mortgages, or by paying rent in generally less expensive apartments.

If Bush is right, most white Americans have paid off their mortgages, and most blacks and Hispanics have not; they are either paying off the mortgage, living in an apartment, or in some other arrangement.

That is problematic: it is indicative of a gap in wealth and certainly means that blacks and Hispanics have less property from which to find capital: it's easier to take out a single mortgage on your home for a loan than to take out a second mortgage while paying off the first.

Why is that difficult to understand?

(Yet another example, I believe, of overstating Bush's lack of intelligence.)
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:17 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 12:39 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Achtung Bubba


Ask yourself this: do YOU want to be judged by how well you communicate on this forum?

Your wish can be easily granted.
There is a big difference:

Bush is The President of the United States and therefore is expected to communicate properly. If he is not able to, he should go back to school. I think he would be able, but maybe he uses this pseudo stupidity to show off how much streetlife he is. Btw, also bad publicity is publicity.

rafmed is not the President of the United States and therefore can talk like he wants. I doubt Bubba is expressing himself in rafmeds mother tongue as well as rafmed in English.

And, Bubba: be careful with the usage of the word "Judge" or "judging" if you donīt want to be called upon it.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:31 PM   #38
Refugee
 
Achtung Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: One Nation. Under God.
Posts: 1,513
Local Time: 05:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
There is a big difference:

Bush is The President of the United States and therefore is expected to communicate properly. If he is not able to, he should go back to school. I think he would be able, but maybe he uses this pseudo stupidity to show off how much streetlife he is. Btw, also bad publicity is publicity.

rafmed is not the President of the United States and therefore can talk like he wants. I doubt Bubba is expressing himself in rafmeds mother tongue as well as rafmed in English.

And, Bubba: be careful with the usage of the word "Judge" or "judging" if you donīt want to be called upon it.
There is not just an expectation to communicate well, there is a logical leap from the occasional verbal misstep to a LACK OF INTELLIGENCE. That logical connection, if it exists, has nothing to do with who Bush is: it either applies to everyone, or it doesn't apply.

Certainly, someone with severe learning disabilities will have trouble talking - but many here are suggesting the reverse, that trouble talking implies something akin to a learning disability, despite the fact that many very smart people have trouble speaking.

(And I understand that certain people here do not speak English as a first language, but that still does not give them carte blanche to connect Bush's missteps to stupidity. Further, there ARE those who speak English as a first language and who have no excuse. Hi Bias appears to be one of them, and yet he was wrong about President Bush's age.)

I try not to judge people unnecessarily, and I do not wish to do so now. But if people are going to suggest that Bush is dumb because he misspeaks, they demand such scrutiny themselves.

Christ teaches that those who are without error should cast the first stone. Many Bush-bashers are throwing so many stones that I am beginning to question the flawlessness of their own communication skills.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The author of the preceding is known
for engaing in very long discussions.
Achtung Bubba is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 01:39 PM   #39
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Basstrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 10,726
Local Time: 08:09 PM
bush is over-rated
I'm sick of his cheesy phrases

"we're gonna hunt them down"
"Axis of evil"
"You're either for us or against us"

he either uses a dictionary of cliches or has a room full of monkeys writing his speeches.
__________________
Basstrap is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 02:09 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by whenhiphopdrovethebigcars


There is a big difference:

Bush is The President of the United States and therefore is expected to communicate properly. If he is not able to, he should go back to school. I think he would be able, but maybe he uses this pseudo stupidity to show off how much streetlife he is. Btw, also bad publicity is publicity.

rafmed is not the President of the United States and therefore can talk like he wants. I doubt Bubba is expressing himself in rafmeds mother tongue as well as rafmed in English.

And, Bubba: be careful with the usage of the word "Judge" or "judging" if you donīt want to be called upon it.
Hiphop-
Plez refer to my Truman posts.
BassTrap- Your view would be different if your homeland was attacked, perhaps?:idea:

Peace-
DB9
:idea:
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 02:17 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 03:39 PM
I think the question of Bush's intelligence in this thread was initially raised not so much because of the way he often misspeaks, but rather because of the fact that he didn't know that there are blacks in Brazil. The President of the United States (whose position has often been equated to 'The Leader of the Free World') should be well-traveled and well-learned--I would go so far as to say better than just about anyone else in the world. Bush may be 'bright' in the 'average guy' kind of sense, but that's a far cry from being brilliant enough to be the kind of leader that position requires. He is an embarrassment to the office (as was Clinton, for different reasons), in my opinion.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 02:31 PM   #42
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 03:39 PM
Umm I agree w you there Joyful.
I cringed when I read that:idea:
However I would take GWs integrity over Clintons for being a better leader.

Peace-
Diamond
:idea:
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 02:52 PM   #43
Refugee
 
rafmed's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: On the moon's belly button
Posts: 1,253
Local Time: 04:39 PM
My dear Bubba
I think ( correct me if I'm wrong) that my english is good enough for you to understand me, and while I have never presumed to be perfect by any means, any mistake by my use of the english language is harmless, since its not my purpouse to RULE the world, oposed to Mr. Bush, who, maybe, should be better informed.
By the way, if that makes you happy, feel free to JUDGE my writing.

Joyful girl is true about her statement.

Thanks to whenhiphopdrovethebigcars
__________________
rafmed is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 03:04 PM   #44
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 130
Local Time: 10:39 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Achtung Bubba
I do believe that President Bush is a very smart man - just not the most well-spoken. Sure, opponents will claim that people write his speeches, and that's true: but I believe, as is the case with MOST politicians, the speechwriters merely crystalize, organize, and strengthen what Bush himself wants to say; and Bush himself has final approval of every speech.
What about his lack of knowledge on world politics? Or even American politics? Like someone said, he thought the Taliban was a Brass Band. He thought Canada's Prime Minister's name was Jean Poutine! (Canada is the US's largest trade partner). While fighting for freedom, he's said that there should be limits on freedom... I would think that such a statement would appall you, considering your love for your country's freedoms.

Quote:
The alternative is ridiculous: it's difficult to suggest without evidence that some writer came up with the politically charged phrase "axis of evil" and Bush just nodded his head and went with it.
I can definitely believe that. I wouldn't be surprised if Bush didn't know what an "Axis" is referring to.

Quote:
The second reason I accept the verbal missteps is that I do believe he's a fairly honest guy. It seems to me that the last President was Bush's opposite in two respects: President Clinton was an undeniably talented speaker but also a congenital liar. Certainly, he lied about his so-called private life, a life that was led in the public offices of the White House, a life he was compelled to explain under Oath; but he also lied about policy. He lied about the state of things ("worst economy in fifty years"), lied about his and his opponents' track records, and lied about what bills did. I was always under the impression that he never made a campaign promise he actually meant; and he met that low expectation.

(The latest edition of Bartlett's collection of well-known quotes contains, I believe, only three Clinton quotes: how he "didn't inhale," how he "didn't have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky," and his question about the meaning of the word "is." Granted, none of these were written by speechmakers, but they were all tied to Clinton's efforts to cover his own ass through deception.)

Almost everything Clinton said was witty, but also quite untrustworthy. Bush occasionally misspeaks, but we know what he meant, and I believe he means what he says. Certainly, his track record isn't perfect - particularly in backtracking on his opposition to McCain-Feingold and in his unwillingness to direct the domestic agenda so that he can fulfill his campaign promises - but I still think he's much more trustworthy than Clinton, and I'll take his foibles if that includes his honesty..
What about Bush's history of drugs and alcohol, that he has often denied or ignored? What about his discovered violation of Federal Security laws and his insider trading that should have earned him stiff penalties? He's been saying he was cleared of those charges, when in fact he was not... that's a lie. (ReadHERE)He's been telling a joke about how he responded to a question from a reporter... when the incident never happened (readHERE).

Quote:

Regarding the "many other shady things" surrounding the Bush Administration, the ONLY thing that comes to mind is Enron. Bush knew those who ran Enron - but they were all in the Texas oil business, so that's not surprising. There IS NO evidence of wrongdoing on Bush's part - no evidence that his friendships involved the mishandling of Enron itself.

Sure, the administration could be more forthcoming with its information, but there are precedents for keeping some information internal - and the Democrats can always make efforts to force the White House's hand, and THEY HAVEN'T.

Truth is, Democrats don't want to find out the truth: the appearance of "shady things" is MUCH more politically useful (particularly if the truth is benign), and a thorough investigation is just as likely to cast a bad light on Democrats who are themselves closely tied to Enron - like Bill Clinton.

And another truth is that the Democrats don't even know what to charge Bush with: first, he was supposed to have helped Enron, but his policies did the opposite. Then, the accusation was that his efforts helped sink Enron - THEN the accusation was that, for some odd reason, Bush should have publically told Enron stockholders to sell.

At the moment, the accusations are nothing more than that: accusations, in this case perpurtrated by a party that's still pissed about the election and willing to do practically anything to win back political power.
SHADY THINGS:
1. The amount of knowledge sent to the US government and pentagon pre 9/11 by other world intelligence agencies. There were several notices sent to the US about an attack, an attack using planes, an attack on the world trade center, and an attack in early September. Even if they didn't know for sure, do you think that with news from all over the world about a terrorist attack, that Bush would be away on vacation? With all this commotion, he would just be relaxing?
2. How after the attacks, they quickly sealed up presidential records of the past several terms, under the name of "national security"...
3. Trying to set up the TIPS system where 1 in 24 americans would be citizen spies! Can we say Big Brother? Thankfully they pulled out of it after a HUGE public outcry.
4. Backing out of international anti-torture laws... We talk about how cruelly women were treated under the Taliban, and how our way is so much better... we talk about the glorious human rights and freedoms in the USA... yet we're not ruling out the idea of torture??? What are we, in the middle ages?


Quote:
It's like the accusations about Republicans wanting to kill the elderly and starve children. If the accusations were believable, then we'd have something to discuss. Until that point, they condemn the accusers much more than the accused.
I'm sure those accusations were nothing more than exaggeration and hyperbole. Of course nobody is saying they're out to hunt seniors... they're saying that their policies show that they are not very interested in the welfare of seniors and poor children. And I don't think that's a stretch to believe at all. We're not debating those accusations because they happened in another thread some time ago... and because they're obvious exaggerations. Let that go, and stop holding on to it in an attempt to discredit others. It really only applies to one guy, yet your debatingwith all of us, so there's no point in using it against anybody but him.
__________________
KingPin is offline  
Old 07-24-2002, 03:07 PM   #45
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,238
Local Time: 04:39 PM
ya know Diamond, you're an alright guy. See, at least you can admit that "do you have blacks, too?" is an incredibly ignorant thing to say.

Bubba, while I agree with some if not most of what you say, I think you're missing the initial point here (as joyfulgirl said). Please tell me that you can admit that Bush's question is very ignorant and doesn't speak very highly of his world-awareness. This is not about his honesty vs. Clinton's lying or which one we would rather have.

The President of the United States didn't even know that Brazil had a (very large) black population. You find nothing worrisome in that fact? Nevermind what the question implies about Bush's thoughts towards blacks in general...
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ÂĐ Interference.com