Gobbledygook! This nonsense is understood by whom? Before your proprietary remarks about the manner of this board embarrass those few Democrats here who still give lip service to the meanings of the English Language, let’s ask randwill the OP, if his opening question was merely a device to goad Repuplicans, and to also provide Democrats and disgruntled Libertarians a handy platform to bash Bush, or did he sincerely want to know what Republican on this board really thought about President Buch being in charge of the doings of the Presidentsy.
Well randwell, what did you mean and do you want to change your mind?
Oh really? I wish it was that easy… and even so, do you get a degree out of legacy? How about a Harvard degree? Come on folks, these are prestigious schools and no one can make me believe Bush got his degrees by riding on the shoulders of others… He worked for them and earned them.
I think it’s obvious that if George W. Bush wasn’t born into an affluent family, he’d be a Walmart Greeter or a Bus Driver, not the leader of the free world. That alone doesn’t bother me. What bothers me is how Republicans belittle Walmart Greeters and other lower class people for not “pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps” when it’s obvious that your beloved idol Dubya always had other people to pull his bootstraps for him.
No crap … Kerry is the most affluent person in the US goverment! Would be perfectly clear Kerry file a married, filing joint return which every member of the Bush administration did
Randwill (OPster) here. My original post was intended to invite Bush supporters (of any party,…I should have said that) to explain how, in the face of mounting evidence that the leader of the free world is a moron, they can defend this guy. I really don’t care that it spurs a discussion like this. In fact I think it’s great. I am dubious that any minds will be changed on either side and am, of course, glad to read posts that support my position. I didn’t know Bush supported Creationism. For me, any doubt I may have had about his intellectual curiosity or ability are out the window. He’s a moron. (Please save Creationism arguments for another topic, there have already been many here.)
So what I have read here has only reinforced what I originally believed to be true. I’ll bet no Bush supporter reading this thread has seen anything here to convince him/her that George Bush is anything but the finest, bravest, smartest man that ever walked the earth. Such is the polarization we’re seeing in the country. Perhaps the national intelligence level hasn’t dropped, but closed minded stubborness in the face of overwhelming evidence is at an all time high.
Exactly, you’ve crystalized my thoughts much better than I.
And look at the typical results. No Bush apologist will look at his grades (posted above) and think: “Hmmm, those actually AREN’T very good marks. Perhaps Mr. Bush isn’t as bright as I had previously believed.” Instead they come back with; “Yeah,…yeah… but, but what about John Kerry’s grades? I’d just like to have a look at them.” I’m not saying Bush is a moron compared to Kerry. I’m saying he’s a moron compared to just about anybody.
Well, there is little more to say here since the OP has weighed in himself and said that he is happy that his question spurred general discussion on this topic. I’ll merely add that this forum is called “Great Debates” for a reason, namely that we debate things here. If the OP was merely asking a question that he wanted a simple answer to then I think he would have posted it to “General Questions” (although it likely would have ended up in Great Debates anyway since that is where the mods move questions that are generating, or are likely to generate, lots of debate).
Would you or Diogenes the Cynic provide a better cite for the idea that George Bush believes in Creationism? The article you linked to merely infers it from his support of local control over curiculum. Also I cannot get the NYTimes article linked to in your cite despite registering and I cannot find an AP link in that cite. Thanks for any help you can give me.
Even the belief that local school districts should have the option of teaching creationism is a numbskull belief. So is the assertion that “the jury is out” on evolution. It most assuredly is not out he’s an idiot if he doesn’t know that.
He’s also an idiot if he thinks that creationism is an “alternate theory” to evolution. There is no such scientific theory as “creationism” and he’s a nitwit if he thinks there is.
On a somewhat related topic, he also thinks that Jews can’t go to Heaven. He got into argument about with his mother and they called Billy Graham to settle it. Billy Graham sided with Shrub that Jews can’t go to Heaven but told Junior not to make a big deal out of it.
Before his first trip to Israel, GeeDub told reporters that he was going tell the Isrealis that they were “all going to hell” for being Jews. He later explained that he was only kidding. Real funny. And plainly not a genius.
That depends on the context in which it is taught. Personally I think “creationism” should definately be taught in those schools that want to teach it. I’ve always thought that one of the best ways to teach the essential principles of Science is by teaching false theories. There is nothing like the experience of disproving a theory taught from the front of a classroom. That is another topic, however. FTR, I understand that my proposed uses for creationism are not those of most people who advocate including it in biology courses.
But that quote came from that New York times article which I cannot read. Is there not more information in the actual article than that? Who said George Bush said that? Also, the rest of the NYTimes article snipet reads "but he does not actively disbelieve in it either; as a friend puts it, “he doesn’t really care about that kind of thing.” ". I’m not really sure that George Bush made the assertion “the jury is out”.
Pardon me again, but the article does not really say the President Bush believes this either. It simply says that he thinks local authorities should make decisions about whether creationism was “part of our history” and whether or not children should be exposed to “different theories as to how the world was formed”. The word “alternate” does not even occur in the article. (The MSN article that is, I still cannot get to the NYTimes article).
I appreciate you adding another topic. But all you have done is make another assertion and made not effort whatsoever to prove it. How do you know he got in an argument of this sort with his mother. Have you talked to either of them? Has any reputable source quoted either of them as agreeing with your characterization of said argument?
About the original discussion between himself, his mom, and Falwell: “*Bush himself said, in the Houston Post article, that the lesson he learned was “listen to the New Testament, but don’t be harshly judgmental”), *”.
And this one about the joke:
“*The issue once again appeared on the radar screen when Bush announced at the November Republican Governors Association meeting that he would be making a National Jewish Coalition-sponsored trip to Israel. When asked by the same Texas reporter who intially relayed his view on heaven what he was going to say to Israeli Jews, Bush, obviously joking, said the first thing he would tell them is that they were all “going to hell.” *” Notice that the reporter to whom he made the “joke” was indeed in a position to understand it. The joke most probably was a reference to the problem arising from that reporters earlier articles. If not for the subject matter, it probably would have been quite funny.
And finally, it includes this
I certainly hope you have better evidence that Bush believes in creationism.
You know what, On review, that last post came out a much more snarky than I intended. I’m sory about that.
I am really quite interested in the proposal that Bush believes in creationism. If you guys can prove that (be warned, short editorials by political pundits will not be sufficient) I might even change my mind about the election.
All you did was prove me right with the Jews-go-to-Hell stuff. Everything I said was true about that. I don’t care about his half-assed apologies afterwards because they aren’t relevant. The point is that he has a low enough IQ to have such an argumet in the first place. Whether he’s sorry about it is beside the point.
And is there really a difference between “different theories” and “alternate theories?” If he thinks *different theories even exist then he’s a dumbass, is he he not?
Here is about the best I can do for the moment with the creationism stuff. True, he does not explicitly say that he believes in creationism, but he at least betrays an ignorance about what the scientific evidence is as well as what is or is not apprpriate to teach in public schools.
BTW, I think registration for the NT Times is free. I have it but I can’t remember if I paid for it. I don’t think I did. If you register you should be able to access the article.
