W's Legacy

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
skek said:
Ah, Green, you managed to miss my point and failed to answer the questions I posed. In the abstract, I think we agree on your point 1 and, to a lesser extent, points 2 and 3 (although SATs and GPAs, all else being equal, do measure something...). Look, I get it. You hate George W. Bush. Therefore, he must be stupid. If you think that kind of knee-jerk debating style works for your cause, have at it, bud. I'm trying to get beyond the fever swamp and have a substantive debate about his legacy -- which I think could be an interesting discussion.
Click to expand...
skek, don't waste your time, that's just the way he operates: bombthrower with little regard for facts, logic, or references.
 
I think Bush's legacy will depend entirely on how Iraq ultimately turns out. If all goes well, Bush's legacy may be much more positive than many people may think. If we pull out and all goes to hell, Bush's legacy will also be much more positive.
 
well, there are many definitions of stupid, and many of Bush's actions, or inactions, as POTUS, fit the bill.

"Heck of a job, Brownie"

While 9/11 may have been difficult for anyone acting as POTUS to prevent, the completely incompetent reaction to the aftermath of the hurricane/flood in New Orleans demonstrates his complete incompetence at leading a large organization.
 
skek said:
Ah, Green, you managed to miss my point and failed to answer the questions I posed. In the abstract, I think we agree on your point 1 and, to a lesser extent, points 2 and 3 (although SATs and GPAs, all else being equal, do measure something...). Look, I get it. You hate George W. Bush. Therefore, he must be stupid. If you think that kind of knee-jerk debating style works for your cause, have at it, bud. I'm trying to get beyond the fever swamp and have a substantive debate about his legacy -- which I think could be an interesting discussion.
Click to expand...

This was just a basic reflection on intelligence measures. Given the evidence we have, we can't say much about his IQ (although plenty have tried). I wasn't trying to validate either stance about him. I am personally more inclined to actually argue that he is somewhere above average.
 
Nude said:
skek said:
Ah, Green, you managed to miss my point and failed to answer the questions I posed. In the abstract, I think we agree on your point 1 and, to a lesser extent, points 2 and 3 (although SATs and GPAs, all else being equal, do measure something...). Look, I get it. You hate George W. Bush. Therefore, he must be stupid. If you think that kind of knee-jerk debating style works for your cause, have at it, bud. I'm trying to get beyond the fever swamp and have a substantive debate about his legacy -- which I think could be an interesting discussion.
Click to expand...
skek, don't waste your time, that's just the way he operates: bombthrower with little regard for facts, logic, or references.
Click to expand...

Nude, this time your criticism is unwarranted. You cannot deduce the IQ of someone by looking at their SAT score. The SAT is more about being able to take a test, study/prepare for it and perform well under in that specific test environment. I don't see how I'm misstating facts or being illogical this time ...
 
green_cactus said:
Nude said:
skek said:
Ah, Green, you managed to miss my point and failed to answer the questions I posed. In the abstract, I think we agree on your point 1 and, to a lesser extent, points 2 and 3 (although SATs and GPAs, all else being equal, do measure something...). Look, I get it. You hate George W. Bush. Therefore, he must be stupid. If you think that kind of knee-jerk debating style works for your cause, have at it, bud. I'm trying to get beyond the fever swamp and have a substantive debate about his legacy -- which I think could be an interesting discussion.
Click to expand...
skek, don't waste your time, that's just the way he operates: bombthrower with little regard for facts, logic, or references.
Click to expand...

Nude, this time your criticism is unwarranted. You cannot deduce the IQ of someone by looking at their SAT score. The SAT is more about being able to take a test, study/prepare for it and perform well under in that specific test environment. I don't see how I'm misstating facts or being illogical this time ...
Click to expand...

"this time" being the operative phrase here. While you cannot identify someone's specific IQ, it is a safe bet that they rate higher than "moron" if they score higher than the norm on a college entrance exam. Which means that it is possible to "deduce" that they fall into a certain range based on their scores. Thinking logically, while there may be some flukes, it takes at least average intelligence to pass a test designed to measure the retention of knowledge accumulated in 12 years. If a person scores high on that test, and isn't an idiot savant or a cheater, then it logically follows that they have at least an average IQ, even if a direct correlation cannot be assigned. Saying otherwise is illogical.
 
I disagree that it "logically follows" that someone scoring 1200 on the SAT has at least an average IQ (100). At best, you can reason this through induction which is a rather weak way of going about it. The main issue at hand then becomes the validity of such a statement. You conclusion is probable (which I didn't deny) but not certain. Thus, it's not illogical by any means to "say otherwise".

I'll take all the bashing you want to dish out but I find that this time your "logic" is flawed.
 
Hey, steppin, I couldn't figure out how to answer you private message.

Just another reason why I don't have an avatar.

My tomatoes have never been eaten by rats. Mice perhaps, and bunnies and

possums and raccoons maybe, but not rats. I can live with all of the above,

but not the turtles. They are most destructive. When I plant veggies, I check

for turtles and have a turtle eviction hearing. The turtles always lose.
 
The irony of the W era is that fake news shows like The Daily Show and The The Colbert Report, and satire/sarcastic web sites like The Onion were more accurate and objective than mainstream media.

Check out how accurate came to be this article from January 2001:

[urlhttp://www.theonion.com/content/node/28784]Bush:'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'[/url]
 
lawyerliz said:
Hey, steppin, I couldn't figure out how to answer you private message.

Just another reason why I don't have an avatar.

My tomatoes have never been eaten by rats. Mice perhaps, and bunnies and

possums and raccoons maybe, but not rats. I can live with all of the above,

but not the turtles. They are most destructive. When I plant veggies, I check

for turtles and have a turtle eviction hearing. The turtles always lose.
Click to expand...

If you have an image that you would like to upload as your avatar, just go to Your Control Panel (top and middle of the screen). From there you will options to edit, including edit avatar. Just click on there and there will be a field where you can browse your computer to locate the image. once you have it located, just click upload avatar. I thought Troop's Lady Justice image was quite lovely.

Turtles, who would have thunk?
 
lawyerliz said:
Hey, steppin, I couldn't figure out how to answer you private message.

Just another reason why I don't have an avatar.

My tomatoes have never been eaten by rats. Mice perhaps, and bunnies and

possums and raccoons maybe, but not rats. I can live with all of the above,

but not the turtles. They are most destructive. When I plant veggies, I check

for turtles and have a turtle eviction hearing. The turtles always lose.
Click to expand...

To reply to a PM, just open the message. At the top you will see a reply button. Just click that and type your reply and hit send.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top