Scent of new-mown hay
Pages
| Author | Topic: Scent of new-mown hay |
|---|---|
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 06:56
Profile
Homepage
His incredibly simplistic approach to problem-solving, to public speaking, and to day-to-day issues (his recent defense of Karl Rove: "I don't like it when my friends get accused of stuff, and Karl Rove is my friend") don't do very much to cultivate an image of intelligence. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 08:28
Profile
Homepage
I've heard an interesting theory: Bush is intentionally trying to project an image of a somewhat dumb, but friendly guy to appeal to average people. One of examples sighted was Bush's use of the mispronounciation nucular (common amond uneducated people), which he couldn't have naturally picked up anywhere, considering that he grew up surrounded by well-educated politicians and businessmen. Whether it's true that Bush's image of stupidity is intentionally cultivated, I think he is much smarter than people give him credit for. He is quite successful at promoting his policies. (Unfortunately I don't agree with many of them, but that's another discussion.) It takes a lot of brains to win re-election as a war-time president when you were the one who started the war and it's going badly. [ Thursday, July 28, 2005 08:30: Message edited by: Zeviz ] -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 09:04
Profile
He also historically has cultivated a reputation for not being a hard worker, and failing at the things he attempts, only to be bailed out by his family and friends after the fact. His is a story of success handed to him, and that doesn't help out his perceived intelligence either. EDIT: Maybe it's the case that he's cultivating that image intentionally, but if that's so, it's all the more reason he shouldn't be president. Deceit is not a quality I want in a democratically-elected leader. I apologize in advance, it's very difficult for me not to get into a rip-roaring partisan rage over this particular topic - I have very strong feelings about it. In case you're wondering how any administration could possibly launch a war on such unfounded grounds as the current one, I encourage you to pick up the book "Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes" by Irving L. Janis. To me it seems quite on the mark, and Janis' analysis of the Bay of Pigs incident seems particularly on the mark. [ Thursday, July 28, 2005 09:10: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 09:36
Profile
Homepage
At least he promoted good moral things and the need to rid ourselves of terrorists. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 09:49
Profile
Boy, didn't see that one coming... :rolleyes: So does every politician, Ben. They champion Good, and detest Evil. It goes with the turf. [ Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:01: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Guardian
Member # 2476
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 10:39
Profile
quote:Rebuilding America's Defenses This document is long and maybe tedious to read, but it does answer many questions. -------------------- Polaris Rache's A3 Site reformatted 2/3 done Rache's A3 Site, original version Posts: 1828 | Registered: Saturday, January 11 2003 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 10:55
Profile
One could also just look at the list of participants at the end to get an idea how it will go. A lot of familiar names are there... :P Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 13:19
Profile
Homepage
quote:So that makes Bush a good politician. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 13:28
Profile
Homepage
By that logic, Ben, every politician is a good politician. But I think we're getting off-topic. We were talking about his public image. Anyone else think it's interesting that most people don't know that he had only a tenuous claim to being a Texan for most of his early life? -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 13:36
Profile
Homepage
No, that makes Bush a politician. "Good" has two possible meanings. One is the subjective "I agree with is policies" sense, in which you clearly do think that Bush is a good politician and I clearly do not. The other is the "good" of getting things done. Bush certainly has gotten things done, although perhaps he has finished or successfully accomplished far fewer. That's drifting back into subjectivity. I don't think Bush is nearly as stupid as he is accused of being, I don't think he is as good-naturedly bumbling as he portrays himselfe, and I don't think he's actually an intellectual powerhouse. He's probably average or a bit above average in the smarts department. That probably places him low on the scale for a politician, but not remarkably so. He makes up for it in base cunning (no, this isn't bias showing at all...). He certainly has the charisma and social savvy to be a highly skilled manipulator of facts in the public opinion. —Alorael, who is somewhat baffled by how Bush is so much more successful in the States than abroad. Is the American group psyche so different, or are outsiders predisposed to turn a more critical eye to foreign leaders? Are other countries' news sources more reliable? Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
|
written Thursday, July 28 2005 14:58
Profile
Homepage
quote:Bush is big on patriotism and putting the interests of his country before anybody else's interests. Leaders like this obviously tend to be a lot more popular in their own countries than in others. Note that countries where people like Bush are either strongly nationalistic themselves (Poland) or have many common interests with USA (India). [ Thursday, July 28, 2005 14:59: Message edited by: Zeviz ] -------------------- Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword, For it too has the power to kill. However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword, Can also have the power to heal. Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Saturday, July 30 2005 05:54
Profile
Somewhere I heard it remarked that electorates always fear most whatever problem they've experienced most recently. So there's a tendency to follow leader X with leader anti-X. It does seem to me that Bush is something of an anti-Clinton, less articulate but more straightforward. Hindsight is 20/20, but ahead of time it's not easy to tell whether simplicity is stupidity or wisdom. There are cases where hemming and hawing about the complexity of the issue is just being timid, when what is needed is simple and direct action, and then resolution in staying the course. There can be a kind of genius in simplicity. It's far from obvious to me that Bush can claim such a role; but neither is it quite obvious to me that he might not turn out in retrospect to have played such a role. Anyway, I think American culture has a much bigger slice of belief in the genius of simplicity than European culture does, and I think this goes a long way to explaining Bush's differential popularity. Then, the Bush team isn't trying to be popular in the rest of the world. That might make a difference, too. [ Saturday, July 30, 2005 05:59: Message edited by: Student of Trinity ] -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Saturday, July 30 2005 12:28
Profile
Homepage
The thing is that many things Bush wants to do are being rejected. What's so wrong with no abortion? What's so wrong about no homosexuality? What's so wrong about religion? What's so wrong with...tax cuts? Though many of his policies are being implemented, he's having trouble reaching his full potential as President. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Saturday, July 30 2005 12:45
Profile
Homepage
Ben, you really hate complexity, don't you? You're making Bush sound like Hitler by simplifying his positions so grossly. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Lack of Vision
Member # 2717
|
written Saturday, July 30 2005 19:22
Profile
quote:Abortion is a medical procedure. Do you really think it is the government's job to determine whether or not you are allowed a medical procedure, rather than you and your doctor? Do not come back saying "but its murder" because if you really believed there was a holocaust of about 1 million babies being killed every year, you wouldn't just sit around and vote Republican, and post a message on the boards. I think anti-abortionists who bomb clinics are criminals, but they're the only ones who behave as if they believed what they say. Gay rights - well, leaving aside the fact that people being gay has been a consistent feature throughout human history, why do you care what two men or two women do in the privacy of their own home? Is it the government's job to tell us how it is appropriate or inappropriate for us to have sex? 50 years ago, almost every Southern state had laws against interracial marriage and sex. Tax cuts - there isn't anything in absolute wrong with cutting taxes, and indeed, it often is a useful tool for economic policy. But please explain why it is rational to cut taxes during a time of war, during a time of huge debt, and when we KNOW that that country will face increased liabilities when the baby boomers retire? Republicans simply cannot be trusted with money - they're like irresponsible teenagers who just borrow and spend, and borrow and spend, leaving it for someone else to clean up their mess. It has been nearly 30 years since a Republican president submitted a balanced budget. I would be much more sympathetic to Republicans on the economic front if they really did cut spending, but they don't. If you don't believe me, go to http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3750 - it is a Cato Institute (a libertarian think tank) analysis of the GOP and spending. Bush and a Republican-controlled congress have grown federal spending far faster than any President since Lyndon "Great Society" Johnson. Let's face it - the modern Republican party uses pre-crisis Argentina as its fiscal model. I read someone who posted an interesting comment with which I fully agree. I wish I could credit that person, but I don't remember who they are. It goes like this: Please name the following (1) Its a Bush administration policy (2) Its important enough that I've heard of it (in a pinch, I should have heard of it) (3) It wasn't substantially f***ed up in the implementation Z -------------------- Pan Lever: Seventeen apple roving mirror moiety. Of turned quorum jaggedly the. Blue? Posts: 186 | Registered: Thursday, February 27 2003 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Sunday, July 31 2005 15:45
Profile
Homepage
Those who are active supporters of abortion and gay rights, are, I think, just against life lived to it's fullest. It is rather immoral to do things like this, and I don't know of any proof that people can feel natural "homosexual emotions", if I'll put it that way. The tax cuts were mostly aimed at doing a little economy rebuilding, and at the time they were first proposed, there was really no initiative to go to war. And of course, the President had to keep his campaign promises. I'll agree with you though, that abortion and homosexuality are really more of out of the governments business. However, removal of practices like this (and this is really the best reason I can give you besides what I've already said) will make this country more God-abiding. That really doesn't go far in today's culture. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Sunday, July 31 2005 20:42
Profile
Homepage
But ben, if it weren't for all the sinners there wouldn't be anyone left for you to preach to! :P -------------------- The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Sunday, July 31 2005 20:58
Profile
Homepage
Ben, imagine for a moment that you lived in Iran. You're a Christian. Iran is a Muslim theocracy. Wouldn't it bother you that the laws of the land were made by and for people who believed entirely different things than you do? That's the basic idea behind the separation of church and state: no religion is universal in the U.S., so using religion to justify laws that affect all of us is one step along the long road to the sort of oppression that is in Iran. In other words, making the world more "God-abiding" is not a legitimate activity of government. You can be as devout a person as you want and still agree with that, I would think; just apply the Golden Rule: would you want someone else forcing his or her beliefs on you? [ Sunday, July 31, 2005 20:59: Message edited by: Kelandon ] -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, August 1 2005 01:32
Profile
Homepage
quote:A great many people believe that one evil does not justify another. In addition to that, there's the fact that in the long run, bombing clinics may only hurt your cause. There are always going to be more clinics, people can go to them instead. If you do enough to actually make an impact on people's actions, the cops are going to go after you pretty hard, and you'll get caught eventually. In the meantime, you've sent a message to the rest of the country that anti-abortionists are violent, dangerous, crazy. When they hear a reasonable, rational person arguing against abortion, there's every chance they'll just dismiss him out of hand. And so the state-sanctioned massacre continues. And then there's the fact that no one is able to take on every injustice of this world and try to fix them all. Thousands are starving in Africa. You really believe that, I assume, and yet you're posting on a message board. Maybe standing by and not accepting the troubles of someone else as your responsibility isn't right, but it's the only way you can stay sane. What some pro-life groups do instead of bombing or protesting is set up their own health care clinic next door. They put out a big sign saying "Free Ultrasounds Today". Women who intend to have abortions frequently change their minds after seeing the ultrasound images - I forget the figures, but I believe it's over 50%. Measures like these are more effective and certainly more moral than bombing clinics. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |
|
Master
Member # 4614
|
written Monday, August 1 2005 06:56
Profile
Homepage
Well, Kel, I guess you could always just get out of there. :) But wait a sec? Pro-life groups are bombing clinics? That's not very pro-life at all. -------------------- -ben4808 Posts: 3360 | Registered: Friday, June 25 2004 07:00 |
|
E Equals MC What!!!!
Member # 5491
|
written Monday, August 1 2005 17:26
Profile
Homepage
Ben, forcing people to flee their country because of their beliefs ain't a good thing. -------------------- SupaNik: Aran, you're not big enough to threaten Ash. Dammit, even JV had to think twice. Posts: 1861 | Registered: Friday, February 11 2005 08:00 |