[argod]

http://homepage.mac.com/njenson/movies/obgyn.html

[spacefreak]

That's a pretty good one.

[argod]

Keith Olbermann's report on it.

http://homepage.mac.com/njenson/movies/lovedocs.html

[spiky_dog]

that's awesome, truly the king of bushisms so far

[LoganCharles]

I honestly think he says this stuff on purpose. He knows it riles the liberals while the rest of the country just shakes its head. You can't help but laugh.

Idiotic, yes. Stupid, no. Strangely charming nonetheless.

[PacHead]

That one was pretty funny.

[Atomic Rooster]

It took me 10 minutes to post this I was LOLing so hard!

[Agasthya]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
I honestly think he says this stuff on purpose.

Nah, I think he's just a really big idiot.

[KaBlooey]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
Idiotic, yes. Stupid, no.

[Cody Dawg]

Actually, since we just had a baby, we know about this issue firsthand.

It is VERY difficult to find an ob/gyn physician who will take on new patients. Our ob/gyn doc said that he pays $800 PER DAY for his malpractice insurance. After this year he is quitting his practice and either retiring or moving to another state.

If you're having a baby in the state of Florida you will have a hard time finding an ob/gyn physician who will take you on as a new patient. They just won't because they are afraid of being sued and they can no longer afford malpractice insurance.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by KaBlooey:

It's in not what he says which I am in complete agreement with but how he says it. Malpractice suits are way out of hand and they won't get better with a trial lawyer liberal like Edwards in the White House.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by Agasthya:
Nah, I think he's just a really big idiot.

This is exactly what I'm talking about and you fell right into it.

[Agasthya]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
This is exactly what I'm talking about and you fell right into it.

No way. No one could do stuff like that on purpose. It is so outrageous.

And what's the point? To look like a retard? I don't see how that is beneficial to his image.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
I honestly think he says this stuff on purpose. He knows it riles the liberals while the rest of the country just shakes its head. You can't help but laugh.

Idiotic, yes. Stupid, no. Strangely charming nonetheless.

You can't be serious? I mean,...really?

[spiky_dog]

Originally posted by Agasthya:
No way. No one could do stuff like that on purpose. It is so outrageous.

And what's the point? To look like a retard? I don't see how that is beneficial to his image.

others have stated this far better than i, but in short he's trying to play himself down. this way he'll look like a hero if he even sounds remotely articulate during the single debate with kerry, for instance.

[Agasthya]

Originally posted by spiky_dog:
others have stated this far better than i, but in short he's trying to play himself down. this way he'll look like a hero if he even sounds remotely articulate during the single debate with kerry, for instance.

So the implication is that Bush is an idiot and can't compete at the same level as Kerry or Gore so he needs to idiotize himself further so that when he does same something competent he looks like less of an idiot.

[dzhim]

Originally posted by spiky_dog:
others have stated this far better than i, but in short he's trying to play himself down. this way he'll look like a hero if he even sounds remotely articulate during the single debate with kerry, for instance.

That doesn't make any sense. Deliberately encourage others to portray you as an idiot for the entirety of your political career, just so that, on certain occasions, you can come across as intelligent and compassionate?

And it's not as if Kerry is a particularly dynamic speaker, anyway. I mean, if he was really trying to "save up" his perceived articulateness, surely he could have found a more demanding time to tap the reserve.

[PacHead]

Bush will do just fine in the debates, just you wait and see.

It doesn't really matter what Kerry says, because he has alread contradicted himself on just about every single issue.

Every single word uttered from his mouth is open to criticism and attack, and can be countered with other words which have also come out of that very same mouth.

[OldManMac]

Kerry will do just fine in the debates, just you wait and see.

It doesn't really matter what Bush says, because he has already contradicted himself on just about every single issue.

Every single word uttered from his mouth is open to criticism and attack, and can be countered with other words which have also come out of that very same mouth.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Agasthya:
And what's the point? To look like a retard? I don't see how that is beneficial to his image.

He doesn't "look like a retard" he just doesn't look like a "pointy headed intellectual" (as Adlai Stevenson was derided in 1952).

A little anti-intellectualism has worked well in American politics in campaigns spanning decades. The obviously erudite lawyer Dewey was beaten by the down-home former haberdasher Truman, bottom of his class Ike beat the intellectual-seeming Stevenson, twice. The supposedly dumb Reagan beat the supposedly smart Carter and later, Mondale. Mondale said after the 1984 election that his biggest mistake was underestimating Reagan. Bush similarly beat Gore.

Whether the supposedly smarter candidates were in fact brighter than the supposedly dumber candidates is questionable. Truman wasn't really dumb, nor was Ike, nor Reagan, and I suspect nor Dubya Bush. On the other hand, Gore strikes me as possessing a very modest intellect. His intellectualism stikes me as mainly puffing. He is certainly no Clinton. But even the obviously bright Clinton liked to play up his anti-intellectual credentials. Listen to his speeches. Before certain audiences his language becomes laced with folksy grammatical errors and Arkansas touches.

Why is this? It is because perceptions are everything. If you can be perceived as being folksy in American politics, it is an advantage both because most Americans like their politicians a bit folksy, and because liberals tend to be excessively convinced that liberals are smarter than conservatives and therefore, conservatives can be dismissed as slow.

Kerry's problem is that his delivery isn't folksy, and his substance is lacking. He has the worst of both worlds.

[OldManMac]

You're good, Simey, but there's a huge difference between perceived as folksy and being perceived as slow, and you know that. A man who has never had a success in business, who got where he is simply because of daddy, and who is known to have had a problem with substance abuse until too late in his life, does not deserve to be President of the United States, period.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by KarlG:
You're good, Simey, but there's a huge difference between perceived as folksy and being perceived as slow, and you know that. A man who has never had a success in business, who got where he is simply because of daddy, and who is known to have had a problem with substance abuse until too late in his life, does not deserve to be President of the United States, period.

Which business was Kerry successful in? The only private sector job he ever held was with the Vietnam Veterans Against the War.

Frankly, I perceive Kerry as being slow. Does that make him slow? Or could my perceptions be wrong?

[OldManMac]

Did I say anything about Kerry? I'm not a fan of his either, by the way. But of course, that doesn't matter to you; you're just interested in deflecting the issues, because you don't have an answer to the statement I posted.

That's one of many peoples' favorite tactics, and, for someone as educated as you are, you should know better.

[PacHead]

Originally posted by PacHead:
Bush will do just fine in the debates, just you wait and see.
It doesn't really matter what Kerry says, because he has alread contradicted himself on just about every single issue.
Every single word uttered from his mouth is open to criticism and attack, and can be countered with other words which have also come out of that very same mouth.



Originally posted by KarlG:
Kerry will do just fine in the debates, just you wait and see.
It doesn't really matter what Bush says, because he has already contradicted himself on just about every single issue.
Every single word uttered from his mouth is open to criticism and attack, and can be countered with other words which have also come out of that very same mouth.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by KarlG:
Did I say anything about Kerry? I'm not a fan of his either, by the way. But of course, that doesn't matter to you; you're just interested in deflecting the issues, because you don't have an answer to the statement I posted.

That's one of many peoples' favorite tactics, and, for someone as educated as you are, you should know better.

There are two candidates running for office. Out of those two, we pick the best one. Or if you like, the lesser of two evils. The best one from my point of view is Bush.

Because few of us know the candidates personally, we each decide based on our perceptions. My perceptions of Kerry are sharply negative. I don't trust his instincts, I don't trust his advisors, I don't trust his judgment. On the other hand, I do trust Bush's instincts, advisors, and judgment. I may quibble with him on may policies, but he is definitely the better candidate. I think he is also the more effective candidate. To me, Kerry doesn't communicate intelligence or thoughtfulness, he communicates arrogance. I don't particularly like that, and I don't see anything in his background to justify it.

You obviously have a different view. I think personally your litany is out of touch with reality. We'll see in November what the people think.

[zigzag]

I, too, have sometimes had difficulty practicing my love with women all across the country. Sadly, I can't seem to get the President to do anything about it.

[OldManMac]

Originally posted by zigzag:
I, too, have sometimes had difficulty practicing my love with women all across the country. Sadly, I can't seem to get the President to do anything about it.

I know what you mean. I hired a hooker the other night, and she told me, "Not on the first date." I mean, what can Dubya do about that, eh?

Keep spinning and avoiding Simey.

PacMan, you're just too clever for me.

[Atomic Rooster]

I have some experience in this area. It's comparable to a form of dyslexia. When speaking publicly or even to a small group of people the brain is unable to follow a logical linear path. The speaker feels stressed and this causes the brain to place it's information in a non logical path. The person then tries to convey this information logically but it usually comes out all screwed up. All the information needed to make sense of a statement just doesn't come out because the speaker is trying very hard to straighten out the jumble and misses bits. This results in a totally incoherent statement or one that is unintentionally humorous.

The more stressed the person, the worse it may become.

Stagefright is a severe form. Some people just cannot speak publicly. Think vertigo and you can imagine what may be happening in the mind of a speaker.

This should worry Bushes handlers in the debates as stress levels will skyrocket. It could only become worse if he works too hard to try to look relaxed and confident. This may throw off his concentration even worse.

Medication helps somewhat.

Should be interesting.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
It's in not what he says which I am in complete agreement with but how he says it. Malpractice suits are way out of hand and they won't get better with a trial lawyer liberal like Edwards in the White House.

Hmmm? I didn't know Edwards was running for president!

[constrictor]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
He doesn't "look like a retard" he just doesn't look like a "pointy headed intellectual" (as Adlai Stevenson was derided in 1952).

A little anti-intellectualism has worked well in American politics in campaigns spanning decades. The obviously erudite lawyer Dewey was beaten by the down-home former haberdasher Truman, bottom of his class Ike beat the intellectual-seeming Stevenson, twice. The supposedly dumb Reagan beat the supposedly smart Carter and later, Mondale. Mondale said after the 1984 election that his biggest mistake was underestimating Reagan. Bush similarly beat Gore.

Whether the supposedly smarter candidates were in fact brighter than the supposedly dumber candidates is questionable. Truman wasn't really dumb, nor was Ike, nor Reagan, and I suspect nor Dubya Bush. On the other hand, Gore strikes me as possessing a very modest intellect. His intellectualism stikes me as mainly puffing. He is certainly no Clinton. But even the obviously bright Clinton liked to play up his anti-intellectual credentials. Listen to his speeches. Before certain audiences his language becomes laced with folksy grammatical errors and Arkansas touches.

Why is this? It is because perceptions are everything. If you can be perceived as being folksy in American politics, it is an advantage both because most Americans like their politicians a bit folksy, and because liberals tend to be excessively convinced that liberals are smarter than conservatives and therefore, conservatives can be dismissed as slow.

Kerry's problem is that his delivery isn't folksy, and his substance is lacking. He has the worst of both worlds.

It also reflects the fact that the American public is getting more stupid, in an international sense, year by year. Compared to other industrialized nations our educational system is faltering. You've heard and seen all the reports on this issue.

These days, the jackass politician is less threatening to the "average American," because the average American ain't so much smart as he used to be, I reckon.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
Hmmm? I didn't know Edwards was running for president!

Come on. I'm talking about the influence of having Edwards, as vice president, in the white house.

[LoganCharles]

Originally posted by KarlG:
You're good, Simey, but there's a huge difference between perceived as folksy and being perceived as slow, and you know that. A man who has never had a success in business, who got where he is simply because of daddy, and who is known to have had a problem with substance abuse until too late in his life, does not deserve to be President of the United States, period.

It wouldn't matter if Bush built Rome in a day you would still attack him.


Let's just say it together: I. Don't. Like. Bush.

[forkies]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
There are two candidates running for office. Out of those two, we pick the best one.

better one, we pick the better of the two. or are you just gettin' "folksy" on us?

[olePigeon]

Because the other thread was locked:

Originaly posted by PacHead:
Here's a fact for all you folks.

Not one liberal loudmouth has taken up Spliffdaddy on his $20 wager in the P- lounge, regarding the election. You people are full of crap.

Disagreeing on political issues and betting on which candidate is going to win the election has nothing to do with each other. Neither of them proves your ideas are right.

I'll bet you $5000 that Earth is more or less spherical. If I win, it proves that your mom is transgender and impregnated itself to conceive you.

[Kenneth]

cool clip!

[chris v]

Me, I'm just simply embarrased.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by KarlG:
A man who has never had a success in business, who got where he is simply because of daddy, and who is known to have had a problem with substance abuse until too late in his life, does not deserve to be President of the United States, period.

Then why on earth are you supporting Kerry?

At least Bush sobered up and started up a business that he sold for millions.

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
Then why on earth are you supporting Kerry?

At least Bush sobered up and started up a business that he sold for millions.

Thanks to the Bin Laden family!

Holy sh!t!!!

I get more befuddled everyday by comments from people who don't know what the fuuk is going on.

[Kenneth]

Jay Leno just brought that clip up again.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
I have some experience in this area. It's comparable to a form of dyslexia. When speaking publicly or even to a small group of people the brain is unable to follow a logical linear path. The speaker feels stressed and this causes the brain to place it's information in a non logical path. The person then tries to convey this information logically but it usually comes out all screwed up. All the information needed to make sense of a statement just doesn't come out because the speaker is trying very hard to straighten out the jumble and misses bits. This results in a totally incoherent statement or one that is unintentionally humorous.

The more stressed the person, the worse it may become.

Stagefright is a severe form. Some people just cannot speak publicly. Think vertigo and you can imagine what may be happening in the mind of a speaker.

This should worry Bushes handlers in the debates as stress levels will skyrocket. It could only become worse if he works too hard to try to look relaxed and confident. This may throw off his concentration even worse.

Medication helps somewhat.

Should be interesting.

Could previous drug abuse have something to do with that condition?

[Anders]

Originally posted by LoganCharles:
It's in not what he says which I am in complete agreement with but how he says it. Malpractice suits are way out of hand and they won't get better with a trial lawyer liberal like Edwards in the White House.

Quick to take up the GOP talking points eh?

Would anyone PLEASE tell me how this at all tells how good a vice president Edwards will be? Not counting newly "democraticed states" this campaign is the fartest from a honest exchange of political views I have seen in any campaign in the western world. And it not just the republicans fault.

[hyteckit]

HAHA...

Bush is a funny man. I just might vote for him.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by constrictor:
It also reflects the fact that the American public is getting more stupid, in an international sense, year by year. Compared to other industrialized nations our educational system is faltering. You've heard and seen all the reports on this issue.

These days, the jackass politician is less threatening to the "average American," because the average American ain't so much smart as he used to be, I reckon.

I did my secondary education in the UK so i have some basis for comparison. I don't know why it is that liberals like to pretend that Americans are dumber than our competitors, but I don't see a real basis for it. My personal opinion is those reports are mostly crap for a variety of reasons. Our education system educates a broader swath of the population, and does so both to age 18 (not 16). That makes comparisons of 18 year olds in secondary education invalid. Our education system also includes the private sector and it continues into higher education. We send far more people to college than our competitors, and certainly more than we used to in our own past. Your statements are flat wrong on both accounts.

And if you want proof, just look at our economic growth rates and unemployment rates compared to our competitors, especially in Europe. To get folksy on you, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

[Spoogepieces]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
I have some experience in this area. It's comparable to a form of dyslexia. When speaking publicly or even to a small group of people the brain is unable to follow a logical linear path. The speaker feels stressed and this causes the brain to place it's information in a non logical path. The person then tries to convey this information logically but it usually comes out all screwed up. All the information needed to make sense of a statement just doesn't come out because the speaker is trying very hard to straighten out the jumble and misses bits. This results in a totally incoherent statement or one that is unintentionally humorous.

I have a similar problem in that if I'm speaking my mouth simply cannot keep up with how fast I think. Thus, like a runaway train, if I speak long enough my thoughts derail and I run into similar issues as I've seen Bush have.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Spoogepieces:
I have a similar problem in that if I'm speaking my mouth simply cannot keep up with how fast I think. Thus, like a runaway train, if I speak long enough my thoughts derail and I run into similar issues as I've seen Bush have.

Judging from things like the "Fool me once..." quote, with all its pauses, Bush's problem is quite obviously NOT that his brain is faster than his mouth.

But you might make a good team, nonetheless.

[stevesnj]

What a dope...he can't even speak what's written for him

[Atomic Rooster]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
<snip>Our education system educates a broader swath of the population, and does so both to age 18 (not 16).<snip>

I'm curious as to what you mean by this statement?

As all countries educate their humans in the population...what is a broader swath?

Do you mean they throw dogs and monkies in there too?

I hope you're not pulling a Charlton Heston.






I think I may put befuddled in my sig. because I cannot believe or comprehend what some people say in this forum. Some people know the truth because it's been brought up often enuf but continue to amaze me with their delusions. Example...Bush and the Bin Ladens and his company Arbusto and then there is the Carlyle Group...

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Atomic Rooster:
I'm curious as to what you mean by this statement?

As all countries educate their humans in the population...what is a broader swath?

Do you mean they throw dogs and monkies in there too?

I hope you're not pulling a Charlton Heston.






I think I may put befuddled in my sig. because I cannot believe or comprehend what some people say in this forum. Some people know the truth because it's been brought up often enuf but continue to amaze me with their delusions. Example...Bush and the Bin Ladens and his company Arbusto and then there is the Carlyle Group...

What I mean is in the US we assume that kids will stay in an academic stream in education up to and including age 18. After that, the kids leave school and either enter the workforce or go on to higher education. So if you measure the aptitude and skills of kids ages 17 or 18, you get a normal bellcurve of results. And you will also get a normal bellcurve if you do a survey of all high school kids, because they are all (or almost all) still in high school.

I have found that Americans tend to assume that all countries similarly keep all their kids in academic programs until age 18, but that isn't the case. Many if not most of our closest competitor industrialized countries in fact practice quite strict streaming. For example, when I went to high school in the UK, the majority of kids left school at age 16.* They went to work, or entered apprenticeship programs. Those who stayed in secondary education past age 16 by and large were the academically gifted who were on track to go to university. Similar patterns exist elseware in Western Europe, and AFAIK, Japan as well.

The result is if you measured the aptitudes of 17 and 18 year olds after excluding the non-academically gifted kids, you get a skewed bell curve. Your sample has been warped. It may be that the ones still in school are very bright, but those aren't your whole population. Your bell curve is just the bright kids, leaving out everyone else.

Even if you sample all high school kids, you still have a skewed sample because you have excluded two years worth of non-academically gifted kids who left to join the workforce or to go into vocational programs. So your sample is wrong.

I have read several of these reports, and they all fail to correct for this basic difference in the way US secondary education is structured compared to our competitors. Thus, I discount them.



*This has changed somewhat since I went to High School in the UK. But it is still the case that more leave school at a younger age than Americans do.