krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 04:29:50 PM new
A white house aide went public with a peeve about the press critisizing Dumbya's third grade grammatical errors.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010224/pl/bush_grammar_dc_1.html
|
snowyegret
|
posted on February 25, 2001 04:57:40 PM new
It's a good thing he's not President of France.
|
december3
|
posted on February 25, 2001 05:13:32 PM new
He's right about one thing. I am scared to death about what he's going to do that affects my life.
|
kiheicat
|
posted on February 25, 2001 05:47:36 PM new
Who is this person to assume in that statement made that American's don't care about Bush's grammar?
Quite untrue. I for one care. The consistency in his bungles is a sign of inferior intellect and that's what is going to be the root of all of his more serious errors yet to come. It didn't just happen once or twice, something that could more easily be overlooked... it happens on a continuing basis.
I couldn't care less if my next door neighbor or the dude at McDonald's makes grammatical errors, or if my children make a mistake now and then, but I sure care when the President who is supposed to clearly and concisely communicate with powerful world leaders cannot do so without making himself look like the idiot that he indeed is!
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 05:53:35 PM new
...a US Pres who can not verbalize.
Helen
[ edited by HJW on Feb 25, 2001 05:55 PM ]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 25, 2001 06:32:58 PM new
Matalin bristled at an interviewer's suggestion that the public might expect more from their president than ``a third-grade grammatical error.''
Puh-leez. She knows damn well that if the shoe were on the other foot she would somehow find it troubling. He does a lot more than make grammatical errors. His speech pattern is vaguely reminiscent of my friend who smoked just a little bit more than his share of the wacky tobbacy. The difference being that Bush is somehow in the Thomas Jefferson club while my friend is a Barnes & Noble manager/ drummer. My own personal standard is that the President should appear at least nominally intelligent. Is that too much to ask?
|
Shoshanah
|
posted on February 25, 2001 07:40:11 PM new
APPEAR NOMINALLY INTELLIGENT is definitely NOT part of Dumbo's Agenda... It would take more (heaven forbids!) than 4 years to rehearse a remote approximation at looking, not so much intelligent, but LESS STUPID...even THAT would be an improvement...
********
Gosh Shosh!
About Me
|
krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 08:10:52 PM new
James,
You made a comment in another thread in which you enthusiastically described the literacy of many of the writers of the documents that are the background to the formation of our government. I agree, and also think that the erosion of such skills has been more recent than not. If you looked at the link to Dwight Eisenhower's 1957 state of the union speech that I posted somewhere, you can see that he, though of a somewhat curt and businesslike manner, was able to form his thoughts into expression that was quite eloquent. JFK was a masterful speaker, as though of another era who I think would have been at home engaging with the likes of Thomas Jefferson or Patrick Henry. But since Kennedy there's been quite a downslide. The notable exception would be Ronald Reagan were it not for his seemingly innate showmanship. Even the extremely bright Bill Clinton was no great speaker at all, yet his ideas were forceful and overcame the oratory handicap he displayed.
But this guy has not the power of intellect that he'd have to have in order for his grammar to be ignored as requested. When he speaks there's nothing but his childlike output to catch attention. He'll just have to live with the laughter and quit sending his various mommies out to make excuses for him.
|
spazmodeus
|
posted on February 25, 2001 08:20:38 PM new
I thought panty threads were no longer allowed.
|
krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 08:23:57 PM new
You've been away too long.
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 08:56:01 PM new
I'm not a big W fan, but I do think you all are making too much of his lack of eloquence. I've known extremely smart people who were not good at expressing themselves in public.
Also, I thought his Inaugeration speech was quite good.
(...putting on the fire proof suit for the flaming I will no doubt get)
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
[ edited by tootsiepop on Feb 25, 2001 08:56 PM ]
|
Pocono
|
posted on February 25, 2001 08:59:48 PM new
STOP INSULTING THIRD GRADERS!
I thinks that maybe Quail tutured goergie in speelings.(mispeeling intese-inail)
Me wundors ef him kin speel potaetoe.
|
krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:02:17 PM new
tootsiepop,
"Also, I thought his Inaugeration speech was quite good."
Why do you think that you would be flamed for that?
ubb
[ edited by krs on Feb 25, 2001 09:06 PM ]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:03:30 PM new
No flaming, but this man is the president of the United States. The same way Clinton detractors proclaimed that an American president ought to be of a high moral standard, I say that a president of the United States ought to be highly articulate. At the very least he should be reasonably articulate.
If he is smart the way Yogi Berra is smart --there's no evidence of that.
|
krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:08:16 PM new
All the talk about his ranch made me surprised to read that he can't ride a horse.
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:14:37 PM new
krs - it was meant mostly in jest, although this does seem to be the I Hate Bush board sometimes.
james - yes, it would be preferable to have a more articulate president, but I would rather have a decent man who is a bad speaker than an indecent man who is a good speaker.
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:16:30 PM new
I can agree with that.
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:22:20 PM new
Tootsie,
What do you mean by indecent?
Helen
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:26:10 PM new
Helen - Bill Clinton is a good example
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
[ edited by tootsiepop on Feb 25, 2001 09:27 PM ]
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:34:48 PM new
Tootsie,
So you would rather have a fool as President. A fool who can't talk.
than Bill Clinton?
|
Baduizm
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:37:10 PM new
Jamesoblivion: You say Dubya "is the President of the United States." This is true. However, forgive me if I never refer to him as such. Afterall, I didn't vote for him. He doesn't represent me.
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:41:30 PM new
Helen - I don't think Bush is a fool, but to answer your question I would rather have my dog as my President than Clinton.
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:42:01 PM new
Tootsie.
I am really interested in your answer because I'm trying to understand
why the south voted for Bush. I suspect that
it can be attributed to a narrow minded view of morality. Is this is your
only basis for voting Republican?
Helen
[ edited by HJW on Feb 25, 2001 09:45 PM ]
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:50:24 PM new
Helen - No, I can't say that was really much of an issue for me. Bush was running against Gore, not Clinton.
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:53:06 PM new
tootsie,
Of course, But we were comparing the credentials of Bush versus Clinton.
Helen
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:56:14 PM new
Helen, you asked if a narrow-minded view of morality was his/ her only basis for voting Republican, and the answer given was that it wasn't an issue because the contest was between Bush and Gore.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Feb 25, 2001 09:57 PM ]
|
krs
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:58:23 PM new
There was a perception of tranferred morality....
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on February 25, 2001 09:59:38 PM new
But an answer to the query was given. It was not an issue here.
|
tootsiepop
|
posted on February 25, 2001 10:00:38 PM new
Helen - okay, first of all let me say I couldn't care less about anyones private life, and I really wish all of the Monica stuff had never come out. Of course I wish even more that it had never happened! But Clintons immorality extends way beyond sex, I think he is dirty through and through, the pardon fiasco is just the latest.
I hope and expect that Bush will conduct himself much differently.
Not Tootsiepop anywhere else!
|
HJW
|
posted on February 25, 2001 10:02:30 PM new
tootsie,
First, you stated that decency was a major
issue. When I asked who was indecent you
named Bill Clinton.
So, I guess we can conclude that if you
had the choice between Clinton and Bush,
that you would vote for Bush because you
consider him more decent.
Helen
|
