Re: Ermmm....

Post #51,586 by wharris2 9/12/02 9:32:15 PM Reply	Re: Ermmm.... In this particular thread, I think it was Marlowe. I do notice you didn't reply to my "why didn't he do anything" message, which was not a personal attack but an attack on the entire "Clinton is a genius" theory. But hell, if you want personal attacks, I'll deliver them to you and any other slavering Clinton-lovers who think he could do no wrong and was always right. To you, and those like you, he is the smartest guy since Einstein and whose bombing of asprin factories wasn't designed and timed coincidentally about the time the Lewinsky affair came to light nor to distract from the impeachment trial. Duh. OK. Obligatory personal attack: you idiot. The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
Post #51,599 by Brandioch 9/13/02 12:00:19 AM Reply	What is it with certain people? But hell, if you want personal attacks, I'll deliver them to you and any other slavering Clinton-lovers who think he could do no wrong and was always right. To you, and those like you, he is the smartest guy since Einstein and whose bombing of asprin factories wasn't designed and timed coincidentally about the time the Lewinsky affair came to light nor to distract from the impeachment trial. So, what's with that? "Clinton-lovers" "do no wrong" "always right" "smartest guy since Einstein" I'm not sure, but I don't think ANYONE has made ANY of those claims.
Post #51,605 by bepatient 9/13/02 2:20:25 AM Reply	Par You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #51,616 by Simon_Jester 9/13/02 8:48:40 AM Reply	I agree.... It's par for the course. Complain about Clinton and you're a Rush following Dittohead. Praise Clinton and you're Monica Clinton loving fanatic.
Post #51,649 by inthane-chan 9/13/02 11:58:30 AM Reply	Finally, something we all can agree on. ;-) I voted for Clinton both times. Given the Republican alternatives, I still would have voted for him both times, but I soured considerably on him as a candidate over time. There is no question in my mind that Mr. Clinton is intelligent. The question really at hand is his ethics, and how far he went to hide his behaviors from the public at large. Quite frankly, I think that our country is all screwed up with it's puritan sex ethic (look at the Nordic peoples for what IMO is a much more sane attitude towards sex 'n violence - lots of the former, and not much of the latter except when necessary) and this obsession with sex (Sex? Yes please, and lots of it, but don't tell anybody...) helped to foster the environment in which somebody who behaves like Clinton becomes possible. Yeah, he's not a very good person. I'd still rather have him for President than Shrub 'n cronies - at least we knew where the shafting was going on... End of world rescheduled for day after tomorrow. Something should probably be done. Please advise.
Post #51,619 by Silverlock 9/13/02 9:26:30 AM 9/13/02 9:40:19 AM Reply	By this I assume you didn't see the interview. Clinton = Rhodes Scholar Bush = C- student Nuff said. Listen to the interview [link\|http://home.hiwaay.net/~ellisc/LateShow/LateShow2002-09-11-32k.mp3\|here] if you would care to become informed. (mp3) (edit to add link) "Can you wage war against an abstract noun?" -Terry Jones Edited by Silverlock Sept. 13, 2002, 09:40:19 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #51,648 by hnick 9/13/02 11:53:08 AM Reply	Not a question of intellectual prowess He is certainly bright enough. That is not his problem. He can not operate from the courage of his convictions because he has neither. He can lecture now, brilliantly, because he has no responsibility in the matter. If he did, he would be waffeling all over the place. He could have been a great president. He had the potential. He failed miserably. Too bad.
Post #51,651 by Simon_Jester 9/13/02 12:16:51 PM Reply	Actually...that was the original question Silverlock's initial point was Clinton's range of vocabulary and his ability to articulate. (No arguement of morals was made.) Wharris pointed out that Clinton was glib... In other words, is he smart or just glib? (As in the definition "2. Marked by ease and fluency of speech or writing that often suggests or stems from insincerity, superficiality, or deceitfulness.") (This initiated the "morals" aspect - and apparently, somehow, argued that Clinton wasn't as intelligent as he sounded. How you can be glib without being intelligent is left as an exercise to the reader.) Marlowe, on the other hand - argued (weakly) that Clinton wasn't intelligent...just Silverlock was stupid. It's not that he's smart. It's that you're stupid. You're like some pathetic cult member. Or Monica Lewinsky. No shades of grey about that. With needless attacks thereafter. Frankly, there's no argument (in my mind) that Clinton is well educated. There is, however, sufficient cause in his actions to warrent a query into his intelligence. (It takes a real moron to stand in front of a camera and tell the world that "I did not have sex with that women" when you did and the truth is BOUND to come out in today's politics.) But then again, it's pretty stupid for a President to not mention the fact he's been in jail 3 times (with a DUI no less) until he's called on it during a campaign. (The real question of intelligence is a pair of daughters of a President who think that they can pass themselves off with a fake ID card. "I wanna go where everybody knows my name....")
Post #51,653 by hnick 9/13/02 12:29:49 PM Reply	Original, yes What I was responding to was >>Clinton = Rhodes Scholar >>Bush = C- student >> >>Nuff said. Smart or glib makes little difference that I can see. He now gets to spout whatever pleases him. The issue is now someone elses problem. As long as he doesn't say anything REALLY stupid, he can always come out looking great. He has no responsibility any more. He can state that some hard choices are the correct ones and it is still up to somebody else to take the heat of implementation. If he was right he can claim credit, if wrong, the other guy blew it. He's just a rather visible arm chair quarterback now.
Post #51,677 by Brandioch 9/13/02 4:38:48 PM Reply	Presidency by polls. He can state that some hard choices are the correct ones and it is still up to somebody else to take the heat of implementation. I still recall that his presidency seemed to be dominated by whatever poll was last taken. You're right. Now that he has no direct responsibility, he can spout off whatever he actually believes.
Post #51,680 by inthane-chan 9/13/02 4:54:45 PM Reply	Remeniscent of Reagan and the Brady Bill, eh? End of world rescheduled for day after tomorrow. Something should probably be done. Please advise.
Post #51,659 by admin 9/13/02 1:21:17 PM Reply	Do not confuse intelligence with common sense There are a lot of very intelligent people who make very bad decisions. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."

Welcome to IWETHEY!