Kerry Wails at Loss to 'This Idiot' Nov 5th

Trick,

I�m sure ed is sorry he asked if her eyes are brown�.however, she then posts on about dyslexia�.and for proof shows her absolute lack of knowledge about dyslexia, then try�s to make light of it�.more proof of the tolerance from the left. If it gets political traction then post it. Who cares if those stupid people who can�t talk straight are offended�although dyslexia is the most common cause of reading, writing, and spelling difficulties�.notice I didn�t include speech. And also forgets that if he is dyslexic that would make him most probably of above average intelligence, in fact there is correlation between average / above average intelligence and language based learning difficulties�.I thought she was claiming stupidity for him�.for whom might be a better question.

funny but she tries to prove what would most probably indicate the opposite conclusion and he's stupid.

pointed lesson lay off the folks with disabilities some of us who have developed disabilities will strike you for it, you fool.


[edit on 24-10-2004 by keholmes]

Originally posted by dgtempe
I heard somewhere (wish i could find it again) that Bush's IQ is 95. Thats bordering on retarded, isnt it???

An IQ score of 95, when the mean IQ is 100 and the standard deviation is ten points or larger, is well within normal limits. The most widely used IQ test has an SD of 12. On this scale, IQ scores falling between 85 and 115 are considered to be normal. Roughly 67% of the population will score on an IQ test normed in this way, plus or minus one standard deviation from the mean.

So, dgtempe, there is a significant (67%) chance that your IQ falls within this range.

Originally posted by goose
Kerry is a pilot for those who do not know he has his pilots license.
As for George Bush his score on the test one takes to be a pilot in the Nationa Guard was the lowest possible score one could get and still qualify, so much for your theory on how smart he is.

Those who think that a pilot's license is the sine qua non of intelligence and leadership skills should consider the following taken from another thread.

A University of Florida scientist has grown a living "brain" that can fly a simulated plane, giving scientists a novel way to observe how brain cells function as a network.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
So, dgtempe, there is a significant (67%) chance that your IQ falls within this range.

so let me get this straight if he is actually dyslexic then he has a fairly good probability of being above average int.....so he could turn out to be smart, and the actual post was self referencing...hmmm interesting


[edit on 24-10-2004 by keholmes]

Originally posted by keholmes
so let me get this straight if he is actually dyslexic then he has a fairly good probability of being above average int.....so he could turn out to be smart, and the actual post was self referencing...hmmm interesting

"Dyslexia is not related to intelligence and can occur in very bright people, as well as in people of lower intellectual ability. It would be inappropriate to use a reading age or quotient as a measure of intelligence for a variety of reasons, not least, the possible presence of a specific learning disability (dyslexia). Dyslexic individuals may experience difficulties in a number of specific areas. But these do not, in themselves, reflect a lack of intelligence. It may be reassuring for these individuals, their parents and teachers to reflect on the success and achievements of some famous dyslexics...."(Hornsby, 1984)

"...Albert Einstein, Leonardo da Vinci, Thomas Edison, Auguste Rodin, Woodrow Wilson, General George Patton, Harvey Cushing."



www.cs.tcd.ie...



[edit on 04/10/24 by GradyPhilpott]

Correct,

Perhaps speaking skills are not a true judge of intelligence.

However, I firmly believe it is important for the peoples of a nation to believe that their president is, at the very minimum, above the intelligence of the average man. Perhaps not exceptional, but "gifted" would do.

He needs to speak well, simply for respect. I can't remember a single president in my life time that has people watching him talk, completely ignoring what he is saying, and waiting to hear him screw up. Now, I'm not saying that this is everyone who is listening, it is in the minority, but it exists nonetheless.

I think this is a problem, too large of a portion of the county views Bush as not intelligent. No, I don't have any statistics on hand to back up that statement, it is based on my observations over the last 4 years, and that belief seems to be getting to be a bigger and bigger portion as time progresses. While I don't think not seeing a president as "exceptional" in the intelligence category as a problem, not seeing him in the "above average" area is.

The problem is that this doesn't really have anything to do with his ACTUAL intelligence. People will follow those that sound good. Look at Clinton, look at Reagan, look at JFK, people loved them, and they were exception speakers. Regardless how smart they actually were, people thought they were because they sounded smart. This gave those presidents a lot of political power with the people, outside of some �ahem� personal choices.

Now, if Bush were to speak much better than he does now I think he would be having a much easier time running for reelection. Regardless of whether his policies were good, he'd sound like he knew what he was talking about, and people will usually give the president the benefit of the doubt. However, he doesn't, and in my view that is going to continue to effect his tenure as president.

If he is reelected people are going to be like, "Okay, he's here for another 4 years. I'll cut him some slack but he's really got to show me something." If Bush continues along the same path of the way he presents himself I think that will be a very serious issue.

I'm not sure not voting for Bush will solve the issue. I mean, I'm voting for Kerry because I support him, have since the primaries. However, the issue at hand is Bush's speaking ability and how it reflects his intelligence. Any politician will tell you appearance is everything, and I think people are going to tire of the "I'd rather have a beer with Bush" points they give him now. Eventually people will want a president to sound like a president.
.

When it comes down to the bottom line, common sense is the best attribute for anyone to have.
An I.Q. test, both timed (12min) and untimed are "abstract".

Sanc'.

Originally posted by dgtempe

Ed, yes, my eyes are brown, but it isnt from excrement back up into my head

I am sorry for my comment, no excuse. Btw, I have brown eyes

Originally posted by keholmes
so let me get this straight if he is actually dyslexic then he has a fairly good probability of being above average int.....so he could turn out to be smart, and the actual post was self referencing...hmmm interesting

[edit on 24-10-2004 by keholmes]

That is interesting, never thought of that one. I just cant see how people can call the man retarded and do so with a stright face, just becuase he doesnt see the world as they do. Lots of folks see the world just as Bush does, as a matter of fact the majority of folks do, cause he WILL win.





[edit on 24-10-2004 by edsinger]

Its ok. No harm done. It takes a lot to disturb me

We all get carried away a little at times.
I know what to expect with these leading threads. Only one way, and thats a major argument between our wonderful ATS family

Originally posted by The Big O
��������
He needs to speak well, simply for respect. I can't remember a single president in my life time that has people watching him talk, completely ignoring what he is saying, and waiting to hear him screw up. Now, I'm not saying that this is everyone who is listening, it is in the minority, but it exists nonetheless.

I think this is a problem, too large of a portion of the county views Bush as not intelligent. No, I don't have any statistics on hand to back up that statement, it is based on my observations over the last 4 years, and that belief seems to be getting to be a bigger and bigger portion as time progresses. While I don't think not seeing a president as "exceptional" in the intelligence category as a problem, not seeing him in the "above average" area is. �����

Well big O you should have been watching for more than the last few years as this a pretty common ploy of the left�personal attacks founded on little or nothing is fairly common with them, it plays well to their base. For example, the parallel of Packwood and Clinton�.another fine example would be all the noise from the left about how out of touch bush was�I believe that it was because he was fascinated by a scanner at a grocery store�.clinton, was fascinated and made some comment when he saw a cordless drill about how they should sell those�I had three. The left just makes sh## up to see if it has traction�while both sides do that to some degree, the left excels at it. It simply amazes me that a lot of folks on the left will readily admit that M. Moore just flat out lies, invariably the next words out of their mouth are something to the effect of �yeah, but he�s really informational.� It amazes me that someone can be so stupid to say that they understand that the evidence is false, however very condemning.

lol I love this. So he gives something good about Bush and all the libs here cry BS?

I've been here for awhile and this is still pretty funny to me.


Haha, quite funny. As to the "obsession": What obsession? He found some good solid evidence; and you ridicule him? Pathetic attempts at trying to win your view.

Let's leave people to their freedom of press, shall we?

-wD

Just to show that I like a good joke now and again, it seems that most of the bad stuff is aimed at Bush yet he has one heck of a VP in my opinion, very smart, and very capable. Bush puts good people around him, but I also like a good laugh..

Originally posted by WeBDeviL

Haha, quite funny. As to the "obsession": What obsession? He found some good solid evidence; and you ridicule him? Pathetic attempts at trying to win your view.



-wD

I think the obsession they refer to is edsingers obsession with constant right wing propaganda posts. Fair enough he's got his view and he's pushing for his man to win. We're allowed to disagree with him.

Some of us are realyl curious as to what eds gonna do after november 2. Sure he'll boast for a while if Bush wins, and spend some time defending the result (or crying foul) if Kerry wins...

But where to from there for Ed? Will he cecede from the US and start his own Ultra onservative republic? Will he find the most right wing country he can and go live there? Will he start a civil war and impose himself as president (you dont want that, check out his if edsinger was president thread... scary)?

Although i disagree with his views, he's an Ultra Conservative on a fairly Liberal board... you gotta respect his efforts

(yes ed I'm saying something nice about you... cherish the moment)

Gee, again I can�t make it past the first page of the garbage before having to start pecking at the keyboard.

First, I would like to ask Gools something. Gools, just what is your reason for being here? When is your time going to be up? I really haven�t read anything of yours to date except this one insulting post, so let me take the time to tell you something. You aren�t what I�d call a mighty pillar of this community and the place wouldn�t grind to a halt if you were to drop off the planet, either. Understand? Your contribution in your first post was to offend, and then tell us that there are �different kinds of intelligence�, whatever that means. I think I know what you mean, but they way you put it displayed none of any, so why not contribute in an intelligent manner?

IceofSpades, you are correct that money can buy you a lot of things. I suppose that is why Kerry saw fit to marry into the stuff a couple of times, huh?

LadyV, I don�t think there have been many anti-Bush threads in which you did not post. As a matter of fact, I�d say the majority of this site is consumed with frothing Bush-Hate, as you can clearly see in the list of recent posts at any given moment. I wouldn�t call anyone �obsessed� in this nuthouse, if I were you. This place is like a DNC meeting without the humor of James Carville!

Nerd, do not assume that everything you have said at this board has been truthful, correct and always intellectually honest. I believe you know I have had many disputes with you. As a matter of fact, here�s another. You believe calling Bush an �idiot� isn�t dishonest? I suppose you don�t understand that generally, if something is not factual, it is incorrect. If something is said that is not true and the speaker knows it isn�t true, he is a liar. Simple.
As far as Kerry holding a pilot�s license, what military school did he go to? I didn�t think he hung around the military long enough to attend anything like pilot training. Surely you aren�t trying to equate a private pilot�s license to Bush�s training? Again, a little dishonest, but that would be assuming you understand the difference, so I will withhold judgment. Under freedom of speech one lie is as good as the other. Don�t pick and choose.

That was just the first page. It is clear and evident that the liberal majority of this board has deep issues with any conservative who stumbles into this joint to the point that if one even comments that Bush might be more intelligent than Kerry then, well, this clown needs to hurry up and leave! As a matter of fact, it is obvious by the way this thread started out that the first liberal reaction is to offend and attack. Typical.

I�m done. I won�t be reading past the first page, so there�ll be no more flashlights shining on the hypocrisy. Carry on with the regularly scheduled lunacy

Originally posted by specialasianX
Although i disagree with his views, he's an Ultra Conservative on a fairly Liberal board... you gotta respect his efforts

You nailed that one on the head m8, bigtime.

Thanks

Originally posted by Gools
Edsigner what are you going to do after the election?

That is a very good question.

Who is his going to turn his slander to?

Who knows he may be getting paid good for his meanness.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by SpittinCobra]

Originally posted by edsinger

The two tests aren't perfectly comparable. But they provide no evidence that Kerry is smarter. If anything, Bush is smarter than Kerry.



www.vdare.com...

You must be extremely bored.

Originally posted by keholmes

Well big O you should have been watching for more than the last few years as this a pretty common ploy of the left�personal attacks founded on little or nothing is fairly common with them, it plays well to their base.

Look at the posts of our Freeper Spambots ( edsinger, Flyersfan, Grady ) on ATS, and you'll see the opposite to be the truth in regards to your statement.
The "attacks" on Bush vs. the "attacks" on Kerry - anyone who has slogged through this board over the several months will see data linked to our own federal governments web sites & reports, as to the state of XXXXX under Bush's term. Attacking failure can be forceful, because so many like you, my GOP-itarian friend, decide to polish the turd without ever realizing that the shine off a turd is still coming off a piece of s***.
I base my knowledge of Bush's mental shortcomings on my business experience: No one who has ever reached a 'C' level executive position, or been voted to a Board of Directors, presents like this man does. For someone to have supposedly stood in front of IVY League admission boards ( I did ) & Military promotion boards ( I did ) & Corporate boards presenting on everything from status to why they're being bought out ( I have ) & Investor meetings ( I have ).....well, they don't read off a script like Bush nor do they come in unable to field spontaneous questions nor do they let all facial ticks /grimmaces/scowls be seen by whom they're presenting to.
Anyway, Dick Cheney is the Black Pope, the real sitting president for the last four years....let's compare those two, him and Kerry. I think Cheney is 'smarter' than Kerry. Now my definition encompasses academic achievement, professional acumen and street smarts. No one can work the system like Cheney. now I also believe him to be evil and void of ANY moral fiber, but he's the smartest out of the four.
I'd respect Republicans if they'd just come out and admit that they really are voting for Cheney through Bush; that they acknowledge the 'pitcher' & not the 'catcher' as being the leader.

OK folks I got a warning for something I do not understand in this thread. Does anyone have any idea what I did that woud deserve a warning? Had to be recent so I can figure it out.

STRIKE THAT, I see what I did, I had already apologized, just a late warning thats all.

Deserved.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by edsinger]

Originally posted by Bout Time

Look at the posts of our Freeper Spambots ( edsinger, Flyersfan, Grady ) on ATS, and you'll see the opposite to be the truth in regards to your statement.

I'd respect Republicans if they'd just come out and admit that they really are voting for Cheney through Bush; that they acknowledge the 'pitcher' & not the 'catcher' as being the leader.

Well I guess you can admitt that I am in the minority here but I believe in what I say as much as you do. I think you are wrong. Bush has done a pretty fair job IMHO and he has my vote. I see things from the right, you dont.

As for Cheney, yeah damn smart, btu he doesnt run Bush and you are misleaded to believe that.

[edit on 25-10-2004 by edsinger]

I've been doing a bit of research on this Steve Sailer fella who wrote the piece Ed popped up to start this thread. He seems to associate with interesting folks, most of which I'm sure aren't going to be walking through Detroit.

Turns out that the NY Times also ran something about Sailer's article:

www.nytimes.com...

Salier has written frequently in defense of both the Linda Gottfredson and the Pioneer Fund. He seems to like them quite a bit. To give you a little background on why Sailer's support of Linda and the Pioneer Fund are important I offer you these tidbits.

Linda Gottfredson is a "second" source that John Tierney of the NY Times used in his article to back up the findings from Sailer in the VDARE.com article Ed posted. Gottfredson, who I believe teaches at the University of Delaware is an expert on IQ ratings or some such. Her research has been partially funded by the Pioneer Fund.

The Pioneer Fund has been designated a "hate group" by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). It has been categorized as such for its support over the years of the work of white supremacists, eugenicists, and others dedicated to proving the existence of genetic differences between races.

Sailer himself has written to the defense of The Pioneer Fund and of Gottfredson, www.vdare.com... . He has also cited Linda in articles he has written about other subjects, www.upi.com... .

The Pioneer Fund's original charter called for the pursuit of "race betterment" for descendants of "white persons" who "settled in the original thirteen states prior to the adoption of the Constitution."

The Pioneer Fund has funded work by Jared Taylor. He founded the American Renaissance magazine. Southern Poverty Law Center describes it as "a courtly presenter of ideas that most would describe as crudely white supremacist."

Richard Lynn, a current member of the American Renaissance board of directors and emeritus professor of psychology at the University of Ulster, wrote in an article in the July 2002 edition of American Renaissance, Lynn wrote that "blacks are more psychopathic than whites" www.amren.com... .

Ed, although I find your idea about this whole thing amusing, I think you need to find better people to associate your ideas with. I'm certain you are not a racist, and I would advise that you not back the writings or people who defend racism and those who write about it in a positve manner. It reflects poorly on someone who obviously has more intelligence than these folks do.

Sources:
NYTIMES.COM
MEDIAMATTERSFORAMERICA.ORG
SPLC.ORG

(Disclaimer: I am not an English major. I'm sure I plagerized something in my post. Much of the content of this post is a reorganization of what I found on Mediamatters and NYtimes. I tried not to lift things line by line but as I've said, I'm no English major and did the best I could to get my point across. Any pointers would be appreciated.)

[edit on 25-10-2004 by The Big O]