\"Don't blame me, I didn't read that far!\"

From the Washington Post

"I suppose it depends on what your definition of 'read' is."

Seriously, can he read? Like a normal adult?

I heard a comment somewhere that he stated his favorite childhood book was ""Hurgle the caterpillar"" (or something like that). Then someone took the trouble of investigating, and it turned out that this book had been released when he was in college.

Well, he was drinking and doing crack left and right in college, so maybe it had a ""deeper"" meaning back then.

Well, he was drinking and doing crack left and right in college

Yeah, you''re an unbiased observer of the administration...

Hey Rat, Hillary Clinton was on Bob Costas'' ""On the Record"" on HBO this week. She stands by her vote to use force in Iraq and states his removal was absolutely justified based on inteligence dating back into her husband''s administration.

Looks like Johnny Mojo will have to change his signature to:
""Rat Boy - Just to the Left of Hillary Clinton""

"Mex" wrote:

Seriously, can he read? Like a normal adult?

I heard a comment somewhere that he stated his favorite childhood book was ""Hurgle the caterpillar"" (or something like that). Then someone took the trouble of investigating, and it turned out that this book had been released when he was in college.

Yes. The man got his MBA without knowing how to read...*cough*

Well, it''s been said again and again that he went to Yale & Harvard (C student), while many others who were intelligent-er were passed up.

""Like a normal adult"", I mean, does he understand the harder-er words? Doesn''t it just scare you that he mangles the language a bit too often? Does he not care? Shouldn''t Hooked on Phonics offer him a discount?

As I understand it, you have a learning disability, Ulairi? From way back, in an EvilAvatar forum, you commented on your dyslexia. Yet I''ve not seen any glaring mistakes in your posts in a long time (then again, English is not my first language).

So I imagine you have somehow overcome this problem, worked at it to improve yourself. Maybe you just got a better spellchecker. In any case, I think the Most Powerful Dude in the World should have a little more motivation to improve the skills that are often used in his job. He has not improved his public speaking talents. He doesn''t seem to read national security reports, let alone Tom Clancy''s latest. It''s like he doesn''t care.

Or maybe most of the american public identifies with him, and it''s only a few disgruntled intellectuals who jeer at him.

Or maybe most of the American public identifies with him, and it''s only a few disgruntled intellectuals who jeer at him.

That''s closer to the truth than many people in these forums would like to admit. No one who has spent any time with the President and reported on him has ever come away thinking he is dumb. I have acquaintances in the administration who have worked with him since his presidential campaign. These are intelligent, cosmopolitan people who have no patience for stupidity, and they will assure you he is not dumb.

Is GWB rough around the edges? Sure. Is he more used to speaking in plain language than in the multi-syllabic, rhetorical world of diplomat speak? Absolutely.

But look at any speech he has made in office. They are all eloquent and coherent, and have been remarkably persuasive. You may say they are all written for him, but every President has a team of speechwriters who present the bulk of what comes out of the mouths to him.

Most of his critics don''t have any issue with gaffes made in policy speeches, but point to one of two things:

1) his getting tongue tied in interviews and q&a sessions.
2) his use of phrases like ""dead or alive"" and ""darn good intelligence""

The first of these issues is largely a non-issue. If you follow the man at all, you will see that he really doesn''t do this anymore. He may make an occasional verbal stumble, but they really are rare. Go read Slate.com and look at "Bushisms". For as much as the guy talks, his gaffes are relatively rare and minor

As to the ""darn""... Well, as said before, he is a plain speaker (this contributes to the problem of gaffes as well). I think George Bush knows who he is and can communicate well, but is most comfortable speaking in straightforward terms. This is annoying to intellectual elites and people who wouldn''t like him anyway, but most Americans just don''t care.

It''s actually a breath of fresh air. At least we know he isn''t ""slick""...

"ralcydan" wrote:

It''s actually a breath of fresh air.

But, given the state of air quality these days...

If you want insight into an ""unscripted"" Bush, watch the documentary ""Journeys with George""

http://www.journeyswithgeorge.com/

It was directed by Nancy Pelosi, a stinking liberal.

[quote=""ralcydan""]

I have acquaintances in the administration who have worked with him since his presidential campaign. These are intelligent, cosmopolitan people who have no patience for stupidity, and they will assure you he is not dumb.

Just out of curiosity...who?

As I understand it, you have a learning disability, Ulairi? From way back, in an EvilAvatar forum, you commented on your dyslexia. Yet I''ve not seen any glaring mistakes in your posts in a long time (then again, English is not my first language).

I do. But I have to work real hard to limit my mistakes. Bush could have a learning disablitiy. Many times people with disablities make up for it in another area. I have problems getting what I''m thinking out in a written form, I also have problems taking things in. However, I''m a fantastic public speaker and can pick up patterns very well.

I don''t expect the President of the United States to read these reports. That is what he has a staff for. Now Condelezza Rice, she might have some ''splaining to do. Or do you think she is dumb, too? She did say that she is wear she is today in small part due to affirmative action.

I think the real dummies are the intelligence agencies that couldn''t tell the Niger documents were forgeries when other nigh-morons like the Italian press and the UN could tell almost immediately.

Maybe we should follow the liberal philosophy as to teachers and just pay the analysts more. We may get better analysts, no? They might have even kept me.

Well, turns out he did read it, he just didn''t read the footnotes that would''ve told him what he read might not be true anyway.

Who reads footnotes? If it was significant it should have been in the main text.

Footnotes are for wusses, not for presidents.

(edit)

Footnotes are for wusses and lawyers. If there is a difference.

"Lawyeron" wrote:

If it was significant it should have been in the main text.

Well, technically it would be, since a footnote is usually on the same page as the * or superscript number that calls it out. Who knows, maybe it was actually an endnote.