Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I won't embarrass you any further and show you're wrong.> I'd love you to actually show you're right about something, rather than just make personal attacks or post obvious hyperbole.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Yes, the information is out there... <a href="http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student/" target="_blank">http://www.boston.com/news/nat ion/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student/</a> According to that link, Douglas, Kerry and Bush were more or less equal in the overall grades they recieved at Yale. So, your earlier belief in post #21 that Bush's GPA and SAT scores were superior to his rivals has now been debunked.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Not only a better SAT score, but better GPA also, based on what's in that link. Now that's an incomplete transcript to be sure, but you seemed awfully sure of yourself to say that neither Gore nor Kerry did better than Bush on GPA. Can you show that?>> <The information is out there. You can look it up.> First, it was your claim that Bush did better than both Gore and Kerry on both SAT and GPA. We already know you have posted an untruth, as we've seen Gore and Bush's SAT scores. And if you make that claim, it's up to YOU to be able to present the information if challenged. You have not done so. Next, 2oony's link shows that Kerry and Bush were roughly equal in GPA, which I remember reading earlier. I tried to find Gore's GPA, but couldn't; I recall it being better than Bush's, but of course I didn't make any claim about it being higher. You did make a claim. Up to you to back it up, or stand revealed as someone who posted an untruth and hoped he wouldn't be caught (and already has been, partly).
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <According to that link, Douglas, Kerry and Bush were more or less equal in the overall grades they recieved at Yale. So, your earlier belief in post #21 that Bush's GPA and SAT scores were superior to his rivals has now been debunked.> Well, no. The article says Sen. Kerry's gpa was lower than the President's, just as I said. Thanks for backing me up.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Yes, a massive, massive difference.> Did I say there was? But evidently, if the President is a moron because he got a C in Economics, the Senator is a moron also.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan No one in this thread has called anyone a moron. But the point was (oh so far back) he recalled having a B in economics, when in fact he got a C-. Recollections are sometimes fuzzy. You thought he had better SAT and GPA than his rivals, and turns out that wasn't exactly correct. You were the one who brought Kerry and Gore into the discussion. Which is a standard tactic -- when your guy doesn't look so hot, pull up a Clinton or Gore or Kerry comparison to distract.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <No one in this thread has called anyone a moron.> That's true, no one on this thread called the President a moron. They just implied he was, and stated it on other threads. <Which is a standard tactic -- when your guy doesn't look so hot, pull up a Clinton or Gore or Kerry comparison to distract.> Yes, how horrible of me to compare him to his peers, rather than join in the bashing.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I didn't say it was horrible of you. Just noting a continuing tactic.
Originally Posted By jonvn Actually, "moron" has a very definite meaning. It means having an IQ of 50-69. An imbecile is having an IQ of 20-49. And if your IQ is below 20, you are classified as an idiot. They don't use these terms anymore. And I apologize to people with IQs in the range of 50-69 for including the President in with you.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Pulling the standard "compare him to others" tactic might be questionable, if not horrible; what is not cool is posting an untruth and claiming it to be true.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Actually, "moron" has a very definite meaning. It means having an IQ of 50-69.> That's why Mr. B. Bunny and most great thinkers like him prefer the term "maroon." It isn't tied to the specific IQ range, but can be thought of to mean "one who acts like he falls within that range, or gives the impression that he might." Perhaps that would be the better term to use.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy I wonder what the President's report card would show for all the other aspects of his life? I mean, aside from his grades in history, has this man been successful in anything that didn't involve him getting massive assistance from Daddy's rolodex? From what I can tell, he pretty much gets a failing grade in life in general.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Bush sucks - officially a Bush sucks thread if it wasn't already I keep saying we need that separate category.
Originally Posted By DAR <<Recollections are sometimes fuzzy. >> Again you're describing some of my college years.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Post 54, welcome to LP President Clinton. >> You know, President Clinton didn't have Daddy's rolodex to lean on at any time in his life.
Originally Posted By DAR Well I'm just saying you've obviously accomplished so much in your life. I'm assuming you were former President Clinton, but I stand corrected, you're former President Carter.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << you're former President Carter >> Another person who didn't get to the White House just because he had a "brand name" and long list of Daddy's friends who wanted to give him campaign money.
