Text 17937, 167 rader
Skriven 2006-02-21 07:23:28 av JOHNJWILSON (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av STAN HARDEGREE
Ärende: Modesty deprivation?
============================
 
-> (Now, Slick is supposedly a Rhodes scholar

(Supposedly?)


, although he bailed out of the
-> program when he was sure he was in no danger of having to serve in the
-> military...

You are certain of his motivation? Five deferment Chaney had
"other priorities" -- do you not fault him for this?


, but this clown is about as intellectually unimpressive and
-> inarticulate as a run of the mill, trailer park redneck.

Interesting judgment. Not universally shared by leading lights
in this world as well as Bush the elser :-)

He won his Rhodes Scholarship in a lottery? :-)

Tjere are times when I too, wished I had residence on My. Olympus









  But you like that
-> manly jaw, don't you, Ski?)
-> 
-> ..  On whether successful presidents share common traits:
-> 
-> "Leadership styles are diverse. Not all of them are charismatic, but all
of
-> [the presidents] who succeeded were seen as strong and had a certain
kind of
-> compass."
-> 
-> (Leadership styles are diverse?  No shit?  Learn something new every
day.
-> Wonder what kind of compass they had?  Slick tells us it was a certain
kind.
-> Is Slick talking about a moral compass?  Do moral compasses point toward
-> interns?  Do they mandate the persecution of  Billy Dale - the
immolation of
-> women and kids at Waco?)
-> 
-> ..  On whether he believes that in office, he most resembled any
individual
-> predecessor:
-> 
-> "No. [I think] there were some similarities in decision-making to the
way
-> [John F.] Kennedy did it, but he didn't live long enough for us to know
-> that. I really liked Teddy Roosevelt because he experimented and did
things,
-> and
-> 
-> (So Slick's decision making style resembled that of a former president
who
-> didn't live long enough to determine what his decision making style was?
-> Slick didn't really think this one through, did he, Bob?)
-> 
-> because he supported free markets but restraints on them. I identified
with
-> him, but he was more bellicose and imperialistic than I am.
-> 
-> (I wonder what the Bosnians, Haitians, Kosovars, Somalians,
Afghanistanis,
-> Iraqis and Branch Davidians think about this claim?  Slick attacked or
-> occupied them all at one time or another.)
-> 
-> ..  On whether it is dangerous for a president to draw too many
analogies
-> from history:
-> 
-> "Absolutely. It is important to understand history, and I think you can
-> learn a lot of personal lessons from [past presidents]. I read a lot
about
-> Nixon, [Lyndon B.] Johnson and Kennedy before I was president. [I
learned]
-> it is very important when you put the White House staff together and the
-> Cabinet that you find people who know things you don't know and then
feel
-> perfectly comfortable telling you when they think you're wrong.
-> 
-> (Or perfectly comfortable trotting out onto the White House lawn to
plead
-> with the world that their boss is not a lying scumbag.  Whoops.)
-> 
-> "You can also learn a lot about having to make decisions and what kind
of
-> alone time you need by studying the presidents whose agenda was not so
-> crowded. I've spent a lot of time trying to study how these people
allocated
-> their time and how they organized their business.
-> 
-> (Wonder how much time Teddy Roosevelt set aside each day for fucking the
-> hired help?)
-> 
-> "I also think it's important not to be imprisoned by [history]. [Take
Iraq]:
-> The people who thought it was a walk in the park were naive and didn't
know
-> anything about Iraq. But the people who thought it was Vietnam were also
-> wrong. It is something else entirely."
-> 
-> (Uh oh, Airman!  You told us that Vietnam IS Iraq.  The Clinton doesn't
-> agree, Ski.  How do you resolve the fact that He disagrees with you,
bearing
-> in mind that The Clinton didn't say shit beyond "it is something else
-> entirely.")
-> 
-> ..  On the way historians rank presidents:
-> 
-> "I really think the circumstances determine where you are ranked -
whether
-> you have big wars, like the Civil
-> 
-> (Circumstances do that??  No kidding?  Man, this guy could teach this
stuff
-> in college!)
-> 
-> War or World War II. But there are three or four tests you can apply to
any
-> president, which are much fairer than ranking them where the deal is
rigged
-> based on the time in which they served.
-> 
-> (The deal is rigged.  This worthless son of a bitch is still pissed that
911
-> didn't happen on his watch.)
-> 
-> "First, did they understand their times and articulate a vision of a
more
-> perfect union? Did they refrain from abusing their power? Then you have
to
-> say, Did they execute [their agenda], and were people better off when
they
-> stopped than when they started?
-> 
-> (Have we ever recovered the 90 some-odd FBI files that this scumbag and
his
-> fishwife pilfered from the FBI while they were not abusing their power?
-> "Were people better off when they stopped than when they started?" 
Deep.
-> Introspective.  Articulate.  And I can think of quite of few in Waco,
Texas
-> who were most certainly NOT better off by the time The Clinton
"stopped.")
-> 
-> "Those tests are fair to apply to every president."
-> 
-> (Here's the test we apply:  Was he impeached?  Was he disbarred?  Did
his
-> legacy carry on to the next generation with the election of his vice
-> president?  In Slick's case, yes, yes and no.  Well done, Willy!)
-> 
-> --- Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
->  * Origin:  (1:123/789.0)
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)