Who's not a moron?
-
Well said. That is the mark of a good leader in any country. "I will find a new sig someday."
Michael A. Barnhart wrote: Well said. Thanks Michael. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: the only reason that Bush is called a moron is because so many people around the world want to be ruled by a benevolent dictator say what? http://www.columbiacentral.com/dubya/[^] "The reason we start a war is to fight a war, win a war, thereby causing no more war" - GWB -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
The inability to speak in public does not make you moron. Heck, the man may be brilliant when you sit and talk with him.
Jason Henderson
start page ; articles henderson is coming henderson is an opponent's worst nightmare * googlism * -
OK, since Bush has been labeled a "moron", I was curious to know if there are any great leaders in the world today? It's easy to poke, and its funny and all, but I'd seriously like to know who is a great political leader right now. Cretien? Blair? Schroeder? Hussein? Putin? Mbeki? Jiang? Howard? BW "I'm coming with you! I got you fired, it's the least I can do. Well, the least I could do is absolutely nothing, but I'll go you one better and come along!" - Homer J. Simpson
You're always a moron for somebody else :)
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
hmmmmm I'm not sure. Maybe there should be 2 arrows, one for each Michel It is a lovely language, but it takes a very long time to say anything in it, because we do not say anything in it, unless it is worth taking a very long time to say, and to listen to.
- TreeBeardMichel Prévost wrote: Maybe there should be 2 arrows, one for each It would have been the funniest :-D
Ohé Partisans, Ouvriers et Paysans C'est l'alarme! Le Chant des Partisans
-
The inability to speak in public does not make you moron. Heck, the man may be brilliant when you sit and talk with him.
Jason Henderson
start page ; articles henderson is coming henderson is an opponent's worst nightmare * googlism *Jason Henderson wrote: The inability to speak in public does not make you moron. true. but it certainly doesn't make you look like a brilliant intellect, either. my posting of that link was in reply to Stan's assertion that the world thinks GWB's a moron because "so many people around the world want to be ruled by a benevolent dictator". i merely presented what i feel is a much more compelling reason to think he's a moron a few quarts low. -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
-
Sounds like a smart fellow. And knighted, I see. With the exeption of a much debated Bush, no one named a single leader who is currently in office. pretty scary stuff. BW "I'm coming with you! I got you fired, it's the least I can do. Well, the least I could do is absolutely nothing, but I'll go you one better and come along!" - Homer J. Simpson
brianwelsch wrote: With the exeption of a much debated Bush, no one named a single leader who is currently in office. pretty scary stuff Whilst I never like Muldoon, ( He looked like a goblin ) I really only realized how smart he was after he was replaced and the following collection of politicians displayed symptoms of being wombats suffering from dehydration. Possibly only on reflection will we see how a leader was truly smart. Tricky Dick Nixon from all accounts was very smart when not suffering from delusions. To have the charisma to become a leader and to be smart as well seems to be really rare. Possibly in the past when the media was more "pliable" some leaders faults were easily covered. Nowdays we can put leaders under a lot of scrutiny. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote: you have not held others to the same standard you hold Bush where did i do that? -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
Chris Losinger wrote: where did i do that? OK, fair enough. Poor choice of words on my part. IMO you hold GW Bush to an impossibly high standard and I don't remember you holding any other world leader (especially liberal ones) to the same standard. Mike Mullikin :beer:
Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. - David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
-
Chris Losinger wrote: where did i do that? OK, fair enough. Poor choice of words on my part. IMO you hold GW Bush to an impossibly high standard and I don't remember you holding any other world leader (especially liberal ones) to the same standard. Mike Mullikin :beer:
Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation. - David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Mike Mullikin wrote: IMO you hold GW Bush to an impossibly high standard the highest possible. he is in charge of the world's strongest military, the world's strongest economy and the country where i live. Mike Mullikin wrote: I don't remember you holding any other world leader (especially liberal ones) to the same standard as soon as i get the chance, i will. :beer: -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
-
Stan Shannon wrote: but not when it is abused to secure a leftest social agenda? err.. WTF are you talking about? the 4th amendment is now a "leftist social agenda" ? Stan Shannon wrote: If we are not willing to see your government militarily eliminate the terrorist threat of the middle east i'll say it again: israel, russia, UK. have their militaries stopped the "terrorist threat"? they've been at it a lot longer than the US has. -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
Chris Losinger wrote: err.. WTF are you talking about? the 4th amendment is now a "leftist social agenda" ? No, but the 14th certainly has become that. I am as concerned about the Bush administration's behavior as anyone, but criticism from the left on that score is absurd. Any group that could swallow the constitutional travesty of Roe V Wade shouldn't choke on a small bit of the 4th amendment. Chris Losinger wrote: i'll say it again: israel, russia, UK. have their militaries stopped the "terrorist threat"? they've been at it a lot longer than the US has. Well, fine. So, I will ask again, what are we supposed to do if we cannot defeat them and our legal system prevents us from taking actions domestically? Join them? Give up? Hire Islamic consultants to overhaul our civilization? What? Besides, I have never believed that anyone can defeat terrorism as long as it is treated as terrorism. If, instead, you confront those governments and societies which are ultimately responsible for terrors organizational structure and destroy them, the organized terror will be destroyed along with them. Will that end terrorism? No, but it will end armies of organized terrorist roaming the globe at will. If you are not willing to do that, than you had better quit worrying about the 4th amendment. It's a moot point. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Chris Losinger wrote: err.. WTF are you talking about? the 4th amendment is now a "leftist social agenda" ? No, but the 14th certainly has become that. I am as concerned about the Bush administration's behavior as anyone, but criticism from the left on that score is absurd. Any group that could swallow the constitutional travesty of Roe V Wade shouldn't choke on a small bit of the 4th amendment. Chris Losinger wrote: i'll say it again: israel, russia, UK. have their militaries stopped the "terrorist threat"? they've been at it a lot longer than the US has. Well, fine. So, I will ask again, what are we supposed to do if we cannot defeat them and our legal system prevents us from taking actions domestically? Join them? Give up? Hire Islamic consultants to overhaul our civilization? What? Besides, I have never believed that anyone can defeat terrorism as long as it is treated as terrorism. If, instead, you confront those governments and societies which are ultimately responsible for terrors organizational structure and destroy them, the organized terror will be destroyed along with them. Will that end terrorism? No, but it will end armies of organized terrorist roaming the globe at will. If you are not willing to do that, than you had better quit worrying about the 4th amendment. It's a moot point. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: criticism from the left on that score is absurd. Any group that could swallow the constitutional travesty of Roe V Wade shouldn't choke on a small bit of the 4th amendment it's all partisan with you, isn't it? as long as there's a "left" to blame for something, the rest of us can just suck it up and enjoy our police state. Stan Shannon wrote: what are we supposed to do if we cannot defeat them and our legal system prevents us from taking actions domestically? well, we could go after the places we know support terrorism, instead of dicking around with unnecessary invasions of countries that we know aren't supporting terrorism. GWB's been screwing around for over a year and Saudi Arabia is still happily send money to OBL's gang. GWB's priorities are misplaced. -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
-
Stan Shannon wrote: criticism from the left on that score is absurd. Any group that could swallow the constitutional travesty of Roe V Wade shouldn't choke on a small bit of the 4th amendment it's all partisan with you, isn't it? as long as there's a "left" to blame for something, the rest of us can just suck it up and enjoy our police state. Stan Shannon wrote: what are we supposed to do if we cannot defeat them and our legal system prevents us from taking actions domestically? well, we could go after the places we know support terrorism, instead of dicking around with unnecessary invasions of countries that we know aren't supporting terrorism. GWB's been screwing around for over a year and Saudi Arabia is still happily send money to OBL's gang. GWB's priorities are misplaced. -c
There's one easy way to prove the effectiveness of 'letting the market decide' when it comes to environmental protection. It's spelt 'S-U-V'. --Holgate, from Plastic
Chris Losinger wrote: well, we could go after the places we know support terrorism, instead of dicking around with unnecessary invasions of countries that we know aren't supporting terrorism. GWB's been screwing around for over a year and Saudi Arabia is still happily send money to OBL's gang. GWB's priorities are misplaced. On that we agree completely. Although I would be amazed if Hussein were not up to his elbows in the support of terrorism, the Saudi's are clearly the cornerstone of support for Islamic terrorism. The faster we go for the juggler the sooner this crap will be over. Still, I find it hard to blame Bush on this score. If he were to even hint that Saudi Arabia was in our sights it would send our allies packing and the international economy into a tail spin. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle