- This topic has 340 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 4 months ago by
Arraya.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 21, 2009 at 7:07 AM #418918June 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM #418219
drboom
Participant[quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]My proof lies in that his aility to fly a plane, pass the test and meet qualifications is proof of his intelligence. Those facts expose the lie that he is unintelligent.
[/quote]Randy Cunningham was a hell of a fighter pilot. He is one of only two American pilot aces in the Vietnam War.
He also did some things a little later that fairly reek of arrogant stupidity.
Now what’s your point again?[/quote]
There’s a difference between intelligence and making mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, intelligent or otherwise. That doesn’t make them unintelligent. It just makes them human.
[/quote]The nature and magnitude of Duke’s “mistakes” argue against being smart. If he was so bright he would have been a smidge less obvious, and I don’t think you can call a sustained pattern of corruption a “mistake”.
Anyway, House staffers voted Cunningham the prestigious “No Rocket Scientist” award in 2004, a year before the corruption story broke. Otnay ootay ightbray, according to those who worked with him. Yet he was a hot fighter pilot.
Next genius theory, please?
June 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM #418449Participant[quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]My proof lies in that his aility to fly a plane, pass the test and meet qualifications is proof of his intelligence. Those facts expose the lie that he is unintelligent.
[/quote]Randy Cunningham was a hell of a fighter pilot. He is one of only two American pilot aces in the Vietnam War.
He also did some things a little later that fairly reek of arrogant stupidity.
Now what’s your point again?[/quote]
There’s a difference between intelligence and making mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, intelligent or otherwise. That doesn’t make them unintelligent. It just makes them human.
[/quote]The nature and magnitude of Duke’s “mistakes” argue against being smart. If he was so bright he would have been a smidge less obvious, and I don’t think you can call a sustained pattern of corruption a “mistake”.
Anyway, House staffers voted Cunningham the prestigious “No Rocket Scientist” award in 2004, a year before the corruption story broke. Otnay ootay ightbray, according to those who worked with him. Yet he was a hot fighter pilot.
Next genius theory, please?
June 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM #418712Participant[quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]My proof lies in that his aility to fly a plane, pass the test and meet qualifications is proof of his intelligence. Those facts expose the lie that he is unintelligent.
[/quote]Randy Cunningham was a hell of a fighter pilot. He is one of only two American pilot aces in the Vietnam War.
He also did some things a little later that fairly reek of arrogant stupidity.
Now what’s your point again?[/quote]
There’s a difference between intelligence and making mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, intelligent or otherwise. That doesn’t make them unintelligent. It just makes them human.
[/quote]The nature and magnitude of Duke’s “mistakes” argue against being smart. If he was so bright he would have been a smidge less obvious, and I don’t think you can call a sustained pattern of corruption a “mistake”.
Anyway, House staffers voted Cunningham the prestigious “No Rocket Scientist” award in 2004, a year before the corruption story broke. Otnay ootay ightbray, according to those who worked with him. Yet he was a hot fighter pilot.
Next genius theory, please?
June 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM #418780Participant[quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]My proof lies in that his aility to fly a plane, pass the test and meet qualifications is proof of his intelligence. Those facts expose the lie that he is unintelligent.
[/quote]Randy Cunningham was a hell of a fighter pilot. He is one of only two American pilot aces in the Vietnam War.
He also did some things a little later that fairly reek of arrogant stupidity.
Now what’s your point again?[/quote]
There’s a difference between intelligence and making mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, intelligent or otherwise. That doesn’t make them unintelligent. It just makes them human.
[/quote]The nature and magnitude of Duke’s “mistakes” argue against being smart. If he was so bright he would have been a smidge less obvious, and I don’t think you can call a sustained pattern of corruption a “mistake”.
Anyway, House staffers voted Cunningham the prestigious “No Rocket Scientist” award in 2004, a year before the corruption story broke. Otnay ootay ightbray, according to those who worked with him. Yet he was a hot fighter pilot.
Next genius theory, please?
June 21, 2009 at 8:47 AM #418938Participant[quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]My proof lies in that his aility to fly a plane, pass the test and meet qualifications is proof of his intelligence. Those facts expose the lie that he is unintelligent.
[/quote]Randy Cunningham was a hell of a fighter pilot. He is one of only two American pilot aces in the Vietnam War.
He also did some things a little later that fairly reek of arrogant stupidity.
Now what’s your point again?[/quote]
There’s a difference between intelligence and making mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, intelligent or otherwise. That doesn’t make them unintelligent. It just makes them human.
[/quote]The nature and magnitude of Duke’s “mistakes” argue against being smart. If he was so bright he would have been a smidge less obvious, and I don’t think you can call a sustained pattern of corruption a “mistake”.
Anyway, House staffers voted Cunningham the prestigious “No Rocket Scientist” award in 2004, a year before the corruption story broke. Otnay ootay ightbray, according to those who worked with him. Yet he was a hot fighter pilot.
Next genius theory, please?
June 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM #418229Participant[quote=EconProf]Actually ANY existing president in the aftermath of 9/11 would have reaped the accolades of a suddenly unified nation. I wouldn’t call that his finest hour.[/quote]
Lots of presidents have addressed the nation during a crisis, but few have done better.
[quote]I would instead nominate his courage in opting for the surge in Iraq, against most all pundits’ advice, the political and popular sentiment, and even some CYA military figures. (Oh, and one particular Illinois senator on the make). It worked beyond anyone’s expectations, and is now about to be copied in Afghanistan.[/quote]
The jury is still out on that one. No one can reasonably argue whether a country can be pacified if enough firepower is brought to bear. The real test will come after we pull out. If the PNAC dream of a functioning Iraqi democracy emerges, then you have success. If the place falls apart, it’s an epic fail.
[quote]Another less-recognized accomplishment will be the revenue increases throughout most of his eight years in office flowing from a growth oriented economy. We sure miss that now.
[/quote]You can’t be serious. That “growth” has been revealed to be an even bigger mirage than Clinton’s bogus budget “surplus” (only a surplus if you counted Social Security contributions toward the general fund). I don’t want to engage in an ad hominem attack, but are you really a professor of economics?
June 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM #418459Participant[quote=EconProf]Actually ANY existing president in the aftermath of 9/11 would have reaped the accolades of a suddenly unified nation. I wouldn’t call that his finest hour.[/quote]
Lots of presidents have addressed the nation during a crisis, but few have done better.
[quote]I would instead nominate his courage in opting for the surge in Iraq, against most all pundits’ advice, the political and popular sentiment, and even some CYA military figures. (Oh, and one particular Illinois senator on the make). It worked beyond anyone’s expectations, and is now about to be copied in Afghanistan.[/quote]
The jury is still out on that one. No one can reasonably argue whether a country can be pacified if enough firepower is brought to bear. The real test will come after we pull out. If the PNAC dream of a functioning Iraqi democracy emerges, then you have success. If the place falls apart, it’s an epic fail.
[quote]Another less-recognized accomplishment will be the revenue increases throughout most of his eight years in office flowing from a growth oriented economy. We sure miss that now.
[/quote]You can’t be serious. That “growth” has been revealed to be an even bigger mirage than Clinton’s bogus budget “surplus” (only a surplus if you counted Social Security contributions toward the general fund). I don’t want to engage in an ad hominem attack, but are you really a professor of economics?
June 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM #418722Participant[quote=EconProf]Actually ANY existing president in the aftermath of 9/11 would have reaped the accolades of a suddenly unified nation. I wouldn’t call that his finest hour.[/quote]
Lots of presidents have addressed the nation during a crisis, but few have done better.
[quote]I would instead nominate his courage in opting for the surge in Iraq, against most all pundits’ advice, the political and popular sentiment, and even some CYA military figures. (Oh, and one particular Illinois senator on the make). It worked beyond anyone’s expectations, and is now about to be copied in Afghanistan.[/quote]
The jury is still out on that one. No one can reasonably argue whether a country can be pacified if enough firepower is brought to bear. The real test will come after we pull out. If the PNAC dream of a functioning Iraqi democracy emerges, then you have success. If the place falls apart, it’s an epic fail.
[quote]Another less-recognized accomplishment will be the revenue increases throughout most of his eight years in office flowing from a growth oriented economy. We sure miss that now.
[/quote]You can’t be serious. That “growth” has been revealed to be an even bigger mirage than Clinton’s bogus budget “surplus” (only a surplus if you counted Social Security contributions toward the general fund). I don’t want to engage in an ad hominem attack, but are you really a professor of economics?
June 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM #418790Participant[quote=EconProf]Actually ANY existing president in the aftermath of 9/11 would have reaped the accolades of a suddenly unified nation. I wouldn’t call that his finest hour.[/quote]
Lots of presidents have addressed the nation during a crisis, but few have done better.
[quote]I would instead nominate his courage in opting for the surge in Iraq, against most all pundits’ advice, the political and popular sentiment, and even some CYA military figures. (Oh, and one particular Illinois senator on the make). It worked beyond anyone’s expectations, and is now about to be copied in Afghanistan.[/quote]
The jury is still out on that one. No one can reasonably argue whether a country can be pacified if enough firepower is brought to bear. The real test will come after we pull out. If the PNAC dream of a functioning Iraqi democracy emerges, then you have success. If the place falls apart, it’s an epic fail.
[quote]Another less-recognized accomplishment will be the revenue increases throughout most of his eight years in office flowing from a growth oriented economy. We sure miss that now.
[/quote]You can’t be serious. That “growth” has been revealed to be an even bigger mirage than Clinton’s bogus budget “surplus” (only a surplus if you counted Social Security contributions toward the general fund). I don’t want to engage in an ad hominem attack, but are you really a professor of economics?
June 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM #418948Participant[quote=EconProf]Actually ANY existing president in the aftermath of 9/11 would have reaped the accolades of a suddenly unified nation. I wouldn’t call that his finest hour.[/quote]
Lots of presidents have addressed the nation during a crisis, but few have done better.
[quote]I would instead nominate his courage in opting for the surge in Iraq, against most all pundits’ advice, the political and popular sentiment, and even some CYA military figures. (Oh, and one particular Illinois senator on the make). It worked beyond anyone’s expectations, and is now about to be copied in Afghanistan.[/quote]
The jury is still out on that one. No one can reasonably argue whether a country can be pacified if enough firepower is brought to bear. The real test will come after we pull out. If the PNAC dream of a functioning Iraqi democracy emerges, then you have success. If the place falls apart, it’s an epic fail.
[quote]Another less-recognized accomplishment will be the revenue increases throughout most of his eight years in office flowing from a growth oriented economy. We sure miss that now.
[/quote]You can’t be serious. That “growth” has been revealed to be an even bigger mirage than Clinton’s bogus budget “surplus” (only a surplus if you counted Social Security contributions toward the general fund). I don’t want to engage in an ad hominem attack, but are you really a professor of economics?
June 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM #418244condogrrl
ParticipantYesterday I finally got around to watching “The Obama Deception” that I think I learned about from Pigginton’s. Yes, it could be just a bunch of film pieces spliced together to present a conspiracy theory. But there was enough truth to it for me to believe the overall theme of the movie: there is a power group operating behind the scenes engineering the whole thing. I recommend you watch this, if you haven’t already.
June 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM #418474ParticipantYesterday I finally got around to watching “The Obama Deception” that I think I learned about from Pigginton’s. Yes, it could be just a bunch of film pieces spliced together to present a conspiracy theory. But there was enough truth to it for me to believe the overall theme of the movie: there is a power group operating behind the scenes engineering the whole thing. I recommend you watch this, if you haven’t already.
June 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM #418737ParticipantYesterday I finally got around to watching “The Obama Deception” that I think I learned about from Pigginton’s. Yes, it could be just a bunch of film pieces spliced together to present a conspiracy theory. But there was enough truth to it for me to believe the overall theme of the movie: there is a power group operating behind the scenes engineering the whole thing. I recommend you watch this, if you haven’t already.
June 21, 2009 at 9:35 AM #418805ParticipantYesterday I finally got around to watching “The Obama Deception” that I think I learned about from Pigginton’s. Yes, it could be just a bunch of film pieces spliced together to present a conspiracy theory. But there was enough truth to it for me to believe the overall theme of the movie: there is a power group operating behind the scenes engineering the whole thing. I recommend you watch this, if you haven’t already.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.