Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
patb
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]
[/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?[/quote]
I work around a bunch of test pilots, some are incredibly bright, well read,
lots of math background, lots of historical background,,,Some just have a really good spatial awareness, and are otherwise ignorant hicks.
To be a good pilot you have to have a good 3D feel, you need to sense
what the vehicle state vector is and you need to sense what you can do to control it.Look some real gibbering idiots in Pakistan fly F-16’s and we were selling
fighters to some real third world hellholes.Does GWB have the same minimal skill set as some degenerate camel
jockey princeling in Saudi Arabia? Probably.Does that make him on par with US Air Force standards? Nope.
And could he work in a more technically challenging field like
flight test? I doubt it.Look, being a football player requires a broad quick set of reflexes,
some physical toughness and the hand eye coordination to toss and throw.
Does that make these guys bright? Usually not.Sure some are scholar athletes, but most are monkeys in pads.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]
[/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?[/quote]
I work around a bunch of test pilots, some are incredibly bright, well read,
lots of math background, lots of historical background,,,Some just have a really good spatial awareness, and are otherwise ignorant hicks.
To be a good pilot you have to have a good 3D feel, you need to sense
what the vehicle state vector is and you need to sense what you can do to control it.Look some real gibbering idiots in Pakistan fly F-16’s and we were selling
fighters to some real third world hellholes.Does GWB have the same minimal skill set as some degenerate camel
jockey princeling in Saudi Arabia? Probably.Does that make him on par with US Air Force standards? Nope.
And could he work in a more technically challenging field like
flight test? I doubt it.Look, being a football player requires a broad quick set of reflexes,
some physical toughness and the hand eye coordination to toss and throw.
Does that make these guys bright? Usually not.Sure some are scholar athletes, but most are monkeys in pads.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]
[/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?[/quote]
I work around a bunch of test pilots, some are incredibly bright, well read,
lots of math background, lots of historical background,,,Some just have a really good spatial awareness, and are otherwise ignorant hicks.
To be a good pilot you have to have a good 3D feel, you need to sense
what the vehicle state vector is and you need to sense what you can do to control it.Look some real gibbering idiots in Pakistan fly F-16’s and we were selling
fighters to some real third world hellholes.Does GWB have the same minimal skill set as some degenerate camel
jockey princeling in Saudi Arabia? Probably.Does that make him on par with US Air Force standards? Nope.
And could he work in a more technically challenging field like
flight test? I doubt it.Look, being a football player requires a broad quick set of reflexes,
some physical toughness and the hand eye coordination to toss and throw.
Does that make these guys bright? Usually not.Sure some are scholar athletes, but most are monkeys in pads.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]
[/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?[/quote]
I work around a bunch of test pilots, some are incredibly bright, well read,
lots of math background, lots of historical background,,,Some just have a really good spatial awareness, and are otherwise ignorant hicks.
To be a good pilot you have to have a good 3D feel, you need to sense
what the vehicle state vector is and you need to sense what you can do to control it.Look some real gibbering idiots in Pakistan fly F-16’s and we were selling
fighters to some real third world hellholes.Does GWB have the same minimal skill set as some degenerate camel
jockey princeling in Saudi Arabia? Probably.Does that make him on par with US Air Force standards? Nope.
And could he work in a more technically challenging field like
flight test? I doubt it.Look, being a football player requires a broad quick set of reflexes,
some physical toughness and the hand eye coordination to toss and throw.
Does that make these guys bright? Usually not.Sure some are scholar athletes, but most are monkeys in pads.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=surveyor][quote=drboom][quote=surveyor]
[/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?[/quote]
I work around a bunch of test pilots, some are incredibly bright, well read,
lots of math background, lots of historical background,,,Some just have a really good spatial awareness, and are otherwise ignorant hicks.
To be a good pilot you have to have a good 3D feel, you need to sense
what the vehicle state vector is and you need to sense what you can do to control it.Look some real gibbering idiots in Pakistan fly F-16’s and we were selling
fighters to some real third world hellholes.Does GWB have the same minimal skill set as some degenerate camel
jockey princeling in Saudi Arabia? Probably.Does that make him on par with US Air Force standards? Nope.
And could he work in a more technically challenging field like
flight test? I doubt it.Look, being a football player requires a broad quick set of reflexes,
some physical toughness and the hand eye coordination to toss and throw.
Does that make these guys bright? Usually not.Sure some are scholar athletes, but most are monkeys in pads.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=EconProf]
A
If history is going to be kind to Bush, historians first need something to be kind to him for. ,,,,,,.I can’t point to anything similar for Bush other than his finest hour in the immediate aftermath of September 11th when he stood on a pile of rubble in NYC and let it all hang out. That’s better than anything Ford could point to, but I don’t know if it results in enough historical brownie points to rank above, say, Taft. [/quote]
Let’s not Forget, Bush ignored all the CIA warnings about “Bin Laden
Determined to Attack” and how he demoted his Counter-Terrorism
Chief so as to not get direct reports from him.And lets not forget in the Immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush went
and did not fly to DC to take command of the government, no, no, no,
He went and hid in a hole in the ground at SAC for 2 days.For 2 days all we had was Bush in his little chicken Bunker and
Cheney in the Fuhrer Bunker under pennsylvania Avenue.All we had for Leadership was Giuliani.
During the Civil War Lincoln rode up to Silver Spring to inspect the
troops and give morale to the men defending the capitol from Stuart’s
Raiders.During WW2, FDR inspected troops on the line.
Bush. Cowardice.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=EconProf]
A
If history is going to be kind to Bush, historians first need something to be kind to him for. ,,,,,,.I can’t point to anything similar for Bush other than his finest hour in the immediate aftermath of September 11th when he stood on a pile of rubble in NYC and let it all hang out. That’s better than anything Ford could point to, but I don’t know if it results in enough historical brownie points to rank above, say, Taft. [/quote]
Let’s not Forget, Bush ignored all the CIA warnings about “Bin Laden
Determined to Attack” and how he demoted his Counter-Terrorism
Chief so as to not get direct reports from him.And lets not forget in the Immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush went
and did not fly to DC to take command of the government, no, no, no,
He went and hid in a hole in the ground at SAC for 2 days.For 2 days all we had was Bush in his little chicken Bunker and
Cheney in the Fuhrer Bunker under pennsylvania Avenue.All we had for Leadership was Giuliani.
During the Civil War Lincoln rode up to Silver Spring to inspect the
troops and give morale to the men defending the capitol from Stuart’s
Raiders.During WW2, FDR inspected troops on the line.
Bush. Cowardice.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=EconProf]
A
If history is going to be kind to Bush, historians first need something to be kind to him for. ,,,,,,.I can’t point to anything similar for Bush other than his finest hour in the immediate aftermath of September 11th when he stood on a pile of rubble in NYC and let it all hang out. That’s better than anything Ford could point to, but I don’t know if it results in enough historical brownie points to rank above, say, Taft. [/quote]
Let’s not Forget, Bush ignored all the CIA warnings about “Bin Laden
Determined to Attack” and how he demoted his Counter-Terrorism
Chief so as to not get direct reports from him.And lets not forget in the Immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush went
and did not fly to DC to take command of the government, no, no, no,
He went and hid in a hole in the ground at SAC for 2 days.For 2 days all we had was Bush in his little chicken Bunker and
Cheney in the Fuhrer Bunker under pennsylvania Avenue.All we had for Leadership was Giuliani.
During the Civil War Lincoln rode up to Silver Spring to inspect the
troops and give morale to the men defending the capitol from Stuart’s
Raiders.During WW2, FDR inspected troops on the line.
Bush. Cowardice.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=EconProf]
A
If history is going to be kind to Bush, historians first need something to be kind to him for. ,,,,,,.I can’t point to anything similar for Bush other than his finest hour in the immediate aftermath of September 11th when he stood on a pile of rubble in NYC and let it all hang out. That’s better than anything Ford could point to, but I don’t know if it results in enough historical brownie points to rank above, say, Taft. [/quote]
Let’s not Forget, Bush ignored all the CIA warnings about “Bin Laden
Determined to Attack” and how he demoted his Counter-Terrorism
Chief so as to not get direct reports from him.And lets not forget in the Immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush went
and did not fly to DC to take command of the government, no, no, no,
He went and hid in a hole in the ground at SAC for 2 days.For 2 days all we had was Bush in his little chicken Bunker and
Cheney in the Fuhrer Bunker under pennsylvania Avenue.All we had for Leadership was Giuliani.
During the Civil War Lincoln rode up to Silver Spring to inspect the
troops and give morale to the men defending the capitol from Stuart’s
Raiders.During WW2, FDR inspected troops on the line.
Bush. Cowardice.
Participant[quote=drboom][quote=EconProf]
A
If history is going to be kind to Bush, historians first need something to be kind to him for. ,,,,,,.I can’t point to anything similar for Bush other than his finest hour in the immediate aftermath of September 11th when he stood on a pile of rubble in NYC and let it all hang out. That’s better than anything Ford could point to, but I don’t know if it results in enough historical brownie points to rank above, say, Taft. [/quote]
Let’s not Forget, Bush ignored all the CIA warnings about “Bin Laden
Determined to Attack” and how he demoted his Counter-Terrorism
Chief so as to not get direct reports from him.And lets not forget in the Immediate aftermath of 9/11 Bush went
and did not fly to DC to take command of the government, no, no, no,
He went and hid in a hole in the ground at SAC for 2 days.For 2 days all we had was Bush in his little chicken Bunker and
Cheney in the Fuhrer Bunker under pennsylvania Avenue.All we had for Leadership was Giuliani.
During the Civil War Lincoln rode up to Silver Spring to inspect the
troops and give morale to the men defending the capitol from Stuart’s
Raiders.During WW2, FDR inspected troops on the line.
Bush. Cowardice.
Participant[quote=surveyor]intelligensia
. My main criticism of him is his lack of historical knowledge. In Bush’s case, however, there have been many people who have claimed him to be unintelligent, a claim that is factually untrue.
[/quote]
1) GWB was having trouble reading in the 4th Grade.
2) This is a guy who didn’t know the difference between Shia and Sunni.
3) This is a guy who had trouble holding a conversation.
10 years in Betty Ford won’t rehabilitate that loser.
Participant[quote=surveyor]intelligensia
. My main criticism of him is his lack of historical knowledge. In Bush’s case, however, there have been many people who have claimed him to be unintelligent, a claim that is factually untrue.
[/quote]
1) GWB was having trouble reading in the 4th Grade.
2) This is a guy who didn’t know the difference between Shia and Sunni.
3) This is a guy who had trouble holding a conversation.
10 years in Betty Ford won’t rehabilitate that loser.
Participant[quote=surveyor]intelligensia
. My main criticism of him is his lack of historical knowledge. In Bush’s case, however, there have been many people who have claimed him to be unintelligent, a claim that is factually untrue.
[/quote]
1) GWB was having trouble reading in the 4th Grade.
2) This is a guy who didn’t know the difference between Shia and Sunni.
3) This is a guy who had trouble holding a conversation.
10 years in Betty Ford won’t rehabilitate that loser.
Participant[quote=surveyor]intelligensia
. My main criticism of him is his lack of historical knowledge. In Bush’s case, however, there have been many people who have claimed him to be unintelligent, a claim that is factually untrue.
[/quote]
1) GWB was having trouble reading in the 4th Grade.
2) This is a guy who didn’t know the difference between Shia and Sunni.
3) This is a guy who had trouble holding a conversation.
10 years in Betty Ford won’t rehabilitate that loser.
-
AuthorPosts
