Moderator: Andrew
Rick wrote:MMMS wrote:Uhhh...
For the record, Liam is a Republican....
Rick wrote:New Bumper Stickers for 2007
Bush: End of an Error
That's OK, I Wasn't Using My Civil Liberties Anyway
Let's Fix Democracy In This Country First
If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to Iran
Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.
If You Can Read This, You're Not Our President
Of Course It Hurts: You're Getting Screwed by an Elephant!
Hey, Bush Supporters: Embarrassed Yet?
George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our Kids Will Have to Fight
Impeachment: It's Not Just for Blow Jobs Anymore
America: One Nation, Under Surveillance
They call Him "W" So He Can Spell It
Whose God Do You Kill For?
Jail To The Chief
No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade Iraq?
Bush: God's Way Of Proving Intelligent Design Is Full Of Crap
Bad President! No Banana.
We Need a President Who's Fluent In At Least One Language
We're Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them
Is It Vietnam Yet?
Bush Doesn't Care About White People, Either
Where Are We Going? And Why Are We In This Handbasket?
You Elected Him. You Deserve Him.
Dub'ya, Your Dad Should'a Pulled Out, Too!
When Bush Took Office, Gas Was $1.46
Pray For Impeachment
The Republican Party: Our Bridge To The 11th Century
What Part of "Bush Lied" Don't You Understand?
One Nation Under Clod
2004: Embarrassed. 2005: Horrified. 2006: Terrified.
Bush Never Exhaled
At Least Nixon Resigned
I like bush, but I prefer shaved
Debunked: "Lovenstein Institute" report that George W. Bush "has lowest IQ of all presidents of past 50 years"
Additional investigation revealed that the presidential IQ report ("Report: President Bush has lowest IQ of all presidents of past 50 years") attributed to the (fictitious) Lovenstein Institute is a hoax, debunked July 18, 2001 by snopes.com, an urban legends website (click here to read the snopes.com exposé; click here to read the original report, published in the fictitious "Pennsylvania Court Observer." In a Lexis-Nexis search, I found the hoax reported as factual information in at least four foreign newspapers: Guardian ("Diary" by Matthew Norman, July 19, 2001), The Express ("By George he's the dimmest," July 20, 2001, p. 8, no byline), the Scottish Daily Record ("Dumbya's dumb day" by Alexandra Williams, July 20, 2001, p. 2), and Bilt Zeitung ("Bush dümmster Präsident seit 1945 -- IQ nur 91," Aug. 1, 2001, no byline).
Aside from the factual errors noted in snopes.com's debunking, the story is transparently bogus, given that JFK (IQ reportedly 174) actually tested at 119 (though admittedly on the relatively crude Otis test) and Nixon (IQ reportedly 155), actually tested nearly a full standard deviation lower, at 143, according to the historical record. Given his academic record, Bill Clinton (IQ reportedly 182) probably has an IQ quite similar to that of Al Gore (who tested at 134, according to the public record).
In short, our presidents aren't nearly as smart as the bogus Lovenstein report would have us believe. [Intellectuals tend to be mediocre politicians who have great difficulty faking connectedness voters.] Given that intelligence tests are standardized with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, the average Democratic president, with a "Lovenstein IQ" of 156 (i.e., +3.7 SD) would be in the top one-hundredth of one percent under the bell curve -- that is, the top 10,000th relative to the general population in intellectual ability). Moreover, it is unlikely that there would be a gap of nearly three standard deviations between the IQs of Democratic ("Lovenstein IQ" = 156) and Republican ("Lovenstein IQ" = 115.5) presidents.
conversationpc wrote:Funny jokes but the jokes on his intelligence are based on the faulty Lovenstein Institute report...Debunked: "Lovenstein Institute" report that George W. Bush "has lowest IQ of all presidents of past 50 years"
Additional investigation revealed that the presidential IQ report ("Report: President Bush has lowest IQ of all presidents of past 50 years") attributed to the (fictitious) Lovenstein Institute is a hoax, debunked July 18, 2001 by snopes.com, an urban legends website (click here to read the snopes.com exposé; click here to read the original report, published in the fictitious "Pennsylvania Court Observer." In a Lexis-Nexis search, I found the hoax reported as factual information in at least four foreign newspapers: Guardian ("Diary" by Matthew Norman, July 19, 2001), The Express ("By George he's the dimmest," July 20, 2001, p. 8, no byline), the Scottish Daily Record ("Dumbya's dumb day" by Alexandra Williams, July 20, 2001, p. 2), and Bilt Zeitung ("Bush dümmster Präsident seit 1945 -- IQ nur 91," Aug. 1, 2001, no byline).
Aside from the factual errors noted in snopes.com's debunking, the story is transparently bogus, given that JFK (IQ reportedly 174) actually tested at 119 (though admittedly on the relatively crude Otis test) and Nixon (IQ reportedly 155), actually tested nearly a full standard deviation lower, at 143, according to the historical record. Given his academic record, Bill Clinton (IQ reportedly 182) probably has an IQ quite similar to that of Al Gore (who tested at 134, according to the public record).
In short, our presidents aren't nearly as smart as the bogus Lovenstein report would have us believe. [Intellectuals tend to be mediocre politicians who have great difficulty faking connectedness voters.] Given that intelligence tests are standardized with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15, the average Democratic president, with a "Lovenstein IQ" of 156 (i.e., +3.7 SD) would be in the top one-hundredth of one percent under the bell curve -- that is, the top 10,000th relative to the general population in intellectual ability). Moreover, it is unlikely that there would be a gap of nearly three standard deviations between the IQs of Democratic ("Lovenstein IQ" = 156) and Republican ("Lovenstein IQ" = 115.5) presidents.
mikemarrs wrote:its kind of scary at this minute not knowing what in the hell is going to happen next.hell if you read news from other places in the world they consider bush a terrorist like we consider bin laden one.thats pretty damn bad.he has pissed a lot of people off and in january of '09 someone is going to have to come behind him and clean all his messes up and thats IF he hasn't declared martial law or has some trick up his sleeve.
mikemarrs wrote:its kind of scary at this minute not knowing what in the hell is going to happen next.hell if you read news from other places in the world they consider bush a terrorist like we consider bin laden one.thats pretty damn bad.he has pissed a lot of people off and in january of '09 someone is going to have to come behind him and clean all his messes up and thats IF he hasn't declared martial law or has some trick up his sleeve.
conversationpc wrote:mikemarrs wrote:its kind of scary at this minute not knowing what in the hell is going to happen next.hell if you read news from other places in the world they consider bush a terrorist like we consider bin laden one.thats pretty damn bad.he has pissed a lot of people off and in january of '09 someone is going to have to come behind him and clean all his messes up and thats IF he hasn't declared martial law or has some trick up his sleeve.
I'm not saying Bush is a great President, because he's not, but he's cleaning up Clinton's mess due to his lack of interest in terrorism.
Rick wrote:conversationpc wrote:mikemarrs wrote:its kind of scary at this minute not knowing what in the hell is going to happen next.hell if you read news from other places in the world they consider bush a terrorist like we consider bin laden one.thats pretty damn bad.he has pissed a lot of people off and in january of '09 someone is going to have to come behind him and clean all his messes up and thats IF he hasn't declared martial law or has some trick up his sleeve.
I'm not saying Bush is a great President, because he's not, but he's cleaning up Clinton's mess due to his lack of interest in terrorism.
Clinton doesn't deserve to be blamed for terrorist attacks, if you want to blame someone, blame the terrorists. btw, Bush sucks!
Monker wrote:conversationpc wrote:Funny jokes but the jokes on his intelligence are based on the faulty Lovenstein Institute report...
You are absolutely correct. It was all caused by Bush's fawlty intelligence.
Monker wrote:conversationpc wrote:Funny jokes but the jokes on his intelligence are based on the faulty Lovenstein Institute report...
You are absolutely correct. It was all caused by Bush's fawlty intelligence.
conversationpc wrote:There's plenty of blame to go around on all sides but it is fact that Bin Laden was basically offered to Clinton on a silver platter.
And, yes, the terrorists themselves are ultimately to blame but there were definitely contributing factors that allowed it to happen.
chf34jmac wrote:No unfortunately, I don't think the idiot is kidding. I mean we all know here that there is NO greater intelligence than Monker. Hell he even tried to tell Andrew how to run his forums. I would be interested to see how any of these self righteous armchair quarterbacks would have handled all of this mess. I know the Dems would have tried diplomacy, and when that didn't work just to show Iraq we meant business, they would have raised our taxes.
I am so tired of both sides doing nothing but trying to sell everybody else on their we're right and they suck mantras.
Both sides suck and neither one is better or more truthful than the other.
So until there is at least one candidate that is willing to tell me the truth, I would appreciate it greatly if both parties and all of their followers would just SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!!!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 52 guests