I know that Bush is smarter than his reputation, but anyone who saw his speech to the CIA today should be able to understand why. Bush managed to coin a new word 'misunderestimated' (as in 'them terrorists dun misunderestimated our resolve' and managed to mispronounce it twice! Add in the slurring of several words, and several abrupt stops for no apparent reason, and any DPS officer who pulled over Bush would have sufficient cause to submit him to a breathalizer. Like Gerald Ford didn't do himself any favors by tripping over everything in site, Bush has no one but himself to blame for is reputation as a less than briliant man. Again I realize that the man isn't really stupid or drunk, but not based on empirical evidence.
Ottomaton, How could you point out a verbal error our president made at a time like this? You are completely ****ing tasteless. Are you a commie? America love it or leave it. Are you even an American? You must be an Ottoman, a Turk? I bet you couldn't say that where you're from. I bet you're not even born again. You're probably a secular or an ACLU a feminist or some such. You must be a dope smoking 60's dropout. You must be only 15 years old since older people are conservative. You should be banned from this board. Just shut the **ck up.
I heard someone mention that dubya needs to stick to scripted speeches ONLY. He shouldn't speak 'off the cuff' or, if you ask me, at all in public. He ends up sounding like a boob. misunderestimated.... you can add that to the list of bush-isms. rH
I'd say his 'off the cuff' speech to the workers in New York was fine. But then again, if people couldn't find anything to hate about Bush, what else would they do? Oh that's right. Something positive.
Personally I've never felt it was imperative to have an extremely intelligent President. Its more important to have a strong support group and allow them to do their respective jobs. One thing I have seen...and I'm not doing a Repub vs. Democ thing....is that Clinton is a genius and so he tried to do everything himself. He was always in the spotlight and very controlling. As much as a genius as he was he can't run everything, and I don't think he was as successful as Bush can be because of that trait. Bush has always done well bringing people together, as seen in Texas, irrespective of political parties. Versus Clinton, who I see as making decisions for the people not letting the public make the decisions for him based on populus vote, which it should be. I feel Gore went down that same route, in that the larger government (socialism) will take care of the people. Versus that of I am an Economist and believe that the government is there to manage a few things a get out of the way of Capitalism and free market systems.
Trust me coma, people found plenty of things to hate about Clinton before all that controversy started, it happens both ways. It's a democrat/republican way. As for Bush, man I'm supporting you, but dude stop creating words!
Just for the record I'm not 'hateing' Bush. While I don't agree with most of his politics, I think that the guy is at least the most genuine president that I can remember, which gives him points in my book. I was more that I almost feel sorry for the guy. He's not stupid, but neither was Gerald Ford. When everybody remembers about Ford is him stumbling around, despite the fact that he was effective in managing the country in a time of great turmoil. I can't help but think that Bush's historical position might be tarnished in the same way.
