84 Comments

1. Ron:

How many days has it been since Mr. Kerry promised to sign the disclosure form so that everyone can see what we already know. Come on John, sign the damn papers and get it over with, its making you look like an idiot, we all know what happened.

Remember when Larry Flynt of Hustler Magazine offered 1 million dollars for any dirt on Bush and Chaney, wonder if he would offer the same money for the missing John Kerry records? If anyone could get those records, they would be worth millions to the Enquirer.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:14 am 2. Rob:

Kerry was clearly not the brightest bulb, but we knew that.

I disagree, Roger. There are lots of reasons to get poor grades in college and stupidity is probably not the one at work here. I knew lots of folks in school who just got distracted, by the freedom, by booze, by girls, whatever. They didn’t focus on their school work and they got poor grades or flunked out.

I don’t know what the dropout rate is in colleges today, but I’ll bet it is huge. Those people aren’t all stupid, they just aren’t focused on their school work.

At least Kerry was smart in this way: he knew that college grades aren’t that big of a deal. As long as you get the diploma, your GPA is going to be moot after your first job.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:27 am 3. David Thomson:

ìEvidently, not for Kerry. And this even though one of the not so secret secrets about Ivy educations is that once you’re admitted, it’s pretty hard to flunk out. In fact it’s pretty hard to get less than a B average.î

The degrees are often more fraudulent than a three dollar bill. Why arenít people getting arrested? When will the criminal investigations begin? Oh gosh, I guess I expect too much. Everybody should read Ross Gregory Douthatís ìPrivilege : Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class.î He writes about the Harvard University scam operation. It will make you want to puke your guts out. I know that Iím exaggerating, but I burst out laughing each time I watch the beginning of ìThe Sopranosî when mob boss Tony is driving down the road. Cynically, I think of Larry Summers driving to Harvard. Another highly recommended book is John Leboutillierís ìHarvard Hates America: The Odyssey of a Born-Again American.î

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:34 am 4. chuck:

Ach, Kerry again. Won’t the guy go away? Two questions:

1) Did Kerry release *all* his records. My understanding is that there are degrees of release available when signing form 180. I expect we will know the answer shortly.

2) How serious is Kerry about impeaching Bush? Did he just say impeachable, or is he headed for the real thing? I would actually love to see him push this before the 2006 elections.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:35 am 5. Jim Mc:

I don’t think anyone is saying Kerry is stupid. It’s more to refute the idea that he’s obviously much smarter than Bush, which was a repeated claim during the campaign. With this and the military aptitude tests whose data came out a few months ago, it’s clear that these guys are both of above average intelligence, though not geniuses.

Genius isn’t a prerequisite of great leadership, of course, and there’s nothing about the intelligence of Kerry as implied by these scores and grades which disqualifies him for the job of President. If one were being fair, one would have to then say the same thing about President Bush, but many people can’t bring themselves to face that. That’s why this is worth talking about even though the campaign is over.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:35 am 6. Baron Bodissey:

Based on the Gomer Pyle-esque photo, Kerry’s greatest fear must have been that his goony prep-school boy appearance would be revealed. Nothing I’ve seen so far better explains his reluctance to let it all hang out.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:37 am 7. Buddy Larsen:

Ha…that’s so true, Dean is all Sinclair Lewis, not to mention Dos Passos and Steinbeck and the others from the 30s red-men establishment.

Also agree that grades don’t tell ya much about brains–but the ‘affect’ word that Roger uses wrt Clinton certainly speaks volumes about Kerry’s innate mental agility. Not to be mean, but aside from an ability to feel no rhetorical shame nor any need for consistency, nor any respect for the intelligence of his constituency, he has a poor toolbox for abstract pursuits. He’s a dullard, matter of fact–just look at his eyes.

Unfortunately, in some ways, this is the perfect personality for a modern liberal politician. Hell, that’s why he won the nomination.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:38 am 8. Mike_Nargizian:

Look, I understand the point here that Bush is seen as the dummy and Kerry as the intellectual and how infuriating it is to read the MSM and Hollywood liberal elitists details this… like Sarandon, Robbins, and the parents in Family Ties…. who spoke about Kerry’s ‘depth’ mistaken for flip flopping.

I voted for Bush and still support him but let’s face it -

1) Bush can’t speak, he’s like deer in headlights.

2) Bush dudn’t come off as smart when he speaks.

3) Kerry or most anyone comes off better in these exchanges.

4) If I had a comedy series I would headline Bush ’speaking’ at his few press conferences.

But in reality could I really give a sh** that Kerry got some D’s his Freshman year when he was 18 years old? THINK ABOUT THAT!

Are we getting as petty as the PC liberal elitists?

I almost flunked out my freshman year after getting straight A’s in high school. WHO CARES and does it say anything about my intelligence? LOL! Einstein got D’s in Math!!

Or does it say that when I was 18 I was a screw up with my head up my a** – uncomfortable in my new surroundings, unable to handle my business and intensely distracted by the incredible abundance of beautiful women.

I understand all this blog jousting and eagerness to point out the MSM hypocrisy…. BIG STORY John Kerry got D’s when he was 18 years old? Gimme a break.

Besides, last I checked he lost didn’t he?

Mike

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:44 am 9. c:

Good points all, Roger. ‘Cept I just have to say that Buchanan and Dean aren’t quite equivalent polar ends of their respective parties. Dean is considered more mainstream in the Democrat Party than Buchanan could ever dream of being in the GOP. Most Republicans are on board with Bush and the WoT, and many/most Democrats are sympathetic to Dean’s anti Bush, anti-Republican and anti-war perspective. Look at this last election to see how many Dems voted for Kerry. Too many! Kerry wasn’t so very different than Dean politically; despite his floundering and flip-flopping, everybody knew that Kerry was an anti-military pacifist at heart.

Yes, a couple of Dem pols currently in office who wish to look more moderate have started to create a little distance between themselves and Dean’s vitupertive rhetoric and money-raising policy, but most of them do not still do not speak up in support of the Iraq war and administration foreign policy. Even Biden who is now not so fond of Dean opined that we should shut down Gitmo. How many of these centrist and moderate Dems condemned the AI report which gratuitously slandered the US?

Pat has only a very small corner in our Big Tent and never would have been made Ringmaster of the Circus, as the Dems made Dean.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:44 am 10. Charlie (Colorado):

I’m sorry, Rob, but you’re slipping the point, setting up a straw man, and otherwise avoiding Roger’s argument: he didn’t say “Kerry was a moron” he said “Kerry isn’t the smartest bulb.”

There is no measure of intellectual achievement by which Kerry has any advantage over Bush except speaking in a more privileged dialect. On the other hand, Bush’s GPA is essentially the same (by eyeball, within 0.1σ), his SAT scores were higher (again, within a small margin), and he’s got a Harvard MBA (very competitive and famously demanding) vs Kerry’s Boston JD.

You have to conclude that if Bush is dumb, Kerry’s at least as dumb; if Kerry’s smart, then Bush is just as smart, possibly smarter.

I’m generically a fan of the “multiple intelligences” theory; it’s clear that Kerry is more verbally fluent, almost to a fault, while Bush is less so. Given his amazing talent at marrying rich women, I think you’d make a pretty good argument for Kerry’s greater “social intelligence”. On the other hand, Bush seems to be brilliant at picking people, extremely good at identifying achievable goals, and getting what he wants.

He also seems to have a real talent for causing people to underestimate him. Kerry’s talent seems to be in fooling people the other way.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:45 am 11. Knucklehead:

If the man (Kerry) was stupid he wouldn’t have gotten in to Harvard in the first place. There are more than sufficient “reasonably bright” young people whose parents can pay full freight to fill Harvard’s freshman class each year.

The point is that when compared with other bright people Mr. Kerry is, well, rather pedestrian and none too swiftly so. He and his supporters, however, presented him as a brain among brains – a deserving member of Our Nation’s Elite Better-Knowers.

Which leads one to wonder about those who can’t even muster the intellect to be aware of the painfully obvious, don’t it.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:45 am 12. Baron Bodissey:

Buddy — but Slick Willie proves you wrong. Whatever else Bill Clinton is, he’s no dullard. No, there must be some other explanation for JFK2’s ascent to the pinnacle of modern liberalism.

Maybe it’s the elite/class thing — it was Kerry’s “turn”, the money was behind him (both married, borrowed, and donated), and he went to the right schools. Bill, however, did it all with brains, just like a lot of other good ol’ boys from the South did in the Democratic Party in earlier generations.

Ya gotta admire the guy…

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:46 am 13. Jim Mc:

Overall, Rob is right. The whole issue isn’t particuarly important, though the points made about the comparison between the two men are valid.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:48 am 14. Laurence Simon:

Further proof that John F. Kerry is no JFK – his father would have bought him better grades.

Or is that only a Harvard thing?

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:51 am 15. Kyda Sylvester:

Wouldn’t it be refreshing to have Bubba put his mouth where his affect is.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:52 am 16. David Thomson:

Do I have any evidence to back up my caustic comments? Well, It seems like somebody agrees with me:

ìKERRY’S GRADES [Rick Brookhiser]

Many MSM reporters are younger than Kerry and Bush and, like them, went to fancy colleges. Their grades were undoubtedly better. But that is because of a pattern of grotesque grade inflation, which began in the late 60s, just as W was graduating. Whatever their politics–what am I saying? despite their liberal politics–these reporters will read of the grades of both men and give a little snicker to themselves. I’m smarter than the president and the man who should have been president! Not really.

I’m Yale class of ‘77, I know what I’m talking about. Of course I had several intelligent friends who took academic leaves of absence (i.e., they flunked out), but that’s because they did no work at all, in favor of drugs, copulation, politics, or 24/7 bull sessions, not because they failed to make the exceedingly gentle grade.

Posted at 10:01 AMî

http://www.nationalreview.com/thecorner/05_06_05_corner-archive.asp#065293

Richard Brookhiser is specifically writing about Yale, but Iím sure he was also thinking of Harvard.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:55 am 17. Kyda Sylvester:

And this even though one of the not so secret secrets about Ivy educations is that once you’re admitted, it’s pretty hard to flunk out.

Boy, that’s the truth. I had friends at Cornell (even back in the day) who had to work very hard to flunk out.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:57 am 18. Knucklehead:

Oops!

If the man (Kerry) was stupid he wouldn’t have gotten in to Harvard in the first place.

Of course I meant Yale. Got my JFKs crossed.

Jun 7, 2005 - 9:58 am 19. JenLArt:

No, Baron, I don’t gotta admire the guy (Bill Clinton).

I’ve never seen or heard any evidence that he’s so intelligent.

And that goes double for Hillary.

As for President Bush, his grades were actually much better than Kerry’s even though the Boston Globe said that that sKerry’s were “on a par” with GWB’s.

Bush’s grades show evidence of an inquiring mind (High “Bs” in spite of the fact that he was head of his fraternity, class president and very popular at all campus parties!) and the only reason he plays “stupid” is to show these East Coast intellectshuls that he’s beyond them and is more of a regular guy, which is why more Americans can relate to him than just the Ivy League snobs, the crowd Kerry and Clinton are welcome to.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:03 am 20. Baron Bodissey:

JenLArt — I have to disagree. I admire Clinton for his intelligence, and despise him for everything else. But his intelligence does come through clearly.

I must emphasize that this is not a comparative with our current President. Mr. Bush is a very intelligent man, despite the way he’s depicted in the MSM.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:07 am 21. Knucklehead:

David Thomson,

Grade inflation actually has, for the most part, two tiers. Harvard (the Ivies in general?) are notorious for not giving out grades below a “B”. There’s little doubt, however, that getting an “A” requires significantly more effort than getting a “B”.

To try to furhter illustrate my point, I was recently listening to a young coed complain about grades. Her complaint was that she got a 92 average in a chemistry course and recieved a grade of “A-”. Another coed who she had tutored in the very same course, the very same section, averaged 80 and recieved a grade of “B”. “A-” doesn’t sound much better than “B” but a average of 92 is substantially better than one of 80.

BTW, the conversation I overheard was precipitated by someone remarking that this particular school didn’t engage in “grade inflation”. The young woman’s reply to that was that “A”s were not “inflated” but that all lesser grades were most definitely “inflated”.

I suppose that wandered too far afield.

More pertinent to the original topic, John Kerry is clearly not stupid. He is, nevertheless, a loon.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:10 am 22. JenLArt:

We’ll have to agree to disagree, Baron.

(Do we have any of Clintoon’s grades? Did he even graduate?)

And do, please, give us some evidence from Clinton’s long presidency–or even his Ark. governorship–that he was “smart” or of decisions he made in office that attested to his wisdom.

Use extra blue books if necessary.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:14 am 23. Rick Ballard:

Why should anyone care about the measured intelligence of a pol capable of attaining nomination for the presidency? Just about all of them are smart enough (McCain may be an exception).

I want to know if they steer by a compass or a weathervane. The moral component outweighs the intelligence component by 4-1 in my book. There are a lot of very smart crooks running around DC free as birds. Some of them have been elected many times.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:20 am 24. Buddy Larsen:

Those windsurfing photos of Kerry, and the pix of him grinning like a possum eatin’ doo-doo, all gussied-up for bike-riding and snowboarding, negate whatever ‘cultural intelligence’ he may’ve shown via his commercial/matrimonial endeavors. I mean, great PR, for the Hyannisport vote.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:26 am 25. Baron Bodissey:

JenLArt, the evidence of his intelligence is his rise from white-trash obscurity to 8 years in the White House, with no advantage except for his wits. That takes plenty of brains.

He had help in his later career from his political connections, but first he had to make them, and he did that on his own.

Kerry may or may not have the brains; I don’t know. But with his background, he could have gone as far as he did with minimum IQ. Examples of the same principle used to be found in the British aristocracy.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:37 am 26. Kyda Sylvester:

Thanks, Baron. That picture gave me my first laugh-out-loud of the day. And Laurence Simon gave me my second.

I too subscribe to the multiple intelligences theory. Of course Kerry is intelligent but the pool is shallow indeed (of course I may be intellectually incapable of dealing with all that nuance). Of course Clinton is intelligent but it’s a lazy intellect. He learned long ago that he could dazzle with words thereby effectively covering any lack of substantial content. People often take what Bill says at face value because he’s so adept at saying it. For my money, Bush is intellectually head and shoulders above both. (And Hillary, please. She is the most pedestrian of thinkers.)

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:40 am 27. Knucklehead:

Holy Hide The Photo, Batman! I just went and actually clicked to the article and that, if ever I saw one, is Loonus Dorkus of Westminster Blue Ribbon caliber. Eegads that boy was uhhgglee. If I had a dog that ugly I’d shave its ass and teach it to walk backwards.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:42 am 28. Kyda Sylvester:

JenLArt–Clinton graduated from Georgetown. Don’t know his GPA. He received his JD from Yale Law (after it switched to pass/fail and apparently few requirements for class attendence). Then there’s that Rhodes Scholar thing (no degree there, though).

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:47 am 29. Sandy P:

–JenLArt, the evidence of his intelligence is his rise from white-trash obscurity to 8 years in the White House, with no advantage except for his wits. That takes plenty of brains.–

Or he really knows how to sell the snake oil.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:47 am 30. JenLArt:

Baron, Clinton’s an operator (Duh)…and he got all of his breaks, including getting into those Ivy League schools and Oxford, by hitching his star to Ark. Sen. Dale Bumpers.

He’s clever enough to manipulate and use people.

Clever, but not intelligent.

Kyda’s absolutely right about the “lazy intellect”–describes the man to a “T” and his presidency, too.

Of course, we paid for that laziness big time with 9/11.

Kerry’s puss, as well as this proof of his intellectual vapidity, gives me all the more reason to thank God, the Swift Boat Vets and 62 million of my fellow Americans that Kerry wasn’t elected!

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:49 am 31. Occam's Beard:

Knucklehead,

Her complaint was that she got a 92 average in a chemistry course and recieved a grade of “A-”. Another coed who she had tutored in the very same course, the very same section, averaged 80 and recieved a grade of “B”. “A-” doesn’t sound much better than “B” but a average of 92 is substantially better than one of 80.

This reflects the magic of a Gaussian distribution. Having signed more university grade sheets than I care to recall, I know only too well that in the middle of the curve a few points make a big difference in grade. In the example above, it’s likely that someone with a slightly lower score (e.g., a 78) might have received a B-, while someone with slightly higher score (say, 84) a B+. The ranges for A’s and D’s is huge; that for B’s is relatively miniscule, because typically at least half the students receive some sort of B. Welcome to grade inflation.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:51 am 32. neo-neocon:

Roger writes of Kerry, “he seems to have some sort of cognitive disorder.”

Replace the word “cognitive” with “personality,” and you would be absolutely correct, in the clinical sense. I’ve been beating this drum for a long time: Kerry has narcissistic personality disorder. This is different from simple narcissism. It is deep and intrinsic, and probably unchangeable. See this for more.

Character disorders such as narcissism–and Kerry appears to be a classic case, by the way–don’t necessarily affect intelligence or performance directly. Narcissists can certainly be very smart, and I submit that Kerry is “smart” in the conventional sense. But all character disorders can affect performance, making it less optimal than otherwise–for example, in areas requiring looking beyond oneself and understanding the reasoning of others, or in the amount of time and energy focused on self-aggrandizement, and therefore not spent on work.

But I also agree with those who point out the effects of grade inflation. And then, the whole point of the thing is Kerry vis a vis Bush, not whether Kerry is smart in the absolute sense–I’m sure he is.

But I am so, so, SO, SO glad that Kerry is not President. No matter how rough a day I may be having, I should remind myself of that fact.

I’ve noticed, BTW, a spate of articles recently in Kerry’s hometown paper, the Globe, critical of him. Perhaps there’s a certain bitter reality creeping in?

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:53 am 33. Occam's Beard:

Then there’s that Rhodes Scholar thing (no degree there, though).

The irony is that Rhodes Scholars are held in surprisingly low esteem in Oxford, being viewed widely as rah-rah jock intellectual lightweights from the various colonies and ex-colonies.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:56 am 34. Knucklehead:

There’s just too much ammo here…

He scored a 61 in geology…

What is it about rocks that JFK2 had trouble fathoming?

His top score was a 79, in another political science course. Another of his strongest efforts, a 77, came in French class.

Cela l’explique.

Jun 7, 2005 - 10:58 am 35. Buddy Larsen:

America has dodged more than one bullet lately. What’s with that party, anyway? Don’t they love us people?

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:01 am 36. Buddy Larsen:

Photos lie, of course, so this is entirely unfair, but, just for grins, I wonder what a mental-health professional would think, opening the door to the examining room and seeing my link standing there.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:10 am 37. Baron Bodissey:

A successful snake oil salesman, con-man, grifter, hustler, etc., will either have to have brains or family connections. Bill must have the former, since he didn’t have the latter.

But I’ll buy the “clever” versus “intelligent” distinction. Brilliance without a moral grounding; brain cells without a guiding light; computing power without a soul. That’s the man I’m talking about.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:10 am 38. WichitaBoy:

The only reason “intelligence” has come up in the last few elections is that the Democrats have made a point of projecting themselves as the intelligent party. This goes hand in hand with the view that their beliefs are the rational, intelligent beliefs and that anyone who opposes them must needs be therefore unintelligent. In this worldview, one I held in my teens, there is no scope for honest disagreement or loyal opposition. It’s simply a matter of explaining to your adversaries why they are stupid and must bow down to your superior intellect. And elect you, of course. Witness for example anything written by Krugman. Thus the case must be made at each and every election that the Democratic candidate is more intelligent than the Republican one. Whether the facts bear this out or not. Reagan was extremely articulate, but I never heard Democrats arguing that this proved his superior intelligence.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:14 am 39. chuck:

Don’t they love us people?

Of course they do, they tell us that all the time how much they love us, how much they *need* us. And, really, they do need us. See how pissed and bitter they became when we went for that other guy? At this point, the image of Popeye and Bluto fighting over the affections of Olive Oil comes to my mind. Ha, I *like* the idea of playing Olive Oil in this game.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:36 am 40. Buddy Larsen:

First, I do not have direct memory of this (*whew*), but Adlai Stephenson apparently ran against Ike as the ‘brainy’ guy who was superior to old doofus Ike. I think Ike’s people turned it around on him, and that I believe is where the ‘pointy-headed intellectual’ phrase originated. I could be wrong.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:40 am 41. Buddy Larsen:

rash of misspelt names; Stevenson and Oyl. Miss Olive Oyl, and her rendition of “Who’s That Knocking At My Door?”

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:44 am 42. chuck:

Thanks Buddy,

I knew there was something funny looking about the name, but just couldn’t quite connect, if you know what I mean. Oyl, Oyl, Oyl, it’s all about Oyl, gotta remember that.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:48 am 43. PeterUK:

There are those who are adept at appearing intelligent.The first thing they do is join a group and repeat all the shibboleths of that group,they do not put foreward any contrary views.Pick up the points from the cleverest and repeat them as their own.If they make a mistake and are corrected they grab the correction as their own,”Of course one would not etc.Always play back to the listener what the listener has been saying themselves.They can lie without shame,Always turn a question,never answer a question.Always look for clues as to the expected answer.Always keep an eye on which way the wind is blowing.Kiss the arses above them.and kick those below them.Never volunteer information,keeping silent often passes as wisdom.Find a patron who can get an entree into the circles that they need to be in,be seen where it matters.Always set the competition up for a fall,smile as they push in the stiletto,Always be willing to move on and dump anyone who has the smell of failure.Betray any for their own advantage.Ideally be an overcontrolled psychopath.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:48 am 44. Morgan:

I think it takes a certain kind of person to buy into the “nuance = intelligence” notion. In my experience, nuance means the avoidance of precision, refusal to quantify probabilities, costs, and benefits (and anything else that can be quantified), and the stripping away of context. This has the effect of allowing a “plausible” argument to be made for any case – “I would have worked with our allies to build a coalition that would have taken the burden off our troops”.

What would this “work with” have entailed? Dunno. What was the situation at the time? Never mind. How likely would success have been given those actions under those circumstances? How much help would these allies have been? Would there have been any costs to that course?

So when I say it takes a “certain kind of person”, I mean it takes someone who has a preferred outcome in mind, and looks for the easiest way to get there. Nuance sure makes things easy.

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:50 am 45. Kyda Sylvester:

OMG, Buddy. My eyes! My eyes!

Jun 7, 2005 - 11:52 am 46. Buddy Larsen:

LOL…is that the expression of inner turmoil–or what?

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:03 pm 47. Buddy Larsen:

BTW, Peter & Morgan, that’s the profile, alright; that’s the personality that sizes everything–everything–up by the ‘what’s in it for me?’ question. Not your best bet for ‘wisdom’.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:06 pm 48. chuck:

More Olive Oyl and the lyrics:

Olive Oyl]

Who’s that knocking at my door?

Who’s that knocking at my door?

Who’s that knocking at my door?

Tell the fair young maiden.

[Barnacle Bill]

It’s only me from over the sea.

It’s Barnacle Bill the sailor.

I’ve come to take you away with me.

I’m Barnacle Bill the sailor.

Hurry before you get me sore.

I’ll rare and tear and rant and roar!

Hurry before I bust in the door!

It’s Barnacle Bill the sailor!

[Olive Oyl]

Here I come to let you in.

Here I come to let you in.

Here I come to let you in.

My Barnacle Bill the sailor.

[Barnacle Bill]

No one ever challenges me!

[Popeye]

Says Barnacle Bill the sailor.

[Barnacle Bill]

I’m the terror of the sea!

[Popeye]

Says Barnacle Bill the sailor.

[Barnacle Bill]

A fe and a fi and a fo and a fum!

Yo he ho and a bottle of rum!

Before your silly old day is done!

[Popeye]

Says Barnacle Bill the sailor.

[Olive Oyl]

Popeye, dear, I love you best.

Popeye, dear, I love you best.

Popeye, dear, I love you best.

When will we get married?

[Popeye]

I’ve changed me mind, so you can wed

Your Barnacle Bill the sailor.

You’re nothing but a cabbage-head.

Every dame’s a selfish cat.

They only turn and leave you flat.

Just the way you did to that

Poor Barnacle Bill the sailor.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:12 pm 49. Rick Ballard:

I’m not sure that a persons efforts during the college years provide any true measure of intelligence. I’d sure be willing to test that thesis in Hillary!’s case. I would like to know what she had to say about her mentor at Wellesley, CPUSA member Saul Alinsky and his “Rules for Radicals” in her senior thesis. She adopted his precepts and used them effectively while helping edit the “Yale Review of Law and Social Action”, a Lefty rag that supported cop killing. That was before she interned for another former CPUSA member – Robert Treuhaft in Berkely in the summer of ‘72.

Is Hillary smart? Given that she had her Wellesley thesis sealed in ‘93, it’s hard to argue that she’s dumb. Totally amoral, but not dumb.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:15 pm 50. Buddy Larsen:

LOL…she was quite the coquette, for sure. I remember being about 10 or 11 yrs old and wondering what the heck, she shore wasn’t all that pretty. Before I understood supply-n-demand.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:18 pm 51. Buddy Larsen:

Wasn’t she a Watergate Lawyer? On one of the main executioner’s staff?

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:20 pm 52. c:

Quite the coquette- who? Hillary or Olive Oyl?

Hillary is not interested in dropping the labels in quite the way that Roger is:

Senator Hillary Clinton castigated President Bush and Washington Republicans today as mad with power and bent on marginalizing Democrats during a speech to 1,000 supporters…

Mrs. Clinton… said that her party is hamstrung because Republicans dissemble and smear without shame and the news media has lost its investigatory zeal for exposing misdeeds.

“There has never been an administration, I don’t believe in our history, more intent upon consolidating and abusing power to further their own agenda,” Mrs. Clinton told the audience…

“… It’s very hard to stop people who have no shame about what they’re doing. It is very hard to tell people that they are making decisions that will undermine our checks and balances and constitutional system of government who don’t care. It is very hard to stop people who have never been acquainted with the truth.“

…Abetting the Republicans, she said in some of her sharpest language, is a Washington press corps that has become a pale imitation of the Watergate-era reporters who are being celebrated this month amid the identification of the anonymous Washington Post source, Deep Throat.

“The press is missing in action, with all due respect,” she said. “Where are the investigative reporters today? Why aren’t they asking the hard questions? It’s shocking when you see how easily they fold in the media today. They don’t stand their ground. If they’re criticized by the White House, they just fall apart.

…On a brighter note, she said, Democrats appear to have all but “stopped” President Bush’s “scheme” to overhaul Social Security…

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:27 pm 53. Terrye:

Clinton is way smarter than Kerry, but Clinton also had Hillary and the connections that came with that.

One thing I have noticed about the Democrats, other than their arrogance and tendency to live in fantasy, is their total indecision on anything important. They call it nuance.

This is what was different about Clinton. He could take a stand.

It seems that the party is now divided between the people that think Bush did not listen to Clinton when he said terrorism was the number one threat to the nation and the part of the party that believes the whole issue of terrorism is “bogus”. The fact that Democrats are too busy trying to find a way to impeach Bush to notice that they sound like a patient with multiple personality disorder is an exmaple of just how unsmart they are.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:29 pm 54. Pat Curley:

Howell Raines remarked last summer that Kerry obviously had the higher IQ and that their SAT scores and grades would bear this out; I’m sure he’ll be terribly disappointed.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:30 pm 55. Knucklehead:

Umm… Chuck, while I wouldn’t mind a little contest of creative Barnacle Bill The Sailor lyrics Roger’s Place might not be a good venue to gor ’round provoking such things

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:37 pm 56. Rick Ballard:

Buddy,

Hillary! was a low level staffer on Rodino’s committee. There are reports that she met Lenzner there, which was unfortunate for Paula Jones, Kathleen Wiley, Monica Lewinski, Juanita Broaderick, et al ad infinitum. I believe that her apparent deep and true devotion to women’s causes developed during that time, especially as regards the unlimited right to abortion.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:41 pm 57. Jamie Irons:

Some of the dumbest people I have ever met went to Yale.

Jamie Irons

Yale College

Molecular Biology and Biophysics

Class of 1969

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:41 pm 58. Jamie Irons:

Five or six of the smartest, too.

Jamie Irons

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:42 pm 59. Jamie Irons:

After nearly fifty-seven years on this earth, and six of them spent in psychoanalysis, when I look back at some of the things I have thought and have believed, I truly don’t think I’ve ever met a man dumber than myself.

Jamie Irons

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:44 pm 60. Rick Ballard:

If you’ll buy me lunch in Napa, you’ll never have to write that again.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:47 pm 61. Jamie Irons:

I have to say Roger is very clever indeed at picking titles for his threads, and I especially enjoy the subtle bite of this one:

Not Too Swift

!!!

Jamie Irons

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:49 pm 62. Jamie Irons:

Rick (I think you’re addressing me here):

If you’ll buy me lunch in Napa, you’ll never have to write that again.

You’re on!

Jamie Irons

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:52 pm 63. chuck:

Jamie, I liked this one: KERRY NOT AS DUMB AS WE THOUGHT.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:52 pm 64. Half Sigma:

“After all, rational discourse is not often rewarded.” Roger, that deserves to be expanded into an entire blog post.

Jun 7, 2005 - 12:56 pm 65. Brown Line:

Michael Medved, the film critic, was a classmate of Bill and Hillary’s at Yale Law. In an interview with Milt Rosenberg, he gave a fascinating description of the two of them. According to Medved, Clinton did not work hard, but is gifted with a near-photographic memory, which let him do well on tests and term papers, regardless of whether he understood the material. This underscores what I’ve observed in Clinton’s discourses on topics on which I know something: the man is bright but lazy – a champion bullshitter who settles for appearing knowledgeable rather than taking the trouble to master a topic. He’s quick-witted rather wise, glib rather than informed. Which goes along with the record of his administration; as a friend of mine said about Clinton, “If you stepped on him, he wouldn’t even crunch.”

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:00 pm 66. Buddy Larsen:

So, Doc, do you prescribe psychoanalysis as the cure for the “We Are the Whirled” syndrome? I know there’s a medication avalable–literary rather than pharmaceutical–the “western canon”.

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:01 pm 67. Buddy Larsen:

Rick, the string of charming-rogue rape victims–a foreshadowing of the ‘ignored-for-the-greater-good’ Taliban women?

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:03 pm 68. Kyda Sylvester:

Wow, C, if you read only the boldtype you’d hafta figure she was talking about the Clinton administration.

Yes, Buddy, Hil was one of the Watergate lawyers (there were over 200 of them, many of them recent grads like Hillary doing scut work). She made a name for herself by wanting the articles of impeachment to include lying to the American public. How’s that for prescient irony!

During campaign 2000, I read a piece in the WSJ by the man who supervised all those lawyers (his name escapes me). He said that there were only a handful of his young charges that he did not recommend for future government posts and that Hillary had been one of them. It seems she had a propensity for bending the law to accommodate her own designs. Imagine that.

It struck me as funny because Billery had always made such a much about Hil’s giving up her brillant future in Washington for the sake of love in Arkansas.

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:07 pm 69. Kyda Sylvester:

Brown Line–Medved also characterized Hillary (in his book at least) as kind and well liked. He said that her friends were disappointed when she took up with Bill.

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:25 pm 70. PeterUK:

Brown Line ,

I would agree that Bill Clinton’s “near pornagraphic memory” makes him appear intelligent,but if he is that smart why did he marry Hillary?

The other question if these people are so clever, why do they believe such arrant nonsense?

Jun 7, 2005 - 1:38 pm 71. Buddy Larsen:

Arrant nonsense, properly packaged, is “Pie in the Sky”, which can actually be produced, at the margins, for awhile.

Jun 7, 2005 - 2:04 pm 72. Jamie Irons:

chuck (12:52 PM):

Thanks for pointing that Tim Blair piece out.

James Taranto of WSJ’s “Best of the Web” will have fun with this (from the Boston Globe article):

Another of [Kerry's] strongest efforts, a 77, came in French class.

Jamie Irons

Jun 7, 2005 - 2:29 pm 73. Old Dad:

Grades don’t make the man, but J effn K’s Ds don’t surprise me. He’s obviously got a fair amount of smarts, and he’s reaasonably glib, but he’s also incredibly dull. You can see the wheels grinding away as he thinks–not much heat or light there.

Not every genius has a sense of humor, but it’s been my experience that very bright people are also often very funny–sometimes in an odd sort of way.

Kerry is the dullest most humorless prig in the Senate

Jun 7, 2005 - 2:57 pm 74. Kevin P:

Roger:

I don’t put much stock in grades, especially the way grades have been degraded over the last 40 years. The only delicous aspect to the release of his grades was the stupid theory that President Bush’s grades were evidence of his stupidity. Know the dems are forced to adopt the grades don’t matter argument that is a complete reversal of what they said when Bushes grades were given. Bush had a higher overall GPA, less d’s and a better grad school performance at a tougher school.The Dems made a issue of Bush’s grades being to low and they claimed it was a sign of Bush being stupid. On every measure Bush was a better student then Kerry. I don’t think GPA is a sign of wisdom, but the Dems said they did. Now they have to swallow their words.

Kerry sounds better then Bush giving a speech. No doubt about it. But his words are a avalanche of verbs and adjectives that are not only dull but have little to no substance. I dare antone to read all the speechs kerry made on Iraq during the campaign and during the 90’s. there is no consistant idea’s, they are a hodgepodge of whatever the cliche of the moment and they read like a poorly written instruction manuel. Thousands of words that are empty multisylabic nonsense. Remove the troops, we need more troops, we will act unilaterally if we have too, we will never act without passing the world test,the Israeli defense fence is legitimate self defense, the israeli wall if a threat to peace. He sounds like he is speaking from a point of wisdom. In reality he is spouting words that are incoherent as far as making a point. In a less then nuanced word he is a windbag.

Jun 7, 2005 - 3:44 pm 75. Kevin P:

now

Jun 7, 2005 - 3:46 pm 76. Captain Hate:

This is great; I have a new way to remember D Day.

Jun 7, 2005 - 4:11 pm 77. richard mcenroe:

Kevin P — In Chuck Jones’ autobiography, he repeats his father’s description of the speechifyin’ of Warren G. Harding as “a hippotamus wallowing in molasses.” Sound familiar?

Jun 7, 2005 - 5:48 pm 78. jerry:

Kerry demonstrates the difference, even before grade inflation, between the vaunted Ivy League and the Public Ivies. Kerry would have flunked out of my Alma Mater, THE University of Illinois, in his Freshman year. It was, and still is, virtually impossible to flunk out of most private intstitutions, including Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. The top public institutions produced far better baby boomer students then the Ivies. They operated on pure Darwinism. Work hard, learn the subject and get good grades or get out.

Jun 7, 2005 - 5:49 pm 79. Kevin P:

Richard:

You took my overly long Kerry like post and summed it up perfectly in two sentences. Salute!

Jun 7, 2005 - 5:54 pm 80. jerry:

The fall back position that the grades don’t matter because he may have had other things on his mind doesn’t cut it. As I recall, there was some interesting entries in the Blogosphere last fall on Kerry’s AFQT. His scores would indicate that his IQ was around 120 vice W’s upper 120’s. All the evidence suggests that Kerry is not as intelligent as Bush. The argument about poor grades and intelligence may be more applicable to Gore. I recall that there was an actual IQ test for Gore and it was in the 130s.

Damn the Quadrenial Defense Review. It has kept me away from posting….

Jun 7, 2005 - 6:02 pm 81. Buddy Larsen:

Correction, Gore tested at 1,300 IQ.

Jun 7, 2005 - 6:46 pm 82. gumshoe:

“Wow, C, if you read only the boldtype you’d hafta figure she was talking about the Clinton administration.”

-Kyda S.

after reading Rick B’s post

re: Saul Alinsky and his “Rules for Radicals”,

i hopped over to several websites

for some back-story….

the phrase that kept popping into my head

while reading was the favorite Clintonite line…

“the politics of personal destruction”

and then this little gem from Mr Alinsky:

“One of the criteria for picking the target is the target’s vulnerability … the other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract.?

reap what you sow/hall of mirrors/glass houses and all that.

great posts,C and Rick B.

-gumshoe

Jun 7, 2005 - 6:59 pm 83. Brown Line:

PeterUK asks, “if [Clinton] is that smart why did he marry Hillary?” There’s an old joke that answers that question.

Bill and Hillary are out driving, and pull into a gas station for some fuel. The pump jockey starts cleaning the windshield, when he notices Hillary. “Hillary?”, he cries, “How are you? It’s been a long time!” The man and Hillary chat for moment, then he goes to fill the tank. Bill, who’s been fuming during all this, snaps, “Who’s that?” “Oh, that’s Bob,” Hillary replies. “He and I dated. In fact, I was thinking of marrying him at one time.” Bill smirks. “Well, I’m sure you’re glad you didn’t. After all, you could have been married to a gas-station attendant, and instead you’re the wife of the president of the United States.” “Bill,” Hillary replies, “If I had married Bob, Bob would be president of the United States and you would be the one pumping gas.”

Jun 8, 2005 - 4:53 am 84. Yehudit:

My theory about Bill Clinton is that in the privacy of the voting booth, he voted for Bush. And not because he wants Hillary to run in 08, but because he knows that Bush was right about Iraq and Kerry would have been a disaster.

Clinton had the invasion scenario sitting on his desk since at least 1998. He couldn’t invade Iraq because he expended his political captital on the Balkans. His people briefed Bush’s people. He knew all the intel.

If you watch Clinton’s behavior during the presidential race last summer and fall, he was doing everything he could to approve of Bush short of coming out and telling people to vote for him. (Lieberman too.)

Jun 8, 2005 - 10:36 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: