THEY BOMBED IN NEW HAVEN ————— by Steve Nadis
To my (admittedly biased) mind, it accomplished just the opposite. In the real world, no one cares about how someone did at college four decades after the fact. In Kerry’s case, it seems entirely irrelevant–ancient history. He was, after all, asked to deliver the senior class oration (he spoke of Vietnam), whereas Bush was given responsibility for the cheerleading corps. And today, no one doubts that Kerry–despite his other faults (i.e., lack of charisma, spontaneity, failure to kiss enough babies, you name it)–knows what he’s talking about. On the other hand, at many times it seems as if Bush can barely READ his cue cards, let alone betray any hint of comprehending the words he utters.
Kerry has moved on from his days in college where academics were a low priority, whereas Bush seems not to have. In contrast to someone like Clinton, who was overprepared, Bush seems to pride himself on not taking the time to read reports or otherwise educate himself. He was a “good old boy” back in college, even though he was not necessarily “old” or “good,” and he’s a good old boy now (though I’d again take issue with the “good” part, while letting the “old” part stand). Unfortunately for people who show signs of consciousness, that good old boy somehow got himself a big office in the White House, while the other is left to pull his hair out (natural or not). It’s a strange turn of events, but rest assured, it has nothing to do with the grades they pulled in New Haven.
I’m no fan of the president’s, but this one seems to be particularly unfair, even for you. After all, Kerry was the one who got four D’s his freshman year.
You’re right, and that’s exactly my point. Kerry got four D’s and it matters not a whit.
Lindsey: Are you suggesting that W doesn’t wear his ignorance as a badge of honor? Even if he isn’t simply dumb, he simply doesn’t have a firm grasp of the issues, and seems to use that to demonstrate that he is a common man.
Snark: What’s come over you? Are you trying to get yourself kicked out of the funny humor webring again?
Hi LRR-U: Actually I was kicked out of the funny humor webring a day or two ago & then mysteriously readmitted less than 24 hours later. It was a topsy-turvy day, as you can imagine. I’m still not sure what I did wrong. Or right.
What I don’t understand is why the President’s accent keeps getting thicker the longer he is away from Texas.
Good point, DrM! I think he’s hell-bent on showing that he doesn’t live in Washington, even though some of the more enlightened members of the electorate know the White House is not located in Crawford, Texas.
Lindsey got it right: Once a snake, always a snake.
Once again Burt, you’ve left me speechless. I’ve always found truisms hard to rebut.
First of all, I applaud Snake for tackling the serious issues. I’m sure that part of the reason the funny humor webring keeps kicking you out is you’re a blog of many moods–sometimes funny, sometimes serious. This shows a level of maturity wholly unexpected from such a young blog.
Second of all, did anyone else notice that the Globe harped on Kerry’s grades but only gave passing reference to Bush’s? I think the "journalistically objective" way to do that story would be to include a chart listing BOTH their grades for all four years, then let the reader draw the conclusions. This smacked more of the Globe (or its parent company) trying to do the White House a favor.
Thank you gatemouth for the vote of confidence. You’re absolutely right: they did focus almost exclusively on Kerry’s performance. Bush’s average was, supposedly, 1 percentage point higher. But even then, that was based on his 1st 3 years, whereas Kerry’s was based on 4 years. So again, it’s not a direct comparison. Still, I stand by my point: They never would have run this story were it not for the fact that Bush is not blessed with an excessive IQ.