English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Its okay to make a point but why make your point with made up figures?

2007-11-18 16:13:47 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

I care! It seems like a epidemic, its great to argue and disagree but be honest about it, I had someone else try to tell me that it cost us the same if the military was here or if we went to war. Its not right to try to win arguements based on lies, lets have honest discussians

2007-11-18 16:18:40 · update #1

The New Yorker Pulished his transcripts in 1999. FYI, He and Kerry did within 1% of each other. I'm not claiming anyone is stupid here did yah notice?

2007-11-18 16:28:51 · update #2

Hawaiian Plumaria: I don't think people can read. If you read my question it is really not about Bush, its about being honest when making an arguement. About me.., my resume and education is very good but again its not the point. As far as support, let the President support me, why am I bad for in your eyes "not supporting [him]"

2007-11-18 17:27:28 · update #3

23 answers

I agree! America is spending way to much time mixing the issues and confusing the principles that our Nation is based on at the present. The lies to defend Bush and his behavior as President are just beginning. But the real story can not be so easily hiden and overlooked.
Bush's educational history, his military record, his alcoholism, his lack of any successful and significant work histroy is all to obvious. GW Bush's own statements like the whole speech at his infamious "Mission Accomplished Speech," is so clearly false and based on a fiction which should and will be called bad propaganda just tells the story clearly.
Bush and his staff were one, had no idea what they were doing or two were cooking up a total lie and it was a bad lie that would not stand the light of day for two minutes. Bush's Presidency is the terrible laughing stock of all Presidency's and will go in history as such!
God help America!

2007-11-18 16:32:30 · answer #1 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 7 2

As they bid for the White House, Democratic candidate John Kerry was often painted as a pompous, French-speaking intellectual, while George W. Bush was portrayed as a simpleton who routinely flubbed the English language. Bush also took his lumps for being a lousy student at Yale, where he graduated with a gentleman's C average, according to a transcript published in the New Yorker in 1999. Kerry, on the other hand, didn't release his grade report until last month. And? Surprisingly average , reports the Boston Globe: an unremarkable 76 grade-point average--a point below Bush's GPA. The Globe reports that Kerry got a slow start, racking up four D's in his freshman year at Yale, but pulled up his average to an 81 (B) his senior year. His top scores freshman year: a 79 in a poli-sci course and a 77 in French. Clearly, he improved, becoming a top student at the Naval Candidate School, graduating from law school, and becoming a lieutenant governor, senator, and presidential hopeful. President Bush obviously wasn't hobbled by his so-so academic performance, either.

2007-11-18 16:21:24 · answer #2 · answered by missourim43 6 · 3 5

You don't have a lot to do if you are worried about President Bush's GPA. Why would you even care? I would say you would be better off to worry about your own. And, China girl, I would think that if you mad nothing below an A- your freshman and sophomore years then you shouldn't have made anything under an A your junior year!!! I am sorry, but I just don't buy that Berkley in California is more prestigious than an Ivy League university.

2007-11-18 16:43:31 · answer #3 · answered by Eyes Wide Open 3 · 2 4

if you want honest open discussions without lies and intolerance you are in the wrong forum. since we don't know each other and don't have to prove anything we say we can just make stupid comments and it makes no difference.
there is more concern for points and levels and thumbs up then any substantive thought provoking open minded discussion or debate. you don't like my opinion well i'll give you a thumb down and report you, that's how this "game" is played

2007-11-18 16:40:31 · answer #4 · answered by michr 7 · 3 2

Oooo I get to be smarter than Dumbya too. 3.0 undergrad and 3.68 grad. and I went to a better school too. Not saying where in case someone I know is reading this.

Chinagirl:

I went to an Ivy and Berkeley is at least as good as an Ivy school. Getting straight A's at Berkeley must be crazy hard. Don't listen to the haters.

2007-11-18 16:32:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

Probably the same reason they think a 77% is a B average instead of a C.

But a C GPA is perfect for being elected into a job where the VP tells you what to do.

2007-11-18 16:30:18 · answer #6 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 5 4

It doesn't really matter. What'cha going to say? He is a bad president because he has a B average? His decision to go to Iraq was unjustified because he didn't get straight A's?

2007-11-18 16:17:02 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5 2

This might come as a great blow, but there is the possibility that you might be wrong.

2007-11-18 17:07:13 · answer #8 · answered by DOOM 7 · 2 1

Because they are Republicans.

Though, he could have had a 77% undergrad and 3.6 for grad school. Who knows.

2007-11-18 16:16:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

77% is a B- a low B-, or 2.8 GPA. The fact remains, he graduated from Yale. You do not get that dumb without some hard work at school.
I, on the otherhand am articulate. At least moreso than "W". And I have a 3.8 GPA from Berkeley (a higher ranking school) so I have the intellectual right to call him a D__b A__!
any time I want!LOL
PS I didn't get anything below an A- until spring of my junior year! HA

2007-11-18 16:23:07 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 3 9

fedest.com, questions and answers