I don't necessarily disagree with your statement that Bush is an idiot if we're talking about the colloquial sense of the word and not the literal, since "idiot" refers to someone of less than 70 IQ. Clearly, Bush's IQ is higher than this. Perhaps as high as 90. :cool:
However, I'd like to see why you think he's a colloquial "idiot." Wouldn't that make for a more interesting thread? Indeed, you might consider reading the to ensure that the topic hasn't already been covered ad nauseum or to elaborate on some point made there. Don't overlook the parent thread of that one either, [url=
http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=118650]George) W. Bush: Pros & Cons (Part I). (]George W. Bush: Pros & Cons (Part II)[/url)
For this thread to continue, it'll need to focus on Bush as an "Idiot," or a person of subnormal intelligence. (
http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn?stage=1&word=idiot) Counter-arguments are welcome, but first I would suggest that the initial statement that "Bush is an idiot" be supported.
Ironically, the etymology of the word idiot (
http://www.bootlegbooks.com/Reference/PhraseAndFable/data/643.html) is from the Greek expressions "a priest or an idiot" (layman), "a poet or an idiot" (prose-writer), and originally meant a private person or one not engaged in public office. So "Bush is an idiot" could be construed as an accurate assessment if one could demonstrate that he is not engaged appropriately in his elected position or that he is really a layman who's bitten off far more than he can chew.
Moderator note: I deleted your (darth_kuat) other two posts for two reasons. 1) they were redundant and you started an entire thread on the subject; 2) at least one, if not both, didn't relate enough to the topic of the threads they were in. If you have a problem with this, please PM me.
-- SkinWalker