Hitting the newswires is an article that purports to prove one thing but actually proves another.
“Sen. John F. Kerry’s grade average at Yale University was virtually identical to President Bush’s record there, despite repeated portrayals of Kerry as the more intellectual candidate during the 2004 presidential campaign.”
Basically, Kerry’s Yale cume average was 76 while Bush’s was 77.
The thing is, if you read the article, Kerry tanked his Freshman year, with several D’s and one failed course. But during his subsequent three years his grades steadily improved. He was never çûm laude or anything, but the point is…he learned from his mistakes.
Whereas Bush started off with an average of 77 and didn’t deviate from it for four years. Kerry improved exponentially. Bush didn’t.
But, hey, what else to expect from the supposedly liberal-leaning press than an article that essentially tries to say that Kerry is no smarter than Bush.
PAD
• 
Since there’s no information on course load, major, personal events, it’s really a non-story. Kerry “improved”. That may mean he started taking easier courses. That may mean he hit his stride in his major. There’s no way to know. Bush was more consistent.
Let’s compare it to Trek (hey, we need to do that on a PAD board). TOS was better than TNG on its best day, and much worse than TNG on its worst day. On average, though, they were both very good shows.
So, Kerry==TOS, Bush==TNG.
At the end of the day, though, an average is just an average.
PAD,
Any chance of the site going to some sort of format with an “ignore” function? Just kidding…mostly.
Seriously, I heard this stuff being trumpeted by Rush Limbaugh at lunch before I switched stations and saw the same points that you did. I also went through a period of poor grades early in college before I got my act together, so I know how deceptive those number can be in that fashion. And that doesn’t even begin to address the problem that using scholastic grades as a measure of inteligence is a poor idea to begin with. Personally, I decided that Bush was an idiot when I heard him speak. Unfortunately, I’m a Texan, so my vote against him was doomed to not make a difference. On the bright side, he’s no longer the Governor.
“From now on, I am this site’s political watchdog.”
Wow. That’s sad. If you’d gotten here just a bit earlier you could have snagged Assistant to the Site Dolt.
But as long as we’re filling positions when is someone gonna step up to the plate and be our Official Attractive Cyber-Babe? Drunken Raconteur? Guy Whose Life Is So Screwed Up It Makes The Rest Of Us Feel Good About Ourselves?
First point:The classes were different, I suppose the teachers were different, so do I REALLY need to bring up apples and oranges? I mean, when I was in college, I got an A- in one algebra class, and a D- minus in another. The difference? Teacher A- had personality and gave us more than numbers. Teacher D- minus spoke as though he were Ben Stein on downers.
Second point:Kerry LOST THE ELECTION. The horse is DEAD, stop beating the dámņ thing already. I wanted him to win, but he didn’t, and now the media brings THIS out like it’ll change anything. Besides the egos in certain red states. “Oh, their guy’s dumb too!” Slow news day.
Third point: X-ray, dude, take one of your pills and get away from the computer. Life ain’t that serious and dead is dull. I speak from experience. Shrub won, our host is not a liar, he’s entitled to an opinion, and who the *&%$ raised you? When addressing someone by their last name, it’s polite to use an honorific such as mister or miss or what have you. It should have been MISTER DAVID in every one of you posts. And just because you post and start an argument, X-ray, don’t think we all don’t see through you.
And I AM funny.. David said so himself!
Are you sure he wasn’t referring to my earlier post, which he quoted, as funny?
Everything Peter David ever says politically is meant to prove BUSH SUCKS
Explain how the last 2 PAD posts “Tony Tony Tony” & “FALLEN ANGEL TO IDW” fit your paranoid claim.
Actually, Bill, I think Monsieur X-Ray fills that last position quite well…
True intellectuals tend not to win elections anyway- Adlai Stevenson lost twice and he may have been the most brilliant man ever to run for that office.
I think the average Bush voter likes looking at Dubya with the knowledge that he’s no smarter than they are. Not that Kerry’s a genius either, if he hadn’t been such an inept campaigner, he’d be President right now.
I still love the bit attributed to Stevenson;
“Governor, that was a great speech! You’ll get the vote of every intelligent citizen!”
“That’s not enough. I need a majority.”
Posted by: X-Ray
“Well, it was so FUNNY when David wrote BUSH SUCKS over and over, so I’m sure it’s funy now too. Right, liar?”
Posted by: Bladestar
“Nope x-ray
You’re just a pathetic fûçkìņg child”
it’s like a kindergartner talking to a pre-schooler.
bladestar, who very often goes on a rant calls someone else that goes off on a rant a child is pretty fûçkìņg funny.
Heck, you can tell Kerry’s smarter by the way he talks. ::snicker::
So how come Kerry wasn’t smart enough to get elected, and Bush was?
X-Ray bores me. Repetitive name-calling is the hallmark of a limited imagination, and a sad sign of the times when the once respectable Republican party (and its representatives) must resort to playground foolishness in order to be a part of a meaningful discourse.
As a college instructor, I can tell you that raising your grade is deceptively hard. But the apples and oranges statement is, ultimately, correct. Only if they had attained the same grades in the same courses would the comparison be more than superficial. I imagine X-Ray would not do well in one of my seminars. I demand logic and solid rhetorical structure from my students.
Oh, well. And, incidentally, PAD did end his post saying the article was trying to say Kerry and Bush are about equal in intelligence, just in case people were seriously wondering if a professional writer was a “poor reader.” Perhaps one should read the whole 6-paragraph post before commenting.
While it may not be universally true, I’m willing to be that being a pretty good reader is a prerequisite to being a professional writer. If I’m not mistaken PAD makes his living from writing. Not the easiest thing to do, imho. I do not always agree with him, but I do respect him. And remember, this is his (public) home. You are a guest.
If you’re serious, try to be the “political conscience” of this site, X-Ray. We’ll be forced to ignore you until you make a good point. Try to give evidence. Try to consider the facts. Never forget context. And think before you speak (or type, as the case may be). We’ll respect you as you respect us.
Oh, and virtually every use of the word “exponential” is hyperbole. For what it is, that’s pretty apparent. However, looking at the numbers, we know Kerry started with a 71 and ended with an 81, which is roughly a 15% increase in GPA. He progressively improved. Which was the point. The harder the courses, the more dedicated and focused the student. Great? No. But not bad, either. It also jibes with the quality of his character, his campaign performance(s), and his personal history.
Bush: more of the same. What can I say? Maybe grades are a predictor of life trends.
TTFN
I said, “Everything Peter David ever says politically is meant to prove BUSH SUCKS.”
Someone who can’t read said, “Explain how the last 2 PAD posts “Tony Tony Tony” & “FALLEN ANGEL TO IDW” fit your paranoid claim.”
Explanation: Those posts are not political. I said political. Learn to read before you attack reflexively.
P.S. Another person posted, “virtually every use of the word ‘exponential’ is hyperbole.” The word was innaccurate, and a lie, so as I predicted, someone tried to redefine the word! It apparently no longer means what it means, because “virtually every use of it is hyperbole.”
Great logic. Maybe you should notify Webster’s dictionary, and have them change the definition to suit your fancy.
P.P.S. Peter David STILL has no problem with being called a liar. Why? He knows it’s true!
Anyone else find it a bit alarming about how much attention is paid to relatively minor things like grades in college? Heck, I wouldn’t want my college grades printed in a newspaper, and they were better than both candidates!
Wouldn’t be a novel idea for the press to concentrate on what candidates do once in their chosen careers rather than what happened when they were young (and stupid)?
Just my two cents….
The smart folks stay out of the political limelight and run things from behind the scenes at their office at corporate headquarters 🙂
Regarding a certain person’s insistance on saying the same thing over and over and LOUDER each time…
Noise proves nothing. Often a hen who has merely laid an egg cackles as if she had laid an asteroid.
-Mark Twain
Y’know, I could make a case that Twain’s quote of “I never let my schooling interfere with my education” applied to both Bush and Kerry. Bush didn’t let it interfere with his education of how to schmooze, and Kerry didn’t let it interfere with his practical politics education (the Yale Political Union, where Kerry apparently spent most of his time, was probably the most significant organization on campus at the time, and my understanding is that those heavily involved in it would learn a lot about speechmaking, debate, making alliances, organization, etc.).
Regarding your obtuseness …
I am still waiting for a specific way Bush has negatively affected your own life.
Loud enough for you?
Found a picture of x-ray:
http://speedo.ca/albums/sweet/789603_1.thumb.jpg
You’ve missed my point.
I don’t care whether you support Bush or not. It’s irrevelant to me. I personally do not like the man, but I will listen to what others have to say.
What bothers me is a the lack of respect you show to others when presenting your point of view. It isn’t necessary to be nasty. You feel that George W is a brilliant and insightful leader? More power to you. Instead of calling Mr David a liar (and typing it repetitively), explain why you think the rise was not “exponential” Perhaps your interpretation of the word is simply different from his.
Want to disagree? Fine, disagree.
Want respect? Show respect.
“Repetitive name-calling is the hallmark of a limited imagination, and a sad sign of the times when the once respectable Republican party (and its representatives) must resort to playground foolishness in order to be a part of a meaningful discourse.”
Now, now. It’s no more logical to call X-Ray a representative of the Republicans than it is to call the biggest liberal idiot one can find a representative of the Democrats.
On the topic at hand again, you really have to allow some us the schadenfreude od seeing people who claimed that Bush’s grades proved him a moron kind of hoisted by their own petard or at least finally being able to see that grades are not always a fair judge of intelligence.
I pointed out earlierthat a rise from 71 to 76 is not exponential. The word has a meaning, it is not open to “interpretation.” Rising from 71 to 76 is NOT exponential. Call it so is a LIE.
Respect? Hah!
I called Peter David a liar because he told a blatant lie. Liars lie, that’s the defination of the word. David lied, so he IS a liar.
Other than that, ALL the name-calling by posters here has been directed towards ME. So go tell your story to them.
But, hey, what else to expect from the supposedly liberal-leaning press than an article that essentially tries to say that Kerry is no smarter than Bush.
PAD,
Uhmm, last time I checked, Rush Limbaugh is hardly a member of the liberal leaning press, and he is the only reason I even heard about it today. I think this was more a matter a Boston paper mad that Kerry kept things from them then the press being either liberal or conservative. But hey, of course I would think that way since I am a conservative. 😉
Iowa Jim
I called Peter David a liar because he told a blatant lie. Liars lie, that’s the defination of the word. David lied, so he IS a liar.
What is the deal? Can’t you make a point without calling PAD a liar? The fact that he interprets facts differently hardly makes him a liar (or an idiot for that matter). By all means disagree, but do so in a rational manner. It will help you win far more arguments.
Iowa Jim
It was in the opening monologue on Letterman just now. And it was all over CNN, which is supposedly the most liberal of the majors.
“Arguing on the internet is just like being in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded.”
-ganked from someone’s sig at the DCMB
Official Attractive Cyber-Babe? …Guy Whose Life Is So Screwed Up It Makes The Rest Of Us Feel Good About Ourselves?
Hey, I can do both! AND be a receptionist! 🙂
“[Peter David] interprets facts differently.”
If you truly believe that calling a rise from 71 to 76 “exponential” is merely “an interpretation,” I would not trust your judgment on any important matter.
It’s quite obviously a lie intended to support a political viewpoint. How in the world can you not see this? An “exponential” rise is an astronomical, huge, gigantic rise. Going from a cume of 71 to 76 simply does not qualify.
And pretending it’s all just a matter of “interpretation” is obtuse.
“It was all over CNN, which is supposedly the most liberal of the majors.”
And there’s the proof! If CNN even MENTIONS the word conservative, that is conclusive proof that they are NOT liberal at all!
Except for the fact that the point of 999 out of 1,000 of their reports is (what else) BUSH SUCKS!
Because you are operating under the shelter of anonymity, which suits a predatory agenda over a fairness. No one else here is reserving the right to be a predator.
Actually, dude, x-ray kinda does represent republicans.
Bush won’t cut his monthlong vacation short to deal with the memo warning him about bin Laden, or fire anyone after 9-11 for thwarting Richard Clarke or the FBI from doing anything about it — but he’ll cut his vacation short to keep a feeding tube in Terri Schiavo?
X-Ray is chickenshit, and Bush is chickenshit, and Bush’s chickenshit is starting to manifest in the polls. For the sake of the country, I hope it doesn’t let up.
“Actually, dude, x-ray kinda does represent republicans”
I’m not entirely sure I agree with that. We have any number of conservatives and GOPers on this board, and I don’t see them flocking to support the village idiot. I mean, when even Iowa Jim is telling the guy he’s out of line, that indicates to me he’s pretty much out there on his own, a fact underscored by his need to create alternate identities to back himself up.
PAD
Bladestar,
“Nope X-Ray. You’re just a pathetic fûçkìņg child”
You know, X-Ray is acting like such an unimaginative, immature, idiotic child I have to agree with you Bladestar. 100%.
Bladestar,
“Nope X-Ray. You’re just a pathetic fûçkìņg child”
Jerome Maida
“You know, X-Ray is acting like such an unimaginative, immature, idiotic child I have to agree with you Bladestar. 100%.”
Wow.
Ok, is there still time to buy apocalypse insurance?
Seriously, though, it is good to see in these fractured times, that there are still things that can bring everybody together. *sniff* Brings a tear to my eye…
(some would argue he is an idiot in spite of his mediocre grades).
Which is the argument Kerry’s party should’ve gone with. 🙂
Unfortunately, few are very interested in the truth.
Kerry is lucky they didn’t use the current grading curve we use at my high school–he would have a D average while Bush would have a C.
And yet, Bush is proud to be a C-average student. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I would, you know, strive to be a better student, and I wouldn’t really strive to be mediocre. 🙂
So how come Kerry wasn’t smart enough to get elected, and Bush was?
Politics is, at best, a game of propoganda. And, as we have learned over the last 5+ years, the Bush Administration excels at it.
I’m not entirely sure I agree with that.
Well, if there’s one thing everybody should know about the internet, is that in no way does any group using it present an accurate representation of the population at large.
However, I do think in X-Ray’s case, one could make an exception.
“Seriously, though, it is good to see in these fractured times, that there are still things that can bring “everybody together. *sniff* Brings a tear to my eye…”
Made me laugh. Thanks! I like fun.
“And yet, Bush is proud to be a C-average student.”
Bush was a just single point away from having a B average. But don’t let the facts get in your way. Like Peter David, just omit the actual numbers and mischaracterize them!
Like Peter David, just omit the actual numbers and mischaracterize them!
Hard to mischaracterize what Bush himself has stated.
He stated he was proud to be a C-average student.
Not “one point away from B-average”.
So, if you have a problem with this fact, take it up with that idiot you worship that is unfortunately our president.
Y’know….Einstein was anything but an A student. So I find that this whole debate is rather pointless. The fact remains that Bush was SMART ENOUGH to surround himself with the people who could get him elected. Kerry was unsuccessful. So let’s deal with the situation now as the freedom clock winds down, and hope that the damage can be contained.
Before anyone attacks me as being a blind liberal, I’d STILL like to go fishin’ with Dubya. Love him or hate him, he strikes me as a “regular guy” and perhaps that’s what part of his success stems from.
X-Ray seems to bear a striking resemblance in his posting-content with that other troll we had a number of months back, whose name escapes me (and probably everyone else as well). Much ado about nothing.
Here’s a wonderful quote from Bush, just for X-Ray:
“I’ll probably say it three more times, see, in my line of work you gotta keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kinda catapult the propaganda.”
Wow, a president who calls his own statments propoganda. What a country we live in.
Maybe next time he can go on about how great it woudl be if he were a dictator. No, wait, he’s already done that too.
What X-Ray has been struggling to get across may be this:
He seems to be hung up on the correct mathematical usage of exponential as in exponential growth: “development at an increasingly rapid rate in proportion to the growing total number or size; a constant rate of growth applied to a continuously growing base over a period of time” – from dictionary.com
Aaron Drucker I think was also correct: Most people using the term “exponential” or “exponentially” aren’t limiting themselves to the strict definition of the term as used in math.
I understood that PAD wasn’t using the word that way, or that the numbers weren’t right for that meaning. I also understood what he WAS saying in terms of the numbers improving over the next three years.
Perhaps X-Ray’s predetermined agenda is showing through.
The only thing that disappoints me more than these kinds of trollish figures are when respected individuals cave to their attention-craving. There’s a reason there’s the warning: “Don’t feed the trolls.”
PAD, you’re better than this. You can’t argue logic with someone who’s devoid of it.
I mean, when even Iowa Jim is telling the guy he’s out of line,
I think the words I would have actually used was more along the lines of off the deep end. Whatever line existed was obliterated a long time ago.
Iowa Jim
“I think the words I would have actually used was more along the lines of off the deep end.”
Well, I checked, and as it turns out, what you actually said was that you were “disgusted” by the posts. So we both weren’t exact, which is fine. The point is that you didn’t point to the guy as some sort of standard bearer of GOP ideals.
PAD
“What are you accomplishing?”
Isn’t it obvious?
(Number of posts made about me by Peter David, who is “Donne” with me: FOUR in just one night! I’d hate to see what would happen if he paid attention to me.)
X-Ray: It’s amusing how you liberals cannot come up with specifics, so you lie and distort, like David did in his post.
Luigi Novi: Right, because conservatives are so qualitatively and genetically different from liberals that they have the market cornered on honesty. Oh no, the flaws in human character from which dishonesty is derived is not universal at all. Cons are honest. Libs are not. How naive you are.
X-Ray: I called Peter David a liar, because he lied.
Luigi Novi: Nope. Sorry. Thank you for playing. A liar is someone who lies habitually. If a liar is someone who has told a lie, then everyone on this board is a liar, including you, X, since you have no doubt lied at some point in your lifetime.
X-Ray: Tellingly, he had no objection to this characterization at all, Not a single word. Rather than defend himself…
Luigi Novi: You proceed from the false presumption that flimsy arguments like yours necessarily need to be responded to. They don’t. Some people are so incompetent in constructing a cogent point that some people feel that there is little point in responding to it.
X-Ray: he calls what I said, “Classic. And funny.”
Luigi Novi: Actually, he didn’t. He said that reiterating your opponent’s argument is. He never said that being called a liar was. He made it clear that your writing “bush sucks” was classic and funny. Interesting that you claim “distortion” on Peter’s part, which you feel justifies calling him a liar, but when you distort his words (even attributing words to him that he never said, like “bush sucks”), it’s somehow okay.
Hey, hear that chirping sound?
(Turns to the window)
Oh look! The hypocrites are in season!
X-Ray: I think that tells the tale. David knows he lied, knows he cannot defend himself…
Luigi Novi: Nope. That’s simply your conclusion. NOt something that anyone here “knows.”
According to the article at the Boston Globe, Kerry’s GPA was an 81 in his Senior Year. That’s a 10 point rise from the 71 in his Freshmen year. Obviously, you can’t have a literal exponential rise in GPA unless you start out with, say, a 2. 10 points is pretty good, though.
“Luigi Novi: Nope. Sorry. Thank you for playing. A liar is someone who lies habitually.”
Then I guess any word can be “interpreted” to mean anything then. For example, you said “Nope.” I interpret that as meaning you agree with me totally!
Thank you!
“[Daivd] calls what I said, “Classic. And funny.”
Luigi Novi: Actually, he didn’t.”
Actually, he did.
“According to the article at the Boston Globe, Kerry’s GPA was an 81 in his Senior Year. That’s a 10 point rise from the 71 in his Freshmen year. Obviously, you can’t have a literal exponential rise in GPA unless you start out with, say, a 2. 10 points is pretty good, though.”
That is not what the article said. Kerry rose from 71 to 76. Is there any OTHER way you’d like to try to make Peter David’s lies into truth?
Peter posted casually, and your need to drive the people you disagree with from casualness is just that — your need. Your needieness is sickening.
And when I say your neediness is sickening, I’m not recommending you repress yourself or jump out of a window or anything like that. You need to stop confusing your neediness with strength.