Tim wrote:
On Jan 11, 5:13 am, hk wrote:
Eisboch wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:43:33 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Jan 10, 6:15 pm, hk wrote:
wrote:
More drool from Andy Borwitz..
There's more cleverness and wit in Andy's farts than anything you
have
done in your entire life, with the possible exception of getting in a
fight with the cops at your local police station.
No there isn't. All he sells is hate. It's the same lame comedy (being
generous here) that ruined Saturday Night Live and Air America... it
sells great to folks like you and readers of the Huffington Hoax..
------------------
Which reminds me. I was watching one of Harry's favorites, Rachael
Maddow the other day.
I get a kick out of her because she's so blatantly biased. She was
interviewing some guest, discussing a subject that had absolutely
nothing
to do with Bush, Obama, the economy or anything of current
importance yet
somehow she found a way to cast blame on Bush in response to almost
anything the guest said. It was comical and I wish I had a tape
recorder
or DVR on to preserve it.
I guess it's currently the "in" thing to be an elitist, liberal, Bush
bashing celebrity I guess. It surprises me because she holds a PhD in
something, so she's not stupid. Just brainwashed.
Eisboch
Bush has had a hand in or on just about every major problem this
country
is facing. The majority of adults in this country give him very low
marks
and will be pleased to see him out of office. Maddow's doctorate is
from
one of the Oxford colleges.
So what? Bush went to Yale. You are so over impressed with academic
credentials that you are blinded to reality.
Eisboch
A C student who got in on his family's coattails.
They guy doesn't have critical thinking skills. He's just ****ed up
the 5th job he's had in his adult life.
He's batting 1.000
Which has nothing to do with Harry's fascination and worship of people
with Ivy league degrees.
It's a common issue in his assessment of the "smartness", job
qualifications and value of others.
During a presidential news conference, I particularly liked Ronald
Reagan's response to a reporter who was trying to make a name for
himself by asking about Reagan's school (Eureka College) in a wise ass
and critical way.
Reagan paused for a minute then replied (paraphrasing), "gee, I was just
thinking of what I could have become if I had gone to a big name school".
IMO, Reagan was a lot smarter and accomplished than the modern left give
him credit for.
I am not necessarily speaking of his policies. I am referring to his
leadership qualities. He was secure in his mind of what he wanted to
achieve, he handled himself well in a crisis and oozed with optimism for
the future which was infectious to the rest of the population. That's
true leadership. I am not alone in this assessment or opinion. More
and more people that worked closely with him are coming forward,
discounting many of the rumors and myths of him being a "dullard" or
asleep at the wheel.
Eisboch
Which has nothing to do with George W. Bush or Sarah Palin, who are
dunces, and Rachel Maddow, who is not. There's nothing about Bush's
academic background that impresses me. He got into Yale as a legacy and
Harvard Biz because of family connections.

So did Carolyn Kennedy.

go ahead and compare away.

Carolyn Kennedy is (or at least was) an intelligent individual, even if
she has some of the worst public speaking skills and interview skills in
the world. She graduated in the top 10% from Columbia Law School, which
had nothing to do with her family connections.

Now the fact that she is being considered as a Senatorial candidate with
NO political experience HAS EVERYTHING to do with her family connections
and the legacy of JFK. We have no idea if she has the political skills
to be an effective senator, or she just has the ability to vote the way
she is told to vote.

Her use of uh's and you knows as a stalling tactic as she thinks of what
to say, is just one of the bad habits people use when they are trying to
think of what to say. She has just mastered the use of Uh's. My guess
is she went into panic mood doing the interview, and her brain froze up,
which is the result of her having no political experience. People with
good public speaking skills will use other more effective stalling
techniques, such as repeating the question back to the person, or saying
"Now that is an excellent question" or using "buzz words" and phrases to
fill in the time while they think. Barack, and Reagan both who had
excellent public speaking ability suck at speaking off the cuff. Reagan
learned to use his hearing disability to his advantage by pretending not
to hear the question. Barack will probably give very few interviews
without knowing the questions in advance. "W" might have the worst
public speaking skills in recorded history.