Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:42:00 -0400, hk wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:41:26 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:38:33 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:17:05 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

Lots of us stupid folks running around!!
It is true that half of the people are below average in intelligence.
Many are notably dumb, [in numbers equal to the notably bright.]
Casady
I would argue that there is little relationship between 'intelligence' and
'stupidity'.
Only a mathematical one.
If you are discussing what is measured by so called intelligence
tests, there seems to be a bell shaped curve, with as many below
average as above it. The correllation between IQ and the real world
does gets debated a lot.

Casady
America has dumbed down substantially the last few years.

One only needs to look at you for proof that most of liberal America
is lower on the IQ scale than brain dead.


Oh, sure, Tom. But...you're the one who bought the eTec.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:21:55 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


wrote in message
et...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:32:43 -0400, hk wrote:


You boys ought to run for political office. After all, you both were in
the military. That certainly would convince me to vote for you. :)

In all honesty, either one, would be a better candidate than some I've
seen in recent years.


Ah, yes. The ultimate dream team.

Here's part of my platform:

I would embrace the liberal concept of redistribution of wealth and
resources to make things fairer across the board.

For example, I figure people with small boats and fuel efficient engines
don't use or need anywhere near the amount of fuel required for those with
big, fuel hogging boats in their respective, mutual enjoyment of boating.

Therefore, the people with small boats can afford to pay more for a gallon
of fuel because they need so much less of it.

A graduated fuel cost/gallon program will be instituted, with cost per
gallon decreasing as boat length and fuel burn rates increase.

Obviously, blow boaters will pay the highest for fuel.


See? I can make just about as much sense as some of our current
politicians in office.

Well, see - if you were a real politician you would have said that all
boaters are wasting gas and diesel and a special tax is needed to
compensate for the use of our precious resources.

And then insert language in the bill in small print to exclude
Mainship owners who have boats only at a certain marina on the Cape.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:21:55 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:32:43 -0400, hk wrote:


You boys ought to run for political office. After all, you both were in
the military. That certainly would convince me to vote for you. :)
In all honesty, either one, would be a better candidate than some I've
seen in recent years.

Ah, yes. The ultimate dream team.

Here's part of my platform:

I would embrace the liberal concept of redistribution of wealth and
resources to make things fairer across the board.

For example, I figure people with small boats and fuel efficient engines
don't use or need anywhere near the amount of fuel required for those with
big, fuel hogging boats in their respective, mutual enjoyment of boating.

Therefore, the people with small boats can afford to pay more for a gallon
of fuel because they need so much less of it.

A graduated fuel cost/gallon program will be instituted, with cost per
gallon decreasing as boat length and fuel burn rates increase.

Obviously, blow boaters will pay the highest for fuel.


See? I can make just about as much sense as some of our current
politicians in office.

Well, see - if you were a real politician you would have said that all
boaters are wasting gas and diesel and a special tax is needed to
compensate for the use of our precious resources.

And then insert language in the bill in small print to exclude
Mainship owners who have boats only at a certain marina on the Cape.




I'm in favor of fuel rationing for vehicles, even though it would very
difficult to set up a rational "fair" system. The way we are going now,
average people cannot afford to pay for the fuel it takes to get to
work, or to sustain their lives and the lives of their families.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:34:50 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:41:26 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:38:33 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:17:05 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

Lots of us stupid folks running around!!

It is true that half of the people are below average in intelligence.
Many are notably dumb, [in numbers equal to the notably bright.]
Casady

I would argue that there is little relationship between 'intelligence' and
'stupidity'.
Only a mathematical one.
If you are discussing what is measured by so called intelligence
tests, there seems to be a bell shaped curve, with as many below
average as above it. The correllation between IQ and the real world
does gets debated a lot.

Casady

I am saying that a person with an IQ of 140+ can be very stupid!

On Aug 23, 2:49 pm, hk wrote:
Valgard Toebreakerson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:42:00 -0400, hk wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:41:26 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:38:33 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:17:05 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

Lots of us stupid folks running around!!
It is true that half of the people are below average in intelligence.
Many are notably dumb, [in numbers equal to the notably bright.]
Casady
I would argue that there is little relationship between 'intelligence' and
'stupidity'.
Only a mathematical one.
If you are discussing what is measured by so called intelligence
tests, there seems to be a bell shaped curve, with as many below
average as above it. The correllation between IQ and the real world
does gets debated a lot.

Casady
America has dumbed down substantially the last few years.

One only needs to look at you for proof that most of liberal America
is lower on the IQ scale than brain dead.

Oh, sure, Tom. But...you're the one who bought the eTec.

LOL!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrnU2nDj_Yk

"hk" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:21:55 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:32:43 -0400, hk wrote:


You boys ought to run for political office. After all, you both were
in
the military. That certainly would convince me to vote for you. :)
In all honesty, either one, would be a better candidate than some I've
seen in recent years.

Ah, yes. The ultimate dream team.

Here's part of my platform:

I would embrace the liberal concept of redistribution of wealth and
resources to make things fairer across the board.

For example, I figure people with small boats and fuel efficient
engines don't use or need anywhere near the amount of fuel required for
those with big, fuel hogging boats in their respective, mutual
enjoyment of boating.

Therefore, the people with small boats can afford to pay more for a
gallon of fuel because they need so much less of it.

A graduated fuel cost/gallon program will be instituted, with cost per
gallon decreasing as boat length and fuel burn rates increase.

Obviously, blow boaters will pay the highest for fuel.


See? I can make just about as much sense as some of our current
politicians in office.

Well, see - if you were a real politician you would have said that all
boaters are wasting gas and diesel and a special tax is needed to
compensate for the use of our precious resources.

And then insert language in the bill in small print to exclude
Mainship owners who have boats only at a certain marina on the Cape.




I'm in favor of fuel rationing for vehicles, even though it would very
difficult to set up a rational "fair" system. The way we are going now,
average people cannot afford to pay for the fuel it takes to get to work,
or to sustain their lives and the lives of their families.

*average* people?

"John H." salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:34:50 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:41:26 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:38:33 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:17:05 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

Lots of us stupid folks running around!!

It is true that half of the people are below average in intelligence.
Many are notably dumb, [in numbers equal to the notably bright.]
Casady

I would argue that there is little relationship between 'intelligence'
and
'stupidity'.
Only a mathematical one.
If you are discussing what is measured by so called intelligence
tests, there seems to be a bell shaped curve, with as many below
average as above it. The correllation between IQ and the real world
does gets debated a lot.

Casady

I am saying that a person with an IQ of 140+ can be very stupid!

When I was in the service we had saying applying to some folks, all G2 and
no gee-whiz.

D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:21:55 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:32:43 -0400, hk wrote:


You boys ought to run for political office. After all, you both were
in
the military. That certainly would convince me to vote for you. :)
In all honesty, either one, would be a better candidate than some I've
seen in recent years.
Ah, yes. The ultimate dream team.

Here's part of my platform:

I would embrace the liberal concept of redistribution of wealth and
resources to make things fairer across the board.

For example, I figure people with small boats and fuel efficient
engines don't use or need anywhere near the amount of fuel required for
those with big, fuel hogging boats in their respective, mutual
enjoyment of boating.

Therefore, the people with small boats can afford to pay more for a
gallon of fuel because they need so much less of it.

A graduated fuel cost/gallon program will be instituted, with cost per
gallon decreasing as boat length and fuel burn rates increase.

Obviously, blow boaters will pay the highest for fuel.


See? I can make just about as much sense as some of our current
politicians in office.
Well, see - if you were a real politician you would have said that all
boaters are wasting gas and diesel and a special tax is needed to
compensate for the use of our precious resources.

And then insert language in the bill in small print to exclude
Mainship owners who have boats only at a certain marina on the Cape.



I'm in favor of fuel rationing for vehicles, even though it would very
difficult to set up a rational "fair" system. The way we are going now,
average people cannot afford to pay for the fuel it takes to get to work,
or to sustain their lives and the lives of their families.

*average* people?




You know, the non-rich...the ones whose family income, according to John
McBluster, is less than $5 million a year.

D.Duck wrote:
"John H." salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 19:34:50 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:41:26 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:38:33 GMT, (Richard
Casady) wrote:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 10:17:05 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

Lots of us stupid folks running around!!
It is true that half of the people are below average in intelligence.
Many are notably dumb, [in numbers equal to the notably bright.]
Casady
I would argue that there is little relationship between 'intelligence'
and
'stupidity'.
Only a mathematical one.
If you are discussing what is measured by so called intelligence
tests, there seems to be a bell shaped curve, with as many below
average as above it. The correllation between IQ and the real world
does gets debated a lot.

Casady
I am saying that a person with an IQ of 140+ can be very stupid!

When I was in the service we had saying applying to some folks, all G2 and
no gee-whiz.




Why would Herring be concerned about IQ? His is about the same as his
golf scores.

"hk" wrote in message
news
D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 09:21:55 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 08:32:43 -0400, hk wrote:


You boys ought to run for political office. After all, you both were
in
the military. That certainly would convince me to vote for you. :)
In all honesty, either one, would be a better candidate than some
I've
seen in recent years.
Ah, yes. The ultimate dream team.

Here's part of my platform:

I would embrace the liberal concept of redistribution of wealth and
resources to make things fairer across the board.

For example, I figure people with small boats and fuel efficient
engines don't use or need anywhere near the amount of fuel required
for those with big, fuel hogging boats in their respective, mutual
enjoyment of boating.

Therefore, the people with small boats can afford to pay more for a
gallon of fuel because they need so much less of it.

A graduated fuel cost/gallon program will be instituted, with cost per
gallon decreasing as boat length and fuel burn rates increase.

Obviously, blow boaters will pay the highest for fuel.


See? I can make just about as much sense as some of our current
politicians in office.
Well, see - if you were a real politician you would have said that all
boaters are wasting gas and diesel and a special tax is needed to
compensate for the use of our precious resources.

And then insert language in the bill in small print to exclude
Mainship owners who have boats only at a certain marina on the Cape.



I'm in favor of fuel rationing for vehicles, even though it would very
difficult to set up a rational "fair" system. The way we are going now,
average people cannot afford to pay for the fuel it takes to get to
work, or to sustain their lives and the lives of their families.

*average* people?


You know, the non-rich...the ones whose family income, according to John
McBluster, is less than $5 million a year.

Leaves out Obama.