Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (51444)	10/12/2002 11:58:58 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Are we finished with this topic yet? Bush definitely suffers from foot-in-mouth disease, and he may well be a simpleton, but I don't think the two are related. He's not very complicated, and he's not a deep thinker. He doesn't have much intellectual curiosity. He's not really interested in philosophy, science, literature, art, or clever repartee. From that you may derive that he is a simpleton, but does it really matter? He is that curious thing, a natural leader. People like that are born, not made, although it helps to come from a family that polishes off the rougher bits, and a lot of family money can't hurt. But being rich doesn't buy you the Presidency, ask Steve Forbes. Connections help because that is what natural leaders do. They make connections with people who want to follow them. If you happen to not like the direction he is headed, then you won't like him. Simpleton isn't really the point. Reagan was a simpleton, Truman was a simpleton. Handlers aren't really the point, either. If the handlers were natural leaders, then why are they handlers? He's the most powerful man on earth. If he doesn't give a flying flip whether it's "nucular" or "nuclear," what difference does it make?