The truth is...

George W. Bush lacks brain power. Our country is in turmoil worse than ever before. Why? Because the man who runs our country can’t even say “nuclear”. I could spend hours digging into all that he has done wrong, but quite frankly I haven’t the time. When it comes down to it you have two choices. One of them is literally dumb as dirt. You decide. :O

Ali - Bush is not considered to be a picture of intellect. However, we live in a very non-intellectual time in the USA right now (this is a separate topic but easily verified) which is why guys like Bush can get elected. Bush got C’s in college & couldn’t even make it into law school. Bush doesn’t give many press conferences because he screws up every time he’s off script (because his brain doesn’t work very well IMO).

Kerry on the other hand is very bright, an excellent debater & is well read, but doesn’t talk/act like a commoner & therefore is considered aloof & elite, traits the right are trying to pin on them.

There was a period where intellectuals, like Einstein, were like movie stars but that is long over. Now it’s people like conservative talk show hosts & commentators who can shout you down & make you look foolish, who get all the glory. It’s a sad time here IMO.

Quote (CosmicCharlie @ Sep. 15 2004,23:02)
Kerry on the other hand is very bright, an excellent debater & is well read, but doesn't talk/act like a commoner & therefore is considered aloof & elite, traits the right are trying to pin on them.

I think they call it... 'nuanced'.

A more detailed explanation from Scott Ott of 'Scrappleface"

"Kerry Calls Bush Poll Lead 'Wrong Bounce at Wrong Time'
by Scott Ott

(2004-09-13) -- Democrat presidential candidate John Forbes Kerry today said the lead that President George Bush has taken in the polls since the Republican Convention is "the wrong bounce at the wrong time and it's wrong for America."

"The W in George W. Bush still stands for wrong," said Mr. Kerry, renewing his latest campaign slogan. "It's wrong to mislead Americans into choosing you in presidential preference polls. It's wrong to let ideology, character and so-called 'principles' blind you to the subtlety and nuance of modern statesmanship. It's wrong to dominate your adversary in a way that makes him feel bad about himself and his future."

Mr. Kerry, a Vietnam veteran and distinguished anti-war protestor who is also a U.S. Senator, said the "polls don't mean anything to me right now."

"A couple of months ago when I was leading Mr. Bush, the polls were clearly an accurate barometer of public sentiment," he said. "But now they're wrong, wrong, wrong."

The Democrat candidate said he if he were conducting the polling research, "I wouldn't have just done some things differently, I would have done almost everything differently. As a consequence, we wouldn't have had some of America's finest men bogged down in this unwinnable conflict--dare I say, this quagmire."

President Bush, asked to respond to Mr. Kerry's latest attacks said, "The W stands for 'whatever'. That's my response. Next question."

Scott Ott


Funny Stuff,
"The W stands for 'whatever'. That's my response. Next question.
Perfect example of the anti-intellectualism here. Everyone just eats this stuff up. It's sad really.

I would have like to see Kerry/Bush have debates like the Lincoln/Douglas debates. It would be good for both of them & good for the country. Bush would never do it though.

It is actually sad to see (and this isn’t new) that the two main characters in this thing have two run down the other one in order to make himself look better.

That’s just sad.

Mike, you say that everyone eats this ‘anti-intellectualism’ .

I’m wondering, and I’m totally open for being wrong here, but it does seem to me that the candidate with the greatest ‘entertainment value’ is the one who gets the votes.

Is it really like that over there ?



I'm wondering, and I'm totally open for being wrong here, but it does seem to me that the candidate with the greatest 'entertainment value' is the one who gets the votes.

Is it really like that over there ?

I know you asked Mike, and I am NOT speaking on his behalf... but yes. Your statement is cynical but true, and has been since the advent of television. Politics has had precious little to do with issues or even reality here in a very long time - the election side of things, anyway.

In my OPINION, if you want to understand US or world politics, study the history of organized crime. If you want to understand the ELECTION process, look to the principles of marketing and advertisement.
Quote (pete @ Sep. 16 2004,08:49)
In my OPINION, if you want to understand US or world politics, study the history of organized crime. If you want to understand the ELECTION process, look to the principles of marketing and advertisement.

I hope you don't mind Pete....I share that opinion with you.

As for the other posts about the intellectual state of is sad but true that we have traded our thirst for real knowledge and enlightenment for instant gratification IMHO. Look at TV if you can stand it. The only channels I can bear to watch are Discovery, History Channel and test patterns!

I've heard the expression "The Dumbing down of America". It's not just America.


Pete, no problem ! I just asked Mike 'cause he’s the one who made the comment that triggered my question.

It is mildly interesting to see what the trend in politics is (basically the same as the legal system - the party that can afford the smoothest talker is more likely to win).

What’s also sad to see is the whole trend towards meaningless ‘eyecandy’ (if you can really call it that) that get transmitted nowadays (ala MTV and whatelse). It just seems that children nowadays are braught up to not think about anything. Everything is built around the entertainment or experience value.

Shees here in SA teenagers can’t spell anymore because they all write in cellphone SMS style and know nothing else.

Back to the topic - it really is sad that nothing is safe from this new mode anymore.
Not music, not politics and heck, even some churces nowadays focus waaaay more on the entertainment-orientated-delivery rather than the quality and solidness of what needs to be delivered.

And the crowds loves it.

I’ve always been of the opinion however that you cannot blame the people who sell cheap meaningless ‘entertainment’ to the masses. They won’t have a market if people didn’t like that.

Quite a reflection on the quality of the people then isn’t it ?


O BTW this post stopped being about America just after the 1st sentance, so all of this is a comment about people in general rather than only the US.

And I am only 30 now - I’ve just re-read it and I sound 70.

Aaah well.

And I am only 30 now - I've just re-read it and I sound 70.

Yeah - but a good, healthy, sound 70.

My favorite comparison comes from a great privilige I've been very fortunate to have in my life - friends in the Amish community. I don't know if that means much to you there in S.A., but these are Anabaptists who have deliberately separated themselves from media and much of technological advancement.

Having close friends in the Amish community, I've been able to compare my own children as they have developed to children in their communities, and the differences are absolutely remarkable.

You say you can't blame the marketers, and I can't disagree - but then you can't really blame the consumers either, can you? After all, this gorgeous package is being offered - full of glitz and glamor and fascinating, sexy pseudo-life. It is being offered strategically, keeping the principles of psychology, rhetoric, persuasion and influence firmly in mind - tools that the vast majority of populations aren't even aware are being used on them. It is a vicious circle of non-blame, isn't it?

It falls back to human nature itself, as all of this does. Anywhere power and wealth accumulate, corruption breeds. This is the downfall of the Marxist ideal, all collectivist mindsets, and, yes, even capitalism. They ALL fail because of the reality of human frailty.

The underlying question, then, is who is going to hold that power? How is it controlled, even while recognizing that those trying to control it will be corrupted? An attempt was made to answer this in the founding of the United States - but we fell away from the idea of a Constitutionally Limited Republic a very long time ago. Who knows... it might have worked!
Mike, you say that everyone eats this 'anti-intellectualism' .

I'm wondering, and I'm totally open for being wrong here, but it does seem to me that the candidate with the greatest 'entertainment value' is the one who gets the votes.

Is it really like that over there ?

Of course everyone is not anti-intellectual & both our major parties hold no monopoly on anti-intellectualism but yes it really is like that here.

Science is not held in as high esteem as it used to be. We continually cut funding for education & come up with the wrong policies/standards to make it better.

Bush has systematically attacked different sciences like stem-cell research, etc. See this article - Science.

Disciplines like evolution is attacked & one way it is attacked it is to discredit the scientists & the science itself. False sciences such as creationism are pushed as real science.

Just watch our TV & listen to our pop music, and you'll see where our culture is it.

That’s sad.

And I suppose we are going down the same alley.

Although I love my country, some of the politicians over here are just too - I dunno - corrupt if that’s the proper word.

The thing that happens (regularly) over here is
1: Politician A does something wrong/ stiff some money from someone / take a bribe.
2: Someone finds out about it, and tell Politician B
3: Politician B makes a huge stink about it and about justice that needs to be done.
4: Politician A start lying about it and denying everything.
5: Politician B produces conclusive proof.
6: Politician A admits (maybe) blaming apartheid and the struggle (no really - this happens) for his actions.
7: Then politician A find some dirt on politician B. Goto 2 but switcth A with B.
This can go on for some time, and then eventually it will end up in court, both will be found guilty, they’ll have a fine to pay, they don’t pay it, and next year they’re both in parliament again, having just been given new cars and a fat salary increase.

I kid you not.

On the other side of the spectrum you have the health minister, who after the highest court in our country ruled that the government must hand out Anti Retrovirals for free don’t do it.
Then she goes to the UK on some official bussiness, and people over there start to ask some questions. Like ‘Why are you not giving out retrovirals for free to the people ?’ - ‘cause the state does not have enough money’ ‘But South Africa just closed a multi billion Rand arms deal ?’ ‘Yes, we must be ready just in case some dangerous forces like the US wants to come and invade our country’.

Can you take this seriously ?

I mean - we are on the Southern most tip of Africa, and I’m pretty shure we’re not on GW’s list of ‘Countries I need to invade before I get voted off’ (although I’m not saying that he doesn’t have a list like that :;): )
(I mean, even if we have weopons, I’ve been in the army, and i know what it’s about.
We were VERY good in the eighties, but nowadays ?
If you guys wanted to, you could send one of those USS-Son-Of-a-Bitch oil tanker airport medium size city ‘nukilar’ hybrids over here, park it on the wrong side of RobbenIsland, take out everything that’s dear to us (including Table Mountain) and be off before we even know what hit us.)

And here she dishes that up for the whole world to take as gospel. On the spur of the moment, sucked out of the thumb answers. That might change next week. “I never said that !”
“Here’s a news clip of you saying it” "I never said that! That must be doctored. This is a conspiricy. Apartheid’s fault !"

I am not exagerating. /end rant

You wonder why the rest of us don’t really care about politics ?



US politics is world politics.

Such as, Putin taking away some liberties in the name of finding the terrorists…and the US saying he should be doing that?

That’s like the pot calling the kettle black as they say over here.

This reminds me of something that’s been on my mind the last few days.

Anyone looked up Nostradamus’ (supposed) predictions about WWIII? I honestly think that stuff is crap, but it’s uncanny how the current war situation is turning out.

From memory…I need to look it up…That movie with the Citizen Kane guy (What can’t I remember his name?) narrating talked about it some but didn’t go into the details one book I have boxed up somewhere went into. The book was originally written back in the 1930’s I think…but it’s something like this…

—A war starts in early 1990’s involving a guy in a blue turban - Middle East guy in any case - and the US.
—Seems to end and all is well for a while - ten years or so; the Middle East guy is out of action most assume.
—The US attacks someone first in the last 1990’s early 2000’s. Yes, the US starts what appears to be an unprovoked war, at least in the eyes of most of the rest of the world.
—The Middle East guy from the first war is heavily evolved, and back in full power by then (rising like a phoenix or some such wording).
—Then there is that guy in the turban. Is it one or two guys? (Hindsight is wonderful to make predictions come true)
—One of these guys is potentially the Anti-Christ and will be instrumental into much nastiness.
—The war starts slowly and builds, lasting over 30 years, slowly pulling in more and more nations until it is a true world war.
—It’s the worst nastiest war the world has ever seen by far with lots of really bad stuff, like what appears to be nuclear bombs going off (…like the sun…) and biological or chemical warfare.
—It is the last big war there will be, the end of the world as we know it, but not the end of the world.
—It might be so bad there’s not much left to fight for after it, so there is no reason to fight again.
—The US (the bear) and it’s allies will eventually win, but at major catastrophic costs.

Scary if you take it seriously. Freaky if you don’t.

Ali, everyone knows that the answer to life, the universe and everything is 42 !

Where have you been ?


I worked on that show Wihan, Bush House, 1978 ish?

Douglas Adams had just done a series of Doctor Who as director (which I hadn’t worked on), and was full of vim and vigour. It was great fun. I remember Doug trying to make an anagram out of “silly fat bastard” which resulted in Sllatdiy Bartfast or summat, (work it out your self! lol) :)

Ah memories! Leave me alone! :D


I’m waiting for another effort at The Guide with modern filmmaking. The time is right, though it will never replace the quirky BBC effort of… what… the 70’s?

And no, I don’t wear a digital watch.

(I was going to take the weekend off posting… then ya had to go and mention 42. sigh)

42…Don’t tell me that. Now I’m getting depressed. I could live with almost any other number.

…it’s even you know…and divisible by 6 AND 7!! How weird it THAT!