dragging out the scapegoats

[MalignD at aol.com]

In a message dated 9/20/1 6:37:31 PM, Lycidas wrote:

<<I'm still baffled by those that bash Bush for his apparent lack of
intelligence. 

I think he is a very smart man with a language problem, but his difficulty 
with the English language, with language itself,  tells us nothing about his 
intelligence. We may say that his policies are stupid, but this would be a 
criticism of some very intelligent men. So what we are really saying is that 
we disagree with the administration's policies, and rather than critique 
those policies, we will keep calling Bush a dunce simply because he can't 
speak very well?>>

If, as you say, "his difficulty with the English language, with language 
itself,  tells us nothing about his intelligence," and "[w]e may say that his 
policies are stupid, but this would be a criticism of some very intelligent 
men," what exactly do youj think you're defending?  

The answer, it seems, is an inarticulate man, the intelligence of whose 
policies you condone by arguing that intelligent men in the past have 
articulated "stupid" policies.

Nice argument.