Clinton smartest president ever

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lefat1 @ Oct 12 2007, 10:47 AM) [snapback]524651[/snapback]</div>

Do you mean IQ? OR do you mean how he stayed on as president after having a sordid affair with a 20? year old assistant? "That woman Ms Lewinsky". I will never get his original denial out of my head, it was brilliant.

 

Well, he did think with his little head.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lefat1 @ Oct 12 2007, 10:59 AM) [snapback]524661[/snapback]</div>

You sure got that right. I have always wondered if my wife would buy the stories like Hillary does. I would probably end up like John Bobbitt. :lol: I am envious of his life, flying around the country getting paid big bucks to speak while his wife is hot on the campaign trail......i am sure he is always faithful. :lol: He gets my vote for smartest since FDR.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Oct 12 2007, 12:01 PM) [snapback]524663[/snapback]</div>

Agree, a role model for every man alive and yet to be born. The only thing I did not agree with was his unusual use of Cuban cigars.

My wife would probably have acted like yours :blink:

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 12 2007, 11:11 AM) [snapback]524669[/snapback]</div>

Not at all like those ever faithfull ones that have come after him, you know like Sen Vitter (R-LA) or Sen Craig (R-ID).

 

So how does one determine the smartest president ever? Just create a website? Is there something that actually backs this up? We can't exactly give them all IQ tests at this point in time.

 

This is my reason for voting for him!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tleonhar @ Oct 12 2007, 12:32 PM) [snapback]524680[/snapback]</div>

I did not realize that Sen. Vitter or Sen. Craig were Presidents. I was under the impression that the original post here referred to "smartest president".

I truly am amazed at Clintons ability to play the field while married - BRILLIANT. And i did not even touch on his ability to create the most amazing and interesting uses for common day objects - who would a thought a cigar was a multitasking/multifunctional instrument :lol: I wonder if he was using a Cohiba Grande or if he was going with the Hoya de Monteray fat boy? Total GENIUS - I would never have had the capacity to come up with that. Whats next....?

Oh, i forgot his other genius.... He turned fellatio into a act not considered sex related. I wont expand from there except to note that an amazing number of middle and high schoolers now feel very free to partake in activities once that disconnect was established. GENIUS again.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lefat1 @ Oct 12 2007, 10:06 AM) [snapback]524694[/snapback]</div>

Clinton is a great orator. Bush is not. That is a given. But wouldn't your test put Steven Hawking at the bottom of the scale?

Do you have a link to this research? I'm curious how they can rate someone from 100 years ago.

 

Now it's Clinton's fault that teenagers are horny? Making that leap is absolute genius.

Even if he did have anything to do with your claim (yet another claim unsubstantiated by actual fact or even personal experience), that would still be genius because that's fewer teens engaging in the kind of sexual acts that get them pregnant.

Steven Hawking has a neurological impairment and he still speaks more coherently than Bush. What's GW's excuse?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 12 2007, 12:45 PM) [snapback]524712[/snapback]</div>

You are wrong again Dr Berman.
Prior to the Clinton episode,oral sex was not considered to be sex by students ,as documented in the Kinsey report and reprinted in JAMA.
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9901/15/jama.editor.02/index.html
"It found 60 percent of college students would not say they "had sex" with someone if it was oral sex."

If anyone is guilty of influencing the sexuality of youth ,it would be the conservatives who kept the story on the front page for years.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Oct 12 2007, 12:45 PM) [snapback]524712[/snapback]</div>

No they were not, but both of them were quite vocal with their holier than thou spoutings on family values and how terrible or "nasty nasty naughty bad boy" Clinton was all the while one was a regular at every whore house between DC and Louisiana and the other was busy playing brokeback senator.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Ichabod @ Oct 12 2007, 10:57 AM) [snapback]524718[/snapback]</div>

No, Hawking does not SPEAK, he cannot control the muscle necessary for speech. All I am saying is the method described doesn't seem like a good way to determine intelligence. History is full of brilliant people who were poor speakers.

I don't know why GW is such a poor speaker. Perhaps he never sought to improve that skill.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Spoid @ Oct 12 2007, 01:45 PM) [snapback]524741[/snapback]</div>

Clinton and GW are almost polar opposites when comparing traits other than the fact they are both white men.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Spoid @ Oct 12 2007, 02:45 PM) [snapback]524741[/snapback]</div>

I'm sorry, let me rephrase: Steven Hawking is incapable of speech in the vocal sense, and yet he still articulates his thoughts more coherently than GWB.

He's a poor comparison because he's arguably and demonstrably a genius, and you're playing at semantics.

Maybe a better criteria would be "expressing one's intelligence in some way," in which case Bush still fails spectacularly. Communication skills really should be requisite for leaders of powerful nations. But if that policy were in effect worldwide, we'd hardly have any more conflict, and that would be bad business for Bush's friends.

That said, I think the OP's claim is both ludicrous and impossible to substantiate.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lefat1 @ Oct 12 2007, 10:47 AM) [snapback]524651[/snapback]</div>

Wishful thinking, reflecting your personal feelings.