HEY, LIBERAL NITWIT WHACKJOBS --- OUR PRESIDENT DID NOT WAVE AT STEVIE WONDER

Well, ladies and gentlemen, the whiners who still can't get over Florida were attempting to run with a story that our President waved to blind entertainer Stevie Wonder at a recent event. Unfortunately for them, the story is not true. Here it is from www.snopes2.com -----

Claim: Hoping to attract the singer's attention at the March 2002 Presidential Gala, George W. Bush waved at Stevie Wonder.

When Stevie Wonder sat down at the keyboard center stage, President Bush in the front row got very excited. He smiled and started waving at Wonder, who understandably did not respond. After a moment Bush realized his mistake and slowly dropped the errant hand back to his lap.

I know I shouldn't have," a witness told us yesterday, "but I started laughing."

Origins: This story appeared in the pages of The Washington Post in early March 2002. Because it was such a juicy tidbit ("The Prez is such a dolt, he waves at blind folks!"), it was subsequently picked up by numerous talk radio hosts who gleefully fed it to their listeners and reached an even larger audience through the medium of television via Late Night with Conan O'Brien and Saturday Night Live.

Was it true? Well, not really. Although Stevie Wonder did perform at the 3 March 2002 Presidential Gala held at the Ford Theatre in Washington where President Bush was in attendance, the "wave" was both far less that initially made out to be and appears to have been directed at someone else.

After running the item as true and being challenged upon it by the Ford's Theatre Artistic Director, who was seated by the President that night and didn't at all recall this incident, Washington Post writer Lloyd Grove delved further into the story. Editors working on turning film of that event into a television special (which is scheduled to air April 12) went frame by frame through the video captured by the "presidential isocam" (as the camera trained on Bush is called). At the point where Wonder was getting settled behind his keyboard, Bush briefly raised his palm and smiled. The gesture was not the excited, enthused wave it is now comically portrayed to be; it was a small motion of the sort one routinely makes to an acquaintance across a crowded room. Moreover, the motion appears to have been directed at Kelsey Grammer, the emcee of the evening.

Stories that showcase blockheadedness stick to George W. Bush like feathers to a tar-coated chicken because they seemingly confirm what much of the public already holds as true about this public figure, that he's not the brightest fellow that's ever been. It is human nature to revel in yarns that the hearer at some level agrees with, thus tales of this sort will always fall upon appreciative ears. Witness the excitment with which the false story about presidential I.Q., as Bush's ranking upon this list was greeted as another example of this phenomenon in action.

THIS IS FROM THE BOSTON GLOBE

GORE'S DUBIOUS SCHOOL RECORD
Author: By JENNIFER C. BRACERAS

Date: 09/07/2000 Page: A15 Section: Op-Ed
JENNIFER C. BRACERAS
Jennifer C. Braceras is an attorney and research fellow at Harvard Law School. Her column appears regularly in the Globe.

When will the liberal media stop treating left-wing ideology as a proxy for intelligence? For months the press has questioned the intellect of Republican candidate George W. Bush, while describing Al Gore as "serious," "intellectual" - even "wonkish."

The basis for the media's unfair attacks on Bush's intelligence is his 30-year-old Yale College transcript (purloined last fall and published by The New Yorker). Yet The Washington Post's subsequent revelation of Gore's unimpressive academic record has done little to alter the media's false portrayal of Gore as "the smartest kid in the class." It is a record that is worth reviewing, if only to debunk the myth of Gore as a serious student.

Gore's undergraduate transcript from Harvard is riddled with C's, including a C-minus in introductory economics, a D in one science course, and a C-plus in another. "In his sophomore year at Harvard," the Post reported, "Gore's grades were lower than any semester recorded on Bush's transcript from Yale." Moreover, Gore's graduate school record - consistently glossed over by the press - is nothing short of shameful. In 1971, Gore enrolled in Vanderbilt Divinity School where, according to Bill Turque, author of "Inventing Al Gore," he received F's in five of the eight classes he took over the course of three semesters. Not surprisingly, Gore did not receive a degree from the divinity school. Nor did Gore graduate from Vanderbilt Law School, where he enrolled for a brief time and received his fair share of C's. (Bush went on to earn an MBA from Harvard).

But whereas the liberal press has described Bush's college days as a time of misspent youth, media accounts of Gore's undergraduate years are grossly fawning. (The New York Times: "As Mr. Bush was frolicking around Yale, a young man named Al Gore was studying at Harvard"; "Harvard nurtured the part of [Gore] that is in love with the world of ideas." The New Republic: "At Harvard, Gore set himself formidable intellectual challenges.")

And then there is the laughable October issue of Psychology Today. As part of a cover story entitled, "Gore and Bush on the Couch," the magazine reports the results of a spurious "analysis" of 10 of the candidates speeches and/or interviews. The authors claim that the study "verifies" the popular stereotype that "Bush is not as deep a thinker as Gore."

Two pages later, readers will be shocked - shocked! - to learn that the magazine's (no doubt scientific) study of the candidates' facial gestures reveals that Gore is the "more serious, constrained, controlled, weighty, ponderous, [and] dominant of the two candidates." More ponderous, perhaps . . . but, please, spare me the pop psychology.

Biased reporters, however, are not the only ones to blame. Indeed, the vice president himself has cultivated this genius persona (one of many). Thus, he did not correct PBS News anchor Gwen Ifill when she referred to him as a graduate of Vanderbilt Law School. Even more significant was the line in Gore's convention acceptance speech in which he stated, "I know my own imperfections. I know that sometimes people say I'm too serious, that I talk too much substance and policy." Poor Al, he's just too smart for the job.

Of course, the stereotyping of conservative candidates as dumb and liberal candidates as "brilliant" is nothing new. During the 1950s, the media lionized Democrat Adlai Stevenson as an intellectual, while ridiculing Republican Dwight Eisenhower as an ineffectual simpleton. Back then, the members of the press knew full well that Stevenson attended Harvard Law School and, yet, had not received a degree. But the media gave Stevenson a pass. (Sound familiar?) Had resourceful journalists investigated, they might have learned (as we now know from Stevenson's biographer John Bartlow Martin) that Harvard Law School Dean Erwin Griswold had hidden Stevenson's transcript in a locked cabinet in his office. What was he hiding? Stevenson, the so-called "thinking man's candidate," had, in fact, flunked out of Harvard Law.

In the end, neither intellect nor academic performance is an especially important criterion by which to judge our presidents. Ronald Reagan and Harry Truman were no scholars, but they rank among the best presidents in our country's history. And what about many liberals' favorite president - Franklin Roosevelt? Social, popular, and famously unserious as an undergraduate at Harvard, FDR had an undistinguished academic record. Yet, later in life, Roosevelt's charisma and his ability to persuade, compromise, and lead helped him to become a "reformer with results."

This election is not an I.Q. test; it is about which candidate has better judgment. And that is why, despite the media's love affair with the celluloid image of Al Gore the policy-wonk, it is the affable, authentic, and sensible Bush who would make the better leader.

=====================================

Will someone post the picture of idiot Gore pointing the M-14 or M-16 at himself in Vietnam? Thanks.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.