"George Bush is stupid!"

We've all heard the shameful America-bashing from the, Enlightened Ones-the Actors and actresses, reporters and other Bush-bashers who think they walk on water. Id want to know why the media elite gives these tiny minds a pass when they blast the president and his cabinet with adjectives such as "ignorant," "Moronic," and "Stupid." Just because you do not agree with the President does not make him stupid. If you did not vote for him it certainly does not mean that you can just disrespect him. He is still your president weather you like it or not. I cant stand Bill Clinton! I believe he has made many bad decisions in his life and did little for this country but that doesn't mean he is stupid! I also did not vote for him but it doesn't mean he wasn't my president. I respect him because he was my president, and that's about all. But never the less I still do respect him.

It adjectives me to see people making ridiculous claims such as Bush is dumb. It would be one thing if these people had some sort of factual information to back their two cents but they never do. In fact just the other day I was on Facebook and saw an old friend of mine had made some remark that, "I used to think George Bush was stupid, but after listening to his State of the Union Address last night now I KNOW he is stupid."

I don't even get what that is supposed to mean. I mean how can you say someone is stupid after they just addressed the United States of America and even earned standing o.'s from democrats such as Barack Obama?

Just for the record I do not support everything our president has done. In fact some issues I couldn't disagree with him more on such as "the no Child Left Behind act" and his lack of border patrol. I cant stand the fact that President Bush chooses not to pardon people who have put their life on the line protecting our borders, or that he does little to nothing for our troops returning from Iraq. But that does not mean he is stupid.

In this debate I would like to face-off with a liberal, democrat or Ron Paul junkie who believes with all of their heart that George Bush is stupid! That way I can set the record straight when I put them in their place and win this debate.

Good luck to my opponent!

My first arguement is simple, that is you should vote for the Pro simply, because the neg has a very bias topic. I cannot prove someone is stupid, so I can simply prove to you that the neg has set a very high burden on me the affirmitive. I define stupid-simply to all you people out there as misguided. We all can agree that Bush is a little misguided sometimes and thus this makes him stupid. First reason, why the war in Iraq, now before I begin I fully support the war on terror, but the war in Iraq was misguided. One reason why, we got into a war witout a clear exit strategy, according to Bill Henrickson, professor of Military strategy at Alabama University write, "A war must have three things to be successful, one it must be based on highly credible intelligence, two it must be a done, taking all the aspects or consequences for the actions and have a high possibility of success, and finaly it must have a exit strategy." First off Bush was misguided and did not have credible evidence, two there was never a high probability of success, and finally, there was no exit strategy. Please vote for the neg, simply because the Aff did not define stupid, and thus cannot deny that Bush was not misguided in the war in Iraq which has cost us billions and soon may last for a long time.

don't mean to make this debate personal because I am not supposed to However you define stupidity as being misguided. That is fine if that is your opinion. But wouldn't that logic make you stupid then seems You said and I quote, "I fully support the war on terror, but the war in Iraq was misguided. " Yet with the same token when I clicked on your profile It CLEARLY states that you are:
United states......................In Favor
Vegetarianism / PETA...............Against
War in Afghanistan.................In Favor
War in Iran........................In Favor
War in Iraq........................In Favor
War on Terrorism...................Against

Now either you just did a hard-core flip-flop or you were "misguided" as to what you were answering to these serious issues. Please enlighten me as to which one is the case for you?

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stupid is either an adjective meaning "lacking in intelligence", or a noun meaning "someone (or something) exhibiting stupidity".,

Stupid may also refer to:
Stupid (band), a punk rock band from Brooklyn
Stupid (art movement), a group of artists in Cologne in the 1920s
Stupid.com, a web site
Stupid!, a UK children's television show on CBBC

http://en.wikipedia.org...

No ware in this definition or explanation is the word misguided even used let alone mentioned. Go to dictionary.com if you want a second opinion. I was already there not to mention, I looked up stupid in several dictionary's and never with the word misguided mentioned or referenced. If you find on that does I would like to site it myself so please sight it for me.

Not to mention if you look at the definition of misguided never is the word stupid used! Yes at times Bush may be led a stray or he may make the occasional wrong judgement or at times he may have poorly conceived or thought out something but that does not prove him to be stupid. It proves he is HUMAN after all and he CAN be misguided. If it does project that he is stupid as you suggest that same logic would imply that you are stupid for making poor judgements or poorly conceiving or strategising how the president of the United States is stupid!
How do you like me now?

"you should vote for the Pro simply, because the neg has a very bias topic."
Ok look you accepted the challenge to this debate, so don't wine about how you think this is unfair. YOU accepted the challenge.

"I cannot prove someone is stupid"
Ok Debating 101 never get into a debate with someone if you can't prove your point! That is the main purpose of a debate so you can share your insight in a convincing was so you can persuade your opponent and or your audience.

"so I can simply prove to you that the neg has set a very high burden on me"
Again don't cry about how heavy your burden is or how difficult your task is. I set no such burden on you, when YOU accepted the challenge YOU placed the entire "burden" as you call it, upon yourself.

"I define stupid-simply to all you people out there as misguided."
Look jr, if you want to debate me then I suggest you start disputing my accusations, if you want to spout out useless opinions with no factual information to back it then go start a blog! www.townhall.com is a good starting place for you. Don't waist my time!

Man with all the flip-flopping and crying you did I am shocked that you are not supporting Hillary Clinton!

In reference to the war in Iraq you said, "two there was never a high probability of success, and finally, there was no exit strategy."
Ok this is a difficult topic to address with out getting off topic to much seems this is a debate about Bush not the war however, It is an indisputable fact that the war has been more successful as of late than it was when we first went in. How do I know this... 1. U.S. soldiers deaths are down 2. The people of Iraq confess they feel safer and better off sense we have come over there and removed Sodom from power and are policing terrorists. 3. I have MANY friends in the military and MANY who are in Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran fighting the war on Terror and every single one of them won't to be there because they say the people love them and appreciate what they are doing to help them even when some people in their own country, the U.S. our country, would fight against them.

Also I don't think any rational president would just sit on their hands after 9/11 and do nothing until they had an exit strategy. We didn't do that when Japs attacked us at Pearl Harbor. We went right over there and fought back. Because we didn't and don't have time to sit around and pontificate and analyze every aspect of what we are doing up to when we finish the war. If we did there is a good chance there would have been another 9/11.

And finally now that I have disputed every argument you have made allow me to make my own. First of all President Bush's formal education included graduating from Yale and then completing a master's of business administration from Harvard's business school ware he received a 3.6 GPA. That's right Harvard and Yale, two of the hardest schools to get accepted into. My guess is Bush was accepted into these schools partly because he scored a 1206 on his SAT's. President Bush also served as managing general partner for five years for the Texas rangers ball club. Not to mention he's been certified as a F-102 pilot and has flown with the Texas Air National Guard during Vietnam. Bush also became Governor of Texas not once but twice in a landslide. He also became the President of the United States of America twice and led the was against Islamo-faschism successfully. Bush also holds the record for the highest approval ratings of any president even among women and minorities. Not to mention Bush received more votes than any other Presidential candidate in history when he won the 2004 election when he beat Senator Kerry by almost 4 million votes!

Some dummy.

First off about Iraq, maybe we should of known the disadvantage of being there. When you enter a war you have to have a exit strategy before entering. Bush was misguided and did not have one. We took out a dictator at the expense of Iraq. The reason, why, we took out a sunni leader in a shiite majority country. The shiite stook their revenge on the citizens, once they took back control. Secret prison, extortion and death have been the cause. I believe that the surge is working to protect everyone mostly, but I said we should of had enough troops before so, yes He is misguided. Lastly you got that definition from Wikipedia, which by the way I could write.