To no one's surprise, the League of Conservation Voters assigned Bush an "F" on its 2003 Report Card given the administration’s abysmal performance on environmental issues. Now, GW has received another "F" this time from the Security Scholars for a Sensible Foreign Policy, a nonpartisan group of over 725 experts in the field of national security and international politics. (thanks Talkleft.com)
From their web site:
The scholars who signed the letter are from over 150 colleges and universities in 40 states, from California to Florida, Texas to Maine. They include many of the nation's most prominent experts on world politics, including former staff members at the Pentagon, the State Department and the National Security Council, as well as six of the last seven Presidents of the American Political Science Association, and twelve former Presidents of the International Studies Association. "I think it is telling that so many specialists on international relations, who rarely agree on anything, are unified in their position on the high costs that the U.S. is incurring from this war," said Professor Robert Keohane of Duke University.
One has to wonder: GW was accustomed to receiving "C"s in school (which now appear to be quite impressive for him). If the teachers didn't likely cater to his family's known prominence, might we conclude that he would've then received the "F"s he's justly receiving now?
I harken back to my earlier post where I pointed out this country's absurd "George Costanza" tendency to favor and encourage those who are extremely average (or below average in this case). It's as if we want to punish the bright, over-achievers and reward the slow-witted and slackers. HELP!!