Posted on 03/01/2010 4:09:45 AM PST by Zakeet
' Funny David calls this a 'gabfest'. . .sort of nails it right there for Obama's talents. Gabfests do not imply any serious intent; by very name. Nor do they require the highest of IQ's even for the gabber who claims most minutes.
The Republicans spoke of facts; and Obama 'gabbed'; no doubt about it.
One more point that David misses; intelligence is a both a waste and a threat, if not framed by a genuine morality. And it is not 'smart' to imagine otherwise.
I believe that GHWB also was the youngest naval aviator in WW II.
Does this mean that all Savants are - Democrats?
Does 'glibness' require a high or 'the highest' of I.Q.'s?
I think he is probably right in the sense that Dem presidents have more detail aptitude (which is why they get bogged down in details). Republican Presidents meanwhile see a bigger picture.
If you have to write a silly article about such a subject, it soulds like you are trying to convince yourself rather than the general public.
When I hear Obama speak, I think of early Jim Rome. Pausing at the weirdest places.
No, I don't think Bush could have acted arrogant. No, I don't think Bush could have cut people off. No, I don't think Bush could have picked his nose on TV. No, I don't think Bush could have thrown opponents the literal finger. No, I don't think Bush could have stammered like a person with a speech impediment. No, I don't think Bush could have hogged almost all the time.
No, David Corn, I don't think Bush could have pulled this off.
Precisely. Schoolhouse rock even shows the process. This “summit” is nothing but show in the attempt the ignorant will be fooled into thinking Obama is “bi-partisan”, but in fact only demonstrates how partisan he is; adversaries to Obama are “partisan” unless they compromise their principles?
It depends. If you take into consideration the grade inflation by liberal profs for their favorite children the answer is no. The curve only curves one way, left.
I saw some corn, when I ‘took a David’, this morning.
Pres. Bush would never have come to the conclusion that the waste of time meeting was needed.
“I would not confuse Obama’s performance with mastering anything. He did not even know that the individual premiums would increase according to the CBO data.”
Likewise, he didn’t know the difference between liability and collision auto insurance. Yeah, an absolute genius.
“Smart” is a LOT different than raw “intelligence”, which is highly overrated.
I say this as a member of MENSA.
Sheer intelligence is NOT an indication of ability to be a good leader/president. In fact, if anything, the opposite is probably true. Folks with sky-high IQ’s are usually completely lacking in common sense, and many times mentally unstable to boot.
IOW, the first affirmative action president. He proves it every day.
Jimmy Carter was NOT a nuclear engineer:
http://atomicinsights.blogspot.com/2006/01/picking-on-jimmy-carter-myth.html
Sorry, but the most intellectual/cerebral of all our Presidents over the past 100 years was Richard Nixon. Second, of course, was Woodrow Wilson who was also the worst president in terms of his effect on the nation and the world.
Good point, my apologies to corn.
“Obama probably woulda been a good political scientist. However, he can’t manage worth a damn.”
Interesting and sad choice of words you used in here. “Manage worth a damn.” While he cannot do this. The American people, (not me) elected him to lead, not only manage.
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.