Lies, damn Lies, and Obama statements

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Archaea

No I don't consider myself particularly bright when compared with those I consider bright.

Bright is somebody who didn't study organic chemistry, reads the book before the test and gets an A.

Bright is the guy who learns language based on an ear without work.

Bright is the guy who discovered the shape of the Benzene ring.

It bothers me when the Hollywood elite proclaim this guy to be some sort of genius yet his accomplishments haven't shown that.

Going to Harvard in the eighties if you're not caucasian could have been the result of affirmative action. Being on law review is a popularity contest. You know that.

The brightest at Harvard have Supreme Court clerkships virtually handed to them.

He hasn't come up with any new ideas, other than tired old liberal, lets create another government agency for health insurance, lets raise taxes and lets go on tv and chime in meaningless slogans. Where's the excessive intelligence in that?

He is bright enough to have you enamored with him and you're no dummy. But other than engineering the love of the liberal elite, I don't hear, see and gather any sense of extreme intelligence from him when he speaks or interviews. Perhaps it's just my dumb perceptions that are off.

OTOH, in an earlier post you falsely accuse me of calling politicians dumb. There not particularly dumb, just not the brightest amongst us from a purely intellectual standpoint. From a people manipulator standpoint, they are among the brightest.

Is he bright enough to be President? I certainly hope not.

There are so many different types of intelligence that it is hard to describe what sort of intelligence or how much of it a president should have. You want book smarts, but not too much, becasue they need to be practical, but not too practical, becasue they need a vision of somehting to grasp for, but not so much that they are dreamers without the ability to know if their dream can be implemented. All of these (and other) types of intelligence exist in most of us to some degree or another, so we are really looking fomr somneone wiht the right mix of these features. How do we learn that? No IQ test shows it. We learn it by gettign to know someone and that is why we have cmapaigns, ostensibly, to make us comfornbtale wiht the casidates and allow us to choose the one for whom we will vote.

IMO Obama is smart enough, as are all 3 of them, I am just not convinced he has the right combination of intelligence that I think we need right now.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Obama is intelligent AND creative. He is also inspiring, cool headed and diplomatic.

What qualities are YOU looking for in a president?

What junk are you smoking dude, because Cheech and Chong and I want some of that shit. You probably think he craps gold bricks as well. He's just another in a long line of liberal elitists, who may win, mind I'm not underestimating his ability to win this election, and I'm not underestimating the stupidity of the electorate, but smart, creative, cool headed? Where the hell did you get that shit?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by creekster

There are so many different types of intelligence that it is hard to describe what sort of intelligence or how much of it a president should have. You want book smarts, but not too much, becasue they need to be practical, but not too practical, becasue they need a vision of somehting to grasp for, but not so much that they are dreamers without the ability to know if their dream can be implemented. All of these (and other) types of intelligence exist in most of us to some degree or another, so we are really looking fomr somneone wiht the right mix of these features. How do we learn that? No IQ test shows it. We learn it by gettign to know someone and that is why we have cmapaigns, ostensibly, to make us comfornbtale wiht the casidates and allow us to choose the one for whom we will vote.

IMO Obama is smart enough, as are all 3 of them, I am just not convinced he has the right combination of intelligence that I think we need right now.

Well said.

Furthermore, all three of the current candidates seem like MENSA candidates compared to Dubya.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Have you read his books? They are well written without the help of a ghost writer. I can only point to evidence of his creativity and intelligence, and his two books are said evidence. Being an 'orator' also requires intelligence and creativity.

My assessment of his cool-headedness comes from the debates and from his handling of the media. That is all we have to assess the cool-headedness of any of the candidates. I could point to specific examples during the debates or in his addressing baiting questions from the media, but I don't want to take the time to do that unless you first agree that these are valid venues in which candidates express genuine cool-headedness.

No, they're not. That's all theatre, and I for one don't buy into the act.

Cool-headedness is displayed if you're in a real life battle, or if you're in a plane about to dive down, or if you have a very short time frame within which to make a life or death decision. You haven't pointed to any life or death decisions, or decisions of momentous consequence which he has faced, i.e., decide whether to settle a case for five million or to turn it down.

Some gifted at gab are very insightful, some are not. No inferences can be drawn from the information we have, other than he's ambitious and opportunistic.

However, he's not exactly faced a Cuban missile crisis, a Wall Street failure or even the public exposure during the loss of a close family member. Debating? That's acting and means nothing but how good of an entertainer is he.

Be skeptical. Geeze, don't buy what these guys sell. They prevaricate in order to manipulate. Step outside their boxes by being skeptical.

We have no public venue for a politician other than a Cuban missile crisis in which to judge cool-headedness.

Some of you have amazingly low threshholds of evidence when it affects your politics and we need rampant cynicism in order to cure the naivete.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Just out of curiosity, do you think that anyone other than 'blacks who feel oppressed by the man' would be interested in the high incarceration rates of black men?

No because I'm obviously a racist. Of course there is an interest. And as I said before I agree it's a big problem. But skewed statistics and hyperbole certaintly do not address that.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

I would agree that there are better tests of a person's metal, but we simply don't have access to that. You have written the definition of a partisan. Your cynicism leaves you trusting nothing but your own inalterable core beliefs. Once you decided which party best represents those beliefs you may as well be a rock falling on a lever.

Neither party suits, but the Reps are less dangerous to me than the Dems. My skepticism extends to damn Republicans, whose ways I know all too well, having worked as a party regular for too long. Anybody closely associated with either party will begin to see that neither party is worthy of trust or belief.

I am NOT a partisan and I detest the Republicans only a little less than I detest the Democrats. McCain is nothing special but if he keeps taxes a little better at bay, then I bit better off. He is a terrible speaker, has a record of being in battle which neither other candidate has, and has a competent economic adviser, but overall is only a little less bad than Obama or Clinton. All three are deceptive manipulators of the electorate.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

I'm sorry. I've been a jerk in this thread. I owe both you and Archaea an apology. Yes, I thought there were some racist undertones to your position, but I was getting around to that in a jerky way, and I really don't know either you or your internet personality well enough to represent you that way.

Apology accepted. And not to pick on you but this illustrates a real problem with the race issue in America. One cannot be the least bit critical of these kinds of statements without people assuming "racist".

I fear that Obama will be elected and everyone will be scared to be critical of ANYTHING he says or does for fear of being branded a racist.

Racism sucks in all its forms. And the black "leadership" (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al) are as guilty of causing race issues as anyone in modern times.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by KiteRider

Obama is intelligent AND creative. He is also inspiring, cool headed and diplomatic.

What qualities are YOU looking for in a president?

I dunno, but I've been defending Obama here for over a year, so you don't need to try to sell him to me. I just think intelligence alone is a silly criterion for qualifying presidential candidates. I also think it's absurd for anyone to try to argue that Obama is not intelligent, though clearly he's been lacking discernment in his remarks of late.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

No, they're not. That's all theatre, and I for one don't buy into the act.

Cool-headedness is displayed if you're in a real life battle, or if you're in a plane about to dive down, or if you have a very short time frame within which to make a life or death decision. You haven't pointed to any life or death decisions, or decisions of momentous consequence which he has faced, i.e., decide whether to settle a case for five million or to turn it down.

Some gifted at gab are very insightful, some are not. No inferences can be drawn from the information we have, other than he's ambitious and opportunistic.

However, he's not exactly faced a Cuban missile crisis, a Wall Street failure or even the public exposure during the loss of a close family member. Debating? That's acting and means nothing but how good of an entertainer is he.

Be skeptical. Geeze, don't buy what these guys sell. They prevaricate in order to manipulate. Step outside their boxes by being skeptical.

We have no public venue for a politician other than a Cuban missile crisis in which to judge cool-headedness.

Some of you have amazingly low threshholds of evidence when it affects your politics and we need rampant cynicism in order to cure the naivete.

I love it. More ridiculous criteria that nobody knows except for Archaea. To be coolheaded, one must be in a life or death situation or a real life battle. Thus, we should pit him versus Clinton in a match to the death, preferably while they are debating to show that they are also capable of being rational AND coolheaded at the same time. I would propose they do an American gladiators type fight on a narrow wood bridge over a pit of fire with fire-repellent crocodiles waiting below. The person who wins definitely is cool-headed. The person who loses at least entertained us in death.

Unfortunately, the ideal president must also be strong, and the only way to know that is to shoot them with a cannonball and see if they survive. Really, it is a very limited pool of qualified candidates, growing more limited each day.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I love it. More ridiculous criteria that nobody knows except for Archaea. To be coolheaded, one must be in a life or death situation or a real life battle. Thus, we should pit him versus Clinton in a match to the death, preferably while they are debating to show that they are also capable of being rational AND coolheaded at the same time. I would propose they do an American gladiators type fight on a narrow wood bridge over a pit of fire with fire-repellent crocodiles waiting below. The person who wins definitely is cool-headed. The person who loses at least entertained us in death.

Unfortunately, the ideal president must also be strong, and the only way to know that is to shoot them with a cannonball and see if they survive. Really, it is a very limited pool of qualified candidates, growing more limited each day.

Wouldn't a gladiator type election be more entertaining?

I bet you my form of selection would get better ratings. Come join us now my fellow Americans as the Democratic and Republican nominees battle to the death. There will be no holds barred as it will be brutal.

Arnold versus Hillary. No weapons allowed. Will he hack her off? You can see.

Any of you really believe we have any real venue to determine cool-headedness except a crisis? Except some sort of crisis, we can't judge one's coolness under fire.

You make fun of my examples because you have none of your own. Face it, Obama may win, but he'll be a financial disaster for us.