As the Left fumes that Perry is dumber than dumb, with no accomplishments, etc. Perhaps, as this article suggests, its time to give Obama an intelligence test, but then he probably has taken several in his "academic" career - but we will never know the results, its a secret, dontchaknow! - Starbow http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/08/what-if-obama-isnt-so-smart What if Obama isn't so smart? Noemie Emery 08/23/11 "Eek! Another Republican moron is running for president, and the blogs on the Left are aghast. Another village in Texas is missing its idiot! Another s--t-kicking cowboy has messed with their heads. The question this time is not just whether Texas Gov. Rick Perry is dumb -- the Left claims the obvious answer is yes -- but also whether he is as dumb as George W. Bush, or even much dumber, moronic where Bush was simply "incurious," and also much less gently bred. Either way, few on the Left doubt that neither is, as Steve Benen says, "an intellectually curious, creative thinker, capable to examining [sic] complex issues in a sophisticated way." Fortunately we have such a thinker, "capable to examining" things to perfection, and that is the problem: President Obama is their ideal of a thinker. He is president, and he has been -- how to put it? -- a bomb. Based on results, Perry has been more successful as governor of Texas than Obama has been as president, or as anything else he has ever tried being, in the entire whole course of his life. In 2008, Obama was hailed as a genius, a "first rate intellect," the smartest man to ever be president, and we know now the first part is true. He is the political genius who shed 30 points in his first years in office. He's the political genius who blew up his coalition in his first months in office, who led his party to annihilation in the 2010 midterms (while showing utter indifference to the fate of congressional Democrats), and gave the Republicans -- who were on the floor, in a coma -- more than they needed to come roaring back from the dead. He is the policy genius who "leads from behind," whose engagement ideas have gone nowhere, whose stimulus stimulated only the deficit, whose health care "success" helped kill off his recovery, and whose efforts to create jobs all fell flat. Almost 40 percent of the new jobs that were created happened under Perry in Texas. Liberals who fault that state for its low levels of taxes and spending might ask themselves why, if it is a hellhole, so many people go there and stay there. Many of them are fleeing states ruled by Democrats, which have high taxes, a strong union presence and a rich array of the programs that Democrats love. If this is idiocy, we may want some more idiots, as Lincoln once asked for more drunks in his army, rather like Gen. Grant. The bloggers fear that he may win a second term anyhow, as there may be a difference between being "too dumb to govern," (look at Bush, for example), and being "too dumb to win." Kevin Drum at Mother Jones thinks Perry may be too dim for even the doltish American public, while Paul Waldman thinks otherwise. "The doltish candidates seem mostly on the Republican side," he writes in the American Prospect, while only Democrats have and/or treasure intelligence. "So while there are many things to dislike about Perry, his tiny brain" might do him no harm. But the real examples of those who campaigned well and bombed afterward are Democrats, such as Obama and Carter, whose careers peaked on the day they took office and went steadily downhill from then on. And if Obama is brilliant, and Bush is an imbecile, how come the genius kept most of the things the dolt set in motion: the protocols for fighting the war against terror, the surge strategy, the timetables, and even, in Robert Gates and David Petraeus, some of his main appointees? Why couldn't the genius improve on the idiot's handiwork? Maybe he isn't that bright." Examiner Columnist Noemie Emery is contributing editor to The Weekly Standard and author of "Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families."
Vote Ron Paul 2012, clarity of policy and clarity of morals. I'd like to see Paul vs. Obama in a debate.
OP, it's the cons themselves that are saying Perry is subhuman, and all the Dems have to do is let the fool continue on with his stuffed shirt self. He'll be past news soon enuf, just like all the other light weight jerks they've propped up, stood behind only to be dumped on, and then what, more zero heros?
Starbow; I have a hard time thinking a "Community Organizer" from Chicago, with a said degree in "Constitutional Law", which requires American History and what little of his history we have to go by, is actually intelligent. He certainly hasn't demonstrated any since in office, especially when your factor in the inconsistencies of his CHOSEN administration. BillyBoy, at least you know this and I'd suggest there have been many notable President's, with little or no formal education, that UNDERSTOOD the Constitution and just MAYBE Capitalism, much better.
and just how well did they work out ? TIME FOR A CHANGE. Elect someone who SUCCEEDED in school..It shows PAST commitment and CHARACTER v someone who is way less in that regard. I might hire someone with a 2.2 grade average for my drywall crew..but not for President. So what job did he get ? ( Perry ) Government..gee go figure...stupid is as stupid does. Then he flips on political party's to advance...and those who support him hammer on Romney switching his abortion view ? Then the constitutional DEAL... How is this in the constitution ? He tries using eminent domain to seize land for a toll road build by foreign companies .. TRY READING. Then he brags about TEXAS..which he DID NOTHING..the rules were in place before HE WAS ELECTED..NO taxes.. OIL deals..all he did was drive TEXAS to the bottom in EDUCATION and HEALTH CARE. That aint conservative. That's ignorant. Romney will destroy and expose this guy for what he is..another guy who is a career politician accepting BIG money from a few donors for sweet heart contracts. BIG GOVERNMENT at its BEST. His idea of capitalism ? We already have with Obama. All he has is his Religion. And why he will never be elected.
BillyBoy; I'd suggest being an activist of any kind (Community Organizer) falls, far short of anyone on a dry wall crew or most any private sector occupation, regardless of grade average. In supposing you support Romney, as I will if the nominee, he IMO will NOT survive the primary process, whether because of his Mormon Religion or his (as you mentioned) flip flopping over Healthcare reform, Abortion, Gun Rights or any number of comments he has made; http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/160351/20110609/mitt-romney-flip-flop.htm As for changing parties 22 years ago, Reagan changed a good many minds on how Government should work and I'd like to remind you Reagan was not only a Union member/organizer, but a DEMOCRAT 20 years before becoming President. I don't know what his grade average was, but Reagan attended Eureka College in Illinois, Perry, Texas A&M, interested in farming, with a degree in Animal Science. I'd suggest, with all due respect, 30 years in active Politics, coming up through the system as a member of both parties, is a good resume. I'm not familiar with your "Eminate Domain" case (if you would like to refresh my memory), but under law any State can cease property, if in the interest of the general public and a fair price is paid. The funny thing to me is "religion" and that he might have too much, for the voters he needs to seek out. He will have the Evangelical's and in general the Catholics, but....
Funny how a persons positions are lined in cement for 20 years to come.. yet..when closely examined we find those attacking the person on those position changes have had as many if not more significant flips and flops. As I have posted elsewhere..usually to deflect attention away from short comings of the politician doing the questioning. If you cant attack his grade average and yours SUCKS ..then you must attack his religion ? If you cant attack his Balanced budget..his 99% coverage of citizens in Health care..Attack the method he used..regardless of how POORLY YOUR OWN STATE RANKS. If you cant match his business savvy because you have NONE..attack his wealth to deflect the fact YOU CANT MAKE AS MUCH. If you cant beat him straight up..make up crapola like the gun issue which ANYBODY who can read knows is FALSE. There is a reason he wont win..he is a MORMON..and the Religious conservative southern vote would rather LOSE than elect a MORMON. So they are GLAD anybody that can run against him regardless of success.. I will vote for anybody but OBAMA..that is CONSERVATIVE in principle. But the independents will not.. any drywaller knows that
The problem with Obama has been that he couldn't lower himself to the caveman intelligence level of his Republican opponents. Its been like planet of the Apes dealing the right wing Congress, and Obama has too often thought that if he doesn't adapt to their culture and intelligence levels, then they will bite him. What he doesn't understand is that they are unbroken savages that will bite him no matter what he does. In 2012, when Congress swings back to the left and the Senate gets a supermajority again, I sincerely hope that Obama simply states that its time to cage the right wing animal and push ahead with a full fledged left wing agenda. Forget compromising with idiots, and do what I elected him to do in the first place. We'd all be better off if the right had just gone into a corner and shut the hell up 3 years ago when they all lost their jobs.
BillyBoy; My comments or evaluation, for what it's worth, come from some political history and my understanding of the electorate. It's in that vain, I think your missing the publics (primary voter), reasons they participate. That is it's the hard core whatever, that choose the nominee's for the major parties. I have no idea what "conservative" means to you, but there are several meanings, including Constitutional, Fiscal, Social/Family, Religious, each meaning different things to the individual. In the Republican Party one major division is the Evangelical and potentially for this issue (Romney) the Catholic's, especially Western Hispanics, who simply will not support a Mormon. So you don't misunderstand my position, I am agnostic and would vote FOR Romney, based on his Business Experience alone, if it comes to that, but I don't think he will survive past the Florida Primary, if he gets that far. BTeam; I'd be interested in knowing just exactly what you think the US Electorate had in mind to do, when they elected him, adding he had a filibuster proof Congress FOR TWO YEARS????
yep, Obama probably passed the tests, esp when graded on a curve, but reflections of actual intelligence could be found in his work product from his academic era : term papers, articles, etc. but, we don't have access to any of that , do we? wonder why?
Perry never has claimed to be an academic wiz kid. Perry finished a degree in Agriculural Science, and that is all. Perry then applied his university knowledge to the real world tasks of running of his parent's ranch, his 6 years elected as a state representative, his 8 years elected as the state's Agriculture Commisioner, his 3 years elected as Texas Lieutenant Governor, and his 9 years elected as the state Governor. It is Obama who was marketed to the public in 2008 as the "smartest man" in the room. And then we found out the truth.
