Brainiac?

Malone, pithy and devastating, on the President’s intelligence:

I’ve never seen any evidence of that, at all. Extremely intelligent? Extremely modest intelligence, would be my rating of Obama’ s smarts. And very swift on the con. Driven by self-love and megalomania.

Obama’s a packaged product, and was always more hype than substance. One of the standards of extremely intelligent people is good judgement. Twenty years in Jeremiah Wright’s church kills that. Obama is an obfuscator and prevaricator. Bad character. Not too smart.

Intellectuals are experts in manipulation of words. Since they fancy themselves to be intelligent, they assume that intelligence “looks like” their verbal skill set.  Since Obama speaks crisply with few slip-ups, he is ipso facto intelligent. (as opposed to “potatoe” and “Is our children learning?” — and Joe Biden is, I would maintain, a special case) This effect is multiplied by “the soft bigotry of low expectations” multiplied by a contradiction in liberal thought: they can observe (because they have been castigated for making the observation) that Obama speaks better than most black people, but “black people” are equal to “white people”. Ergo, if Obama speaks better than other blacks who are equal to white people, then Obama is superior to everyone.

I’m not sure I want to totally buy into the “multiple intelligences” gobbledygook that educarats use to explain away their failures. But my wife, who admits to being a disaster with language, thinks for herself, can perceive reality clearly,  and is a better mechanic than I am.  Obama’s alternative skill-set, had he grown up in Africa without his education, would have made him a successful “solicitor” in your email, asking for your help in resolving a rich man’s estate.

Advertisements

2 Responses to Brainiac?

  1. kishnevi says:

    Not sure I agree with you, based on the limited data available.
    1) He’s probably been never intellectually challenged beyond the standard liberal boundaries in his entire life. Recall, if you would, that until I got onto Bob Hunt’s list, I would have spouted much of the same stuff he does–and I was past 40 by then, with at least as good an edikation as Obama’s even if it wasn’t done at Hahvahd.
    2) Evaluating people’s character and finding the solutions for real world problems are two different skill sets entirely. Of course, I don’t take Rev. Wright to be as bad a character as you do; I suspect he falls comfortably into the mainstream of black preacherdom–and that you would find him talking a good deal more sensibly than some others that fall into that category (for instance, the Revs. J. Jackson and A. Sharpton). I also suspect that Obama never realized how extreme Wright was in white eyes until the issue came up during the presidential campaign: he saw him as a locally important black preacher, to whose congregation a local black politician would be wise to belong. Hence all the obfuscation, etc.–which, if Obama is not really a committed Christian began the moment he joined that church.
    3) In my experience, while intelligent people may have inferior verbal skills (for instance, Bush 43), unintelligent people never have superior verbal skills, and he does.

    He is an obfuscator, con man, etc. But so are most politicians. The important thing in his case is that he’s never encountered the real world before, and therefore never encountered anything that actually challenges his liberal views.

  2. jeffreyquick says:

    1). That Obama is provincial does not make him unintelligent, it is true, but it bespeaks a lack of curiosity (which is indicative of intelligence). You recovered; why didn’t Obama?
    2.) Not entirely. Both involve analytic skill. However, if one is blocked from making the observations needed to evaluate character (say you have Asperger’s Syndrome), one could have one skill and not the other….or if the real-world problems are technical and you don’t have the technical background. As for preachers, I don’t have a personal cootie against Wright any more or less than others of his ilk; my own tastes in Negro preachers leans more to Alex Jones. I think your analysis of The O’s perceptions about “being seen” at the Wright place is accurate… now what would we say about a Caucasian Southern politician who joined the Sons of Confederate Veterans and had no clue how that might be perceived by Negros? For somebody with political aspirations, it shows a small mind, not looking forward to the next step.
    3.) In terms of raw IQ, that’s more or less true, though given how much standardized tests depend on verbal skills, it’s also begging the question. And it doesn’t address the issue of the mind trained to work against itself. True, profound stupidity requires either brain damage or a Master’s degree.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: