Splicetoday

Politics & Media
Sep 06, 2011, 06:37AM

Is Barack Obama Dumb?

It’s just a matter of time before mainstream liberal journalists call for a primary challenge to Obama next year. Where’s Hillary?

Obama facepalm.jpg?ixlib=rails 2.1

A mere four months ago, most readers looking at the above headline would undoubtedly shake their heads and think the author was a gun-for-hire Tea Party provocateur and quickly click away from the page. But the political climate has changed dramatically this summer, and even hard-core liberals are wondering about the smarts of President Obama as they consider the perceived nightmare of President Rick Perry (who was victim of the same headline last week on Politico). It’s a measure of Obama’s current electoral pickle that some of those questioning the President’s decisions (or lack thereof) write for The New York Times and openly wonder if the man can get re-elected, whether it’s Perry or Mitt Romney who wins the GOP nomination next year.

There are usual caveats: Of course Obama isn’t illiterate or Bush-dumb because as Jesse Louis Jackson once said, “God doesn’t make junk,” and the intelligence-challenged just aren’t allowed near Harvard, much less become editor of that university’s Law Review. And man, he sure can deliver (teleprompter notwithstanding) an inspiring speech! Let’s get this out the way now: in my view, without meeting either man, it’s silly to call either Obama or Perry “dumb.” Obama’s first three years in the White House have been, depending upon your views, disappointing, lackluster or just plain disastrous. But, unlike The Wall Street Journal’s excellent op-ed columnist Bret Stephens, who argued, “Stupid is as stupid does, said the great philosopher Forrest Gump. The presidency of Barack Obama is a case study in stupid does,” it’s hard to believe the President is lacking in intelligence. 

Nevertheless, in modern times, no man has been elected president without demonstrating considerable cunning, a flair for cut-throat attacks on the competition and a firm grasp on the mood of the country. And no one can ever take away the brilliance of Obama’s 2008 campaign, his ability to beat the Clinton machine and correctly realize that he’d never have another opportunity so ripe to exploit for an historical election. Really, in 2007, if the question were posed about who’d ascend to Oval Office first, a woman or a black man, the overwhelming majority would’ve picked the former. Similarly, pundits make vicious jokes about Perry’s supposed low-wattage, and while it’s true he’s probably never recited lines from Yeats or Browning in conversation at a collegiate cocktail party, the man has won three gubernatorial elections in Texas, defying the Republican establishment in that state again and again, so there’s something going on above his neck.

As I’ve written before in this space, Perry’s adherence to creationism, apparent fear of homosexuals, abortion opposition, constant invocations of God and dismissal of global warming make me queasy, but in next year’s election those extreme right-wing positions won’t really matter. The only issue is the dreadful economy, which shows no sign of improving before voters pass down their verdict, and while you can scoff at Texas’ remarkable job creation in the past several years—the general liberal reckoning is that all those jobs are at minimum-wage fast food joints—it’s not as if Obama can make any boasts about his own record on that score. The Times’ nominal conservative columnist David Brooks, who clearly prefers the more socially acceptable Romney, concluded his August 25 column “President Rick Perry?” (typically late in raising the possibility), by saying that although Romney would be superior in “managing economic problems” (dubious), “Romney might be able to beat back the Perry surge. In the meantime, it’s time to take Perry seriously. He could be our next president.”

Yet what really demonstrated the bewilderment and fear among those who live, in Brooks’ words, the “Acela corridor,” was his colleague Frank Bruni’s Sept. 4 column “Pass, Fail and Politics,” in which he completely dismissed the notion of a presidential candidate’s intelligence, saying that making such a query is “a vessel for prejudices, a stand-in for grievances.” Bruni’s piece is perfectly timed, and though he’s a rabid liberal, you could sense that what he really wanted to say, but just couldn’t, was Won’t Someone Please Run Against Obama in the Democratic Primaries. Maybe next month, after the next dismal jobs report.

Anyway, while expressing abhorrence for Perry’s social conservatism, Bruni isn’t buying the idea that the Texan is stupid. His damning conclusion: “Instead of talking about how smart politicians are or aren’t, we should have an infinitely more useful conversation about whether we share and respect their values and whether they have shown themselves to be effective. Someone who rates high on both counts is someone to rally unreservedly around. Right now, neither Perry nor Obama fits that double bill.”

The “Acela” cognoscenti ought not take that paragraph lightly, for not only is Bruni implying that Perry will be the Republican presidential candidate, but that Obama’s a failed president. When a Democratic president loses the op-ed braintrust of The New York Times, the jig is up.

Discussion
  • Ted Kennedy and his run in 76 pretty much insures that no dem who wants a dem president will primary Obama. This rules Clinton out. That said, it is way too early to knock Obama out of the 12 race. Not that I'm a fan but the guy has proven his campaigning skills and takes the slow and steady approach. Right now we aren't even in pre-season, we are still playing AAA ball.

    Responses to this comment
  • Totally agree, Texan, that it's way too early. You should brush up on your history, though, cowpoke! Kennedy challenged Carter in 1980.

    Responses to this comment
  • I stand corrected. Still clearing long-weekend cobwebs

    Responses to this comment
  • Ooh, I like the idea of a meaningful Democratic National Convention - and the same for Republicans. Then the electorate might start paying attention.

    Responses to this comment
  • If Obama is primaried, we get a Republican president. I don't think Obama is dumb, in any sense. He made a very big, very wrong call regarding the degree of craziness of the Republican Party. We're all paying the price, but there's time for a late-course correction in his political approach. In fact I think he will get re-elected, even w/ 9% unemployment. It will be close and ugly, but the electorate is starting to face up to our times central political fact: the Republican Party has gone insane and cannot be trusted w/ power.

    Responses to this comment
  • First- Obama was not editor of the Harvard Law review, he was President- a largely ceremonial position which is voted upon not chosen for ability. Second, politicians need feral cunning more than intellectual ability as is all too obvious. And Obama's college grades have never been released, which is interesting. As a Columbia University graduate I can attest to the fact that many students there are intellectually mediocre at best, so nothing about Obama's intelligence should be concluded based on his mere attendance at an ivy league school. I do have a question- upon what basis was it decided that Obama was "brilliant" [to quote many liberal pundits]? Being a community organizer and occasional lecturer at a University hardly proves or demands great intelligence.

    Responses to this comment
  • In a word, yes. He is dumb. Given that we've never seen his grades, we have no idea if he was intelligence-challenged, or if he earned his way in. He managed to be editor of the law review and have nothing published- quite a feat. At this point, with 9%+ unemployment for most of his term, I'll take Bush-dumb over Obama-dumb. His is the thinnest resume ever to ascend to the WH.

    Responses to this comment
  • What's dumb is the expectations of this article. Liberals just don't seem to understand that the majority of Americans are bnot buying their programs or their rhetoric. The rant at the tea party or the GOP or blame Obama or whatever - but the problem is their policies. And pushing ahead with a worldview and policies that the country has already reject is, well, dumb.

    Responses to this comment
  • Et tu? O bama was not "editor" of the Harvard Law Review! He was "president", a very different position that is more of a popularity contest than a testament to legal brilliance.

    Responses to this comment
  • Is Barack Obama Dumb? No, but he thinks we are.

    Responses to this comment
  • If going to Harvard disqualifies you from being Bush-dumb, then Bush wasn't Bush-dumb b/c he went to HBS.

    Responses to this comment
  • Here's an example of a solution Obama came up with to solve the energy crisis that is indicative of his intellect, reasoning powers, and ability to see the broader picture and to see beyond the immediate and into the future. THE ELECTRIC CAR. Electric cars don't use any fuel! all ya gotta do is plug-um into the wall! Oh. what's that? we'll need new power plants? no problem. we'll build solar and wind power plants! But the existing power plants will use more fuel to power electric cars than gasoline powered cars use??? Nobody told Obama. He's already spent billions developing the electric car.

    Responses to this comment
  • Did you really, really mean to write "the jig is up"? Just imagine if a conservative had written that.

    Responses to this comment
  • "Bush-dumb?" "...and the intelligence-challenged just aren’t allowed near Harvard." FYI: Bush has an MBA from Harvard.

    Responses to this comment
  • Is Obama Dumb? According to what Forrest Gump's Mamma always used to say, yes. Stupid Is as Stupid Does. According to that However, anyone who voted for him isn't looking to good either, except that there's a fine line between being fooled once and being a fool beyond that point. November 2012 will be something of a national IQ test.

    Responses to this comment
  • Of course O isn't dumb, but the people who voted for him sure are! I know a lot of people who I don't regard as stupid who voted for him. The thing is, I don't know a single person who isn't more qualified. A community organizer who has never actually had a job? A country with this many people with absolutely no critical thinking skills will crumble. It is inevitable. Too bad. It is a real insult to our ancestors. How is it they were so much better people than their progeny?

    Responses to this comment
  • Yes...he is dumb!

    Responses to this comment
  • "...the intelligence-challenged just aren’t allowed near Harvard..." Biggest laugh I've had all day!

    Responses to this comment
  • Yep, nothing will identify an "extreme right winger" like his belief in the sanctity of life, his knowledge that AGW is a REgressive scam and his "apparent fear of homos" And nothing pegs a far leftie like his fear that someone with traditional, conservative and American values will win the presidency. I'll tell you one thing bub, if Rick Perry has your panties in this much of a wad, Sarah Palin will set them on fire.

    Responses to this comment
  • For the record, Mr. Never Never Land, I'd support either Perry or Romney over Obama. Sarah Palin? She blew whatever remote chance she had at the GOP nomination by bailing on her gubernatorial term in Alaska and whoring after publicity and money.

    Responses to this comment
  • "For the record" OK thanks. I see this same BS about "The Quit Bull" so much, I'm sure most of it is coming from left wing trolls. It's what they've been programmed to parrot. But let's take you at your word. You believe that meme pushed by the left dominated media. You believe that she resigned her governorship to "whore" after publicity and money. Besides saying a lot about your conservative bona fides and your character, it also reveals a vapid understanding of what happened during her 2 1/2 years as governor and what transpired after McCain selected her to run as his VP. My advice? Get informed before you open your soup coolers again.

    Responses to this comment
  • Since when does disapproval equal fear? Perry's disapproval of the homosexual lifestyle does not mean that he fears homosexuals. The term "homophobia" was coined to disparage those who disagree with the homosexual agenda. It is incorrect and demeaning. I don't know of one single person who is afraid of homosexuals.

    Responses to this comment
  • As Texas Army Ranger said since when does disapproval equate to fear? Just because Christians feel that homosexuality is a sin does not mean we fear it. If President Obama is so smart, why has he spent millions to prevent people from seeing his records? If he's so brilliant, surely he would want to brag, he does about everything else. If he's so brilliant, surely his classmates would come forward to say how brilliant the young Barack was. Of course we know that this has not happened. More likely, the president is the useful idiot for the radicals he has admittedly associated with. Caveat Emptor...

    Responses to this comment
  • I don't think he's that dumb, but maybe if he stopped being a yes-man he would get things done wisely.

    Responses to this comment
  • If people who are against homosexuality don't fear homosexuality then why do they try to prevent gay marriage? If the answer is because it is a sin, then why do they think the U.S. is a theocracy? Why do they think it is their duty to impose their own morality?

    Responses to this comment
  • Dumb, dont know, he continues to spare no expense to hide his records. Mouthpiece? absolutely. As soon as he appointed the Clintonistas to his administration we knew it was the same old shell game. I understand old Carter advisors had a lot to do with his grooming,(particiularly Zibignew Bryzinski) and Henry Kissinger claims Obama is primed to lead the New World Order that Ive been hearing about since the first President Bush. He is merely a mouthpiece for the true rulers of the world. Pity for America that our leaders have lead us to this.

    Responses to this comment
  • Here's a bulletin for you: the Bush-dumb Bush has an MBA from Harvard.

    Responses to this comment
  • True, but if his last name was Borden, and had no family connections, do you think he'd have gone to Yale and Harvard? Maybe, but I doubt it.

    Responses to this comment
  • Hey Dummy, Bush went to Harvard and Yale. Who are the Editors here? They seem Bush-Dumb.

    Responses to this comment
  • Only dumb people refer to the great Mexican fiesta as 'Cinco de Quatro'. Ivy league education but didn't learn much. Concerning all those 'shovel ready' projects. Has Mr. Obama ever used a shovel? Does he know what a shovel is?

    Responses to this comment

Register or Login to leave a comment