OT – GOP is being carried to the extreme

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Zeitgeist]I like it. Thanks for the new aka.[/quote]

Zeit: You do realize this doesn’t give you carte blanche to run around with an AK shooting gubmint vehicles whilst wearing a letterman’s jacket, right?

[felix]

I don’t know whether intellect was weighed as a factor or not. I suspect intellect was to a certain degree a factor. There is no doubt Obama was popular and even then a good speaker. However, intellect itself clearly was not the overriding qualification. And I don’t think anyone would say Obama was the best student or intellect in the running.

Also Obama wasn’t selected, he was elected. Albeit elected by the other 61 editors. Imo a selection when not made exclusively on merit would be arguably be even more suspect. Anyway, yes, elections are popularity contests.

From what I understand at the time Harvard was very interested in easing racial tensions. In fact, the first black tenured professor resigned over the situation there. So the election of the first black editor of law review would and did help ease some of those tensions.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/

[felix]

I don’t know whether intellect was weighed as a factor or not. I suspect intellect was to a certain degree a factor. There is no doubt Obama was popular and even then a good speaker. However, intellect itself clearly was not the overriding qualification. And I don’t think anyone would say Obama was the best student or intellect in the running.

Also Obama wasn’t selected, he was elected. Albeit elected by the other 61 editors. Imo a selection when not made exclusively on merit would be arguably be even more suspect. Anyway, yes, elections are popularity contests.

From what I understand at the time Harvard was very interested in easing racial tensions. In fact, the first black tenured professor resigned over the situation there. So the election of the first black editor of law review would and did help ease some of those tensions.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/

[felix]

I don’t know whether intellect was weighed as a factor or not. I suspect intellect was to a certain degree a factor. There is no doubt Obama was popular and even then a good speaker. However, intellect itself clearly was not the overriding qualification. And I don’t think anyone would say Obama was the best student or intellect in the running.

Also Obama wasn’t selected, he was elected. Albeit elected by the other 61 editors. Imo a selection when not made exclusively on merit would be arguably be even more suspect. Anyway, yes, elections are popularity contests.

From what I understand at the time Harvard was very interested in easing racial tensions. In fact, the first black tenured professor resigned over the situation there. So the election of the first black editor of law review would and did help ease some of those tensions.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/

[felix]

I don’t know whether intellect was weighed as a factor or not. I suspect intellect was to a certain degree a factor. There is no doubt Obama was popular and even then a good speaker. However, intellect itself clearly was not the overriding qualification. And I don’t think anyone would say Obama was the best student or intellect in the running.

Also Obama wasn’t selected, he was elected. Albeit elected by the other 61 editors. Imo a selection when not made exclusively on merit would be arguably be even more suspect. Anyway, yes, elections are popularity contests.

From what I understand at the time Harvard was very interested in easing racial tensions. In fact, the first black tenured professor resigned over the situation there. So the election of the first black editor of law review would and did help ease some of those tensions.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/

[felix]

I don’t know whether intellect was weighed as a factor or not. I suspect intellect was to a certain degree a factor. There is no doubt Obama was popular and even then a good speaker. However, intellect itself clearly was not the overriding qualification. And I don’t think anyone would say Obama was the best student or intellect in the running.

Also Obama wasn’t selected, he was elected. Albeit elected by the other 61 editors. Imo a selection when not made exclusively on merit would be arguably be even more suspect. Anyway, yes, elections are popularity contests.

From what I understand at the time Harvard was very interested in easing racial tensions. In fact, the first black tenured professor resigned over the situation there. So the election of the first black editor of law review would and did help ease some of those tensions.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/01/28/at_harvard_law_a_unifying_voice/

[felix]

[quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix]
Too many on the left seem to believe that anybody that doesn’t agree with them is not smart enough to know what is best for this country or even for oneself.[/quote]

Replace the “LEFT” with “RIGHT”. It goes both ways.[/quote]

Perhaps, you’re correct on this but I only see the media portraying one-side as dumb.

The past few elections we have been told the Harvard educated; Clinton, Kerry and Obama were geniuses but Bush, McCain and even going back a ways, Reagan were dummies.

What’s ironic about this is that Bush is the only president we’ve ever had with degrees from both Harvard and Yale. Yet he has been portrayed as a idiot more so than any president in my lifetime.

Personally I don’t know who has the highest IQ nor do I care. One doesn’t have to be a genius to be a good president. One has to be a leader. And one has to surround himself with smart capable folks.

Lastly, there is another difference. Most conservative initiatives have been those of traditional values. They aren’t trying to reshape this country but to preserve our traditions. That usually meant less government intrusion into our lives instead of more.[/quote]

Bush Jr – I don’t know many who think he got into Yale and Harvard because of his intelligence. It’s family connection don’t ya think? What was his GPA in Yale?

McCain – Not as bad as Bush but his ranking in Naval Academy was close to the last. And he wrecked 5 US Navy planes (granted one was in combat) before he was done with it.

Reagan – Actor. Enough said.

POTUS has to be a leader AND a pretty smart person. Saying high IQ isn’t required of POTUS is not too smart.

Clinton – a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University
Obama – Harvard Law Review editor. As much as we don’t like lawyers, you have to be pretty smart to get there.

Let’s be honest. Of the POTUS and POTUS candidates from the last 2 – 3 decades, Dems pretty much dominate GOP in the intelligence/IQ/achievement dept. Except Bush Sr.

I’m sure GOP (the party of rich, powerful, CEOs) can do better. Or does GOP just want someone as POTUS that rich and powerful can manipulate easily?[/quote]

First, can you tell me how Obama got into Harvard?
[/quote]

Maybe he got good enough GPA in college and LSAT?[/quote]

So now you agree with me when I said one doesn’t have to be the best intellect but only needs to be good enough to do the job.

The question with regard to Obama’s enrollment in Harvard is whether his grades and LSAT score would have been good enough for a white man to get into Harvard.

If we didn’t have different standards we would all know the answer to that question.

[felix]

[quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix]
Too many on the left seem to believe that anybody that doesn’t agree with them is not smart enough to know what is best for this country or even for oneself.[/quote]

Replace the “LEFT” with “RIGHT”. It goes both ways.[/quote]

Perhaps, you’re correct on this but I only see the media portraying one-side as dumb.

The past few elections we have been told the Harvard educated; Clinton, Kerry and Obama were geniuses but Bush, McCain and even going back a ways, Reagan were dummies.

What’s ironic about this is that Bush is the only president we’ve ever had with degrees from both Harvard and Yale. Yet he has been portrayed as a idiot more so than any president in my lifetime.

Personally I don’t know who has the highest IQ nor do I care. One doesn’t have to be a genius to be a good president. One has to be a leader. And one has to surround himself with smart capable folks.

Lastly, there is another difference. Most conservative initiatives have been those of traditional values. They aren’t trying to reshape this country but to preserve our traditions. That usually meant less government intrusion into our lives instead of more.[/quote]

Bush Jr – I don’t know many who think he got into Yale and Harvard because of his intelligence. It’s family connection don’t ya think? What was his GPA in Yale?

McCain – Not as bad as Bush but his ranking in Naval Academy was close to the last. And he wrecked 5 US Navy planes (granted one was in combat) before he was done with it.

Reagan – Actor. Enough said.

POTUS has to be a leader AND a pretty smart person. Saying high IQ isn’t required of POTUS is not too smart.

Clinton – a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University
Obama – Harvard Law Review editor. As much as we don’t like lawyers, you have to be pretty smart to get there.

Let’s be honest. Of the POTUS and POTUS candidates from the last 2 – 3 decades, Dems pretty much dominate GOP in the intelligence/IQ/achievement dept. Except Bush Sr.

I’m sure GOP (the party of rich, powerful, CEOs) can do better. Or does GOP just want someone as POTUS that rich and powerful can manipulate easily?[/quote]

First, can you tell me how Obama got into Harvard?
[/quote]

Maybe he got good enough GPA in college and LSAT?[/quote]

So now you agree with me when I said one doesn’t have to be the best intellect but only needs to be good enough to do the job.

The question with regard to Obama’s enrollment in Harvard is whether his grades and LSAT score would have been good enough for a white man to get into Harvard.

If we didn’t have different standards we would all know the answer to that question.

[felix]

[quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix]
Too many on the left seem to believe that anybody that doesn’t agree with them is not smart enough to know what is best for this country or even for oneself.[/quote]

Replace the “LEFT” with “RIGHT”. It goes both ways.[/quote]

Perhaps, you’re correct on this but I only see the media portraying one-side as dumb.

The past few elections we have been told the Harvard educated; Clinton, Kerry and Obama were geniuses but Bush, McCain and even going back a ways, Reagan were dummies.

What’s ironic about this is that Bush is the only president we’ve ever had with degrees from both Harvard and Yale. Yet he has been portrayed as a idiot more so than any president in my lifetime.

Personally I don’t know who has the highest IQ nor do I care. One doesn’t have to be a genius to be a good president. One has to be a leader. And one has to surround himself with smart capable folks.

Lastly, there is another difference. Most conservative initiatives have been those of traditional values. They aren’t trying to reshape this country but to preserve our traditions. That usually meant less government intrusion into our lives instead of more.[/quote]

Bush Jr – I don’t know many who think he got into Yale and Harvard because of his intelligence. It’s family connection don’t ya think? What was his GPA in Yale?

McCain – Not as bad as Bush but his ranking in Naval Academy was close to the last. And he wrecked 5 US Navy planes (granted one was in combat) before he was done with it.

Reagan – Actor. Enough said.

POTUS has to be a leader AND a pretty smart person. Saying high IQ isn’t required of POTUS is not too smart.

Clinton – a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University
Obama – Harvard Law Review editor. As much as we don’t like lawyers, you have to be pretty smart to get there.

Let’s be honest. Of the POTUS and POTUS candidates from the last 2 – 3 decades, Dems pretty much dominate GOP in the intelligence/IQ/achievement dept. Except Bush Sr.

I’m sure GOP (the party of rich, powerful, CEOs) can do better. Or does GOP just want someone as POTUS that rich and powerful can manipulate easily?[/quote]

First, can you tell me how Obama got into Harvard?
[/quote]

Maybe he got good enough GPA in college and LSAT?[/quote]

So now you agree with me when I said one doesn’t have to be the best intellect but only needs to be good enough to do the job.

The question with regard to Obama’s enrollment in Harvard is whether his grades and LSAT score would have been good enough for a white man to get into Harvard.

If we didn’t have different standards we would all know the answer to that question.

[felix]

[quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix]
Too many on the left seem to believe that anybody that doesn’t agree with them is not smart enough to know what is best for this country or even for oneself.[/quote]

Replace the “LEFT” with “RIGHT”. It goes both ways.[/quote]

Perhaps, you’re correct on this but I only see the media portraying one-side as dumb.

The past few elections we have been told the Harvard educated; Clinton, Kerry and Obama were geniuses but Bush, McCain and even going back a ways, Reagan were dummies.

What’s ironic about this is that Bush is the only president we’ve ever had with degrees from both Harvard and Yale. Yet he has been portrayed as a idiot more so than any president in my lifetime.

Personally I don’t know who has the highest IQ nor do I care. One doesn’t have to be a genius to be a good president. One has to be a leader. And one has to surround himself with smart capable folks.

Lastly, there is another difference. Most conservative initiatives have been those of traditional values. They aren’t trying to reshape this country but to preserve our traditions. That usually meant less government intrusion into our lives instead of more.[/quote]

Bush Jr – I don’t know many who think he got into Yale and Harvard because of his intelligence. It’s family connection don’t ya think? What was his GPA in Yale?

McCain – Not as bad as Bush but his ranking in Naval Academy was close to the last. And he wrecked 5 US Navy planes (granted one was in combat) before he was done with it.

Reagan – Actor. Enough said.

POTUS has to be a leader AND a pretty smart person. Saying high IQ isn’t required of POTUS is not too smart.

Clinton – a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University
Obama – Harvard Law Review editor. As much as we don’t like lawyers, you have to be pretty smart to get there.

Let’s be honest. Of the POTUS and POTUS candidates from the last 2 – 3 decades, Dems pretty much dominate GOP in the intelligence/IQ/achievement dept. Except Bush Sr.

I’m sure GOP (the party of rich, powerful, CEOs) can do better. Or does GOP just want someone as POTUS that rich and powerful can manipulate easily?[/quote]

First, can you tell me how Obama got into Harvard?
[/quote]

Maybe he got good enough GPA in college and LSAT?[/quote]

So now you agree with me when I said one doesn’t have to be the best intellect but only needs to be good enough to do the job.

The question with regard to Obama’s enrollment in Harvard is whether his grades and LSAT score would have been good enough for a white man to get into Harvard.

If we didn’t have different standards we would all know the answer to that question.

[felix]

[quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix][quote=dbapig][quote=felix]
Too many on the left seem to believe that anybody that doesn’t agree with them is not smart enough to know what is best for this country or even for oneself.[/quote]

Replace the “LEFT” with “RIGHT”. It goes both ways.[/quote]

Perhaps, you’re correct on this but I only see the media portraying one-side as dumb.

The past few elections we have been told the Harvard educated; Clinton, Kerry and Obama were geniuses but Bush, McCain and even going back a ways, Reagan were dummies.

What’s ironic about this is that Bush is the only president we’ve ever had with degrees from both Harvard and Yale. Yet he has been portrayed as a idiot more so than any president in my lifetime.

Personally I don’t know who has the highest IQ nor do I care. One doesn’t have to be a genius to be a good president. One has to be a leader. And one has to surround himself with smart capable folks.

Lastly, there is another difference. Most conservative initiatives have been those of traditional values. They aren’t trying to reshape this country but to preserve our traditions. That usually meant less government intrusion into our lives instead of more.[/quote]

Bush Jr – I don’t know many who think he got into Yale and Harvard because of his intelligence. It’s family connection don’t ya think? What was his GPA in Yale?

McCain – Not as bad as Bush but his ranking in Naval Academy was close to the last. And he wrecked 5 US Navy planes (granted one was in combat) before he was done with it.

Reagan – Actor. Enough said.

POTUS has to be a leader AND a pretty smart person. Saying high IQ isn’t required of POTUS is not too smart.

Clinton – a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University
Obama – Harvard Law Review editor. As much as we don’t like lawyers, you have to be pretty smart to get there.

Let’s be honest. Of the POTUS and POTUS candidates from the last 2 – 3 decades, Dems pretty much dominate GOP in the intelligence/IQ/achievement dept. Except Bush Sr.

I’m sure GOP (the party of rich, powerful, CEOs) can do better. Or does GOP just want someone as POTUS that rich and powerful can manipulate easily?[/quote]

First, can you tell me how Obama got into Harvard?
[/quote]

Maybe he got good enough GPA in college and LSAT?[/quote]

So now you agree with me when I said one doesn’t have to be the best intellect but only needs to be good enough to do the job.

The question with regard to Obama’s enrollment in Harvard is whether his grades and LSAT score would have been good enough for a white man to get into Harvard.

If we didn’t have different standards we would all know the answer to that question.

[felix]

Wow.

I don’t know exactly the particulars of some of the stuff you posted. However, to consider those you named above as whackos says plenty about you. You and many others may not agree with their politics but they are hardly whackos.

[felix]

Wow.

I don’t know exactly the particulars of some of the stuff you posted. However, to consider those you named above as whackos says plenty about you. You and many others may not agree with their politics but they are hardly whackos.

[felix]

Wow.

I don’t know exactly the particulars of some of the stuff you posted. However, to consider those you named above as whackos says plenty about you. You and many others may not agree with their politics but they are hardly whackos.

[felix]

Wow.

I don’t know exactly the particulars of some of the stuff you posted. However, to consider those you named above as whackos says plenty about you. You and many others may not agree with their politics but they are hardly whackos.

[Author]

Posts