STING2 said:
Just because someone wins the spelling bee at their local school does not make them a genious.
No, it doesn't. Although I can tell you for free that you won't win any spelling bees by spelling "genius" as "genious".
Also, a person that may have difficulty with public speaking does not mean they are not intelligent. Some of the smartest minds on the planet have difficulty in social settings sometimes. Again, I don't think anyone votes for a leader based on his spelling mistakes or speaking ability. Whats important are the solutions he has to the various problems that confront the world.
That may be true, but forgive me for not having every confidence in a guy who can't give a five minute speech without going on linguistic safari.
Look, this isn't only about President Bush. It's about the dumbing down of politics in general. It's about the fact that we assume that unless an issue can be reduced to a ten second soundbite, people will lose interest. It's about the fact that people assume that issues like healthcare, education, social security, foreign policy, can be reduced to soundbites in the first place. It's about the fact that stupidity is seen as an asset and intelligence as a burden in political campaigns.
Politicians are told they'll look like "know-it-alls" or "arrogant" if they dare to present themselves as an educated, intelligent individual. We hear phrases like "Ivy League elitists" and we're told that what we really want is a President who's an ordinary guy, who can relate to the average man on the street. Although, while we're on this subject, please someone tell me how exactly a multi-millionaire like Mr. Bush, or any one of the 20+ millionaires in the US Senate, can relate to your 'average' American?
To return to the original subject, "what's important are the solutions he has to the various problems that confront the world." I don't disagree, however I'm beginning to wonder exactly what Mr. Bush's solutions are. Alienating countries which were once key allies of the United States? Increasing military spending by billions of dollars whilst simultaneously passing tax cuts which disproportionately benefit the richest people int he country? Ignoring the continuing chaos in Afghanistan to wage war against Iraq, only to begin preparations for a bombing campaign against Syria before war with Iraq has even ended? Pledging billions of dollars to fight AIDS, only to later disclose that the funding will be targeted to agencies which promote abstinence only, to guarantee himself the support of the hard-right of his party at the next election? And that's only in foreign policy.