Maybe Bush and Palin seem dumb to liberals because liberals gauge intelligence in ways that, like the I.Q. test, are culturally discriminatory. It's the phenomenon that leads racists into thinking that black people trend towards low intelligence.

You know I'm right. If people with above-ground swimming pools did indeed tend to have mediocre intelligence, then there'd be no need to posit an unfair system to explain their lower economic achievement.

This is why labels matter. I don't think it is an issue of intelligence. I know little to nothing about Sarah Palin's "intellgence" per se. What I do know of her is what she has presented to the media. And she strikes me as uninformed about some of the major issues of our day. I disagree with John McCain, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden on many issues, but I am confident that they have thought about and wrestled with the big topics. They can speak about the details of very important problems without the need for cue cards. Sarah Palin certainly could become informed, but she is absolutely not there yet. And being a governor and not a national politician is not an excuse. She chose to run for Vice President, so she should have been ready to answer questions on national issues. Bill Clinton was "just" the governor of Arkansas, but - agree or disagree with his plans - he had thought about the major issues facing this country.

fsilber:

Maybe Bush and Palin seem dumb to liberals because liberals gauge intelligence in ways that, like the I.Q. test, are culturally discriminatory. It's the phenomenon that leads racists into thinking that black people trend towards low intelligence.

I'm trying to follow your reasoning. The "liberal" view of intelligence is culturally biased against the disadvantaged. So that's why George Bush, son of privilege, is unfairly dubbed "dumb" (your word)?

I don't think liberals are seeking "high IQ" candidates -- we are seeking candidates who are curious, quick learners, and well-versed on the issues.

then why barry? he said he didn't hear the racist fundamentalist preacher he went to for over 20 years,,what was he doing? he said he didn't know bill ayers was a terrorist, even though he knew him for almost 20 years and chaired several boards with him. he is either incredibly stupid, or thinks you are, or he is a liar..your choice...

Easy questions to answer:

1. there are a grand total of about 30 seconds or so of Rev. Wright's sermon(s?) taken out of context ... and you KNOW that if there'd been more we'd have seen those played over and over again, too - and not a millisecond of those in which you see Obama in the congregation. If you can't prove he was there when the offensive comments were made and you have no evidence that there were more comments like those made when Obama WAS in the congregation, you cannot accuse Obama of anything related to this (unless, of course, you're willing to accuse "Johnny" - if we're going to go down your road of disrespect - of YEARS of misogynism based on his reprehensible joke at young Chelsea Clinton's expense ... that reminds me, has he EVER apologized for that? Or maybe we can accuse the "pit bull in lipstick" - again, just following your lead on the respect issue - of backing an anti-American secessionist group because we have her, not someone she knows but the woman herself, on tape congratulating them on their work.)

2. Bill Ayers was not a terrorist when Obama knew him - his time in the Weather Underground was 30 years behind him and he was a respected member of the Chicago community by the time they met. And they didn't "chair several boards" together - they served on a couple of boards together ... one to improve the education system in Chicago, in fact ... which brings us back to the topic at hand - what do you have against education, anyway? (just kidding ... I hope.)