Who cares? I'm the smartest person in my family; I'm actually probably the smartest person in my group of friends. They're all doing much better in life than I am. George Bush was not a good President. He fucked up a lot of stuff, stuff that I'm going to have to be fixing in the nest two or three decades. He could've been the smartest man in the world but he still created a society of incredible debt, prolonged wars, environmental mess, an educational system now compiling the issue of decades of already misguided policy. I'd rather have an idiot that had stumbled in to the right choices. Now off to my steadily more expensive college class that will get me a job almost no where. I can go on to spend years in debt up to my ears struggling to make a living, watching a government that I can't trust expand upon everything Bush did. Shit, my really big developmental years, the time I spent in school, was basically spent with the country in a constant state of war. Awesome. Well, at least he was smart.
Yes. But I'm also taller. Now as you go up higher the air is thinner, yes? So the taller you are the thinner the air is, which means your vision is less obscured, so your perception is better. Now, perception is reality, ergo my superior perception leads to a superior reality. So, I exist in a superior reality, if we recall the principle of "cogito ergo sum" - latin is a smart people language - then we can simply reverse it. I am in a superior reality; thus, I must think in a superior reality. Now simply divide the whole equation and you reach the only logical conclusion. Quite simply put, I think in a superior manner, as you can clearly see in my flawless logic.
Well, shorter people may have another intelligence factor that would effectively cancel out your thinner air theory. Less height means less length means less distance from heart to brain, so the shorter the person, the better the oxygen supply to the brain. But now that I think about it, if the heart is closer to the ground, it will have to work harder to push blood against gravity since the force of gravity gets stronger as distance to the center of the earth decreases. So I guess you're right. Sorry I misjudged you!
I understand that, but its a defense against what is an irrelevant attack. A President should not be judged on their character or intelligence. They should be judged on their Presidency. I'll put it in terms I can understand, and you might too. Metaphors are fun. So let's say you go see a movie with some friends, specifically the new Transformers movie - Transformers 4: Rise of the Cobra Surfer - and it is predictably dogshit. Your one friend happens to be really annoyed by this movie. So he rants off about it, saying how the acting was terrible, the cinematography was confusing, the narrative was awful, the dialogue was unbelievable and cheesy, and the CGI looked like shit. His criticisms do not sit well with your other friend. Let's call them Larry. Larry really liked it. So he tries to defend it. He tries to defend the acting but of course he's wrong and is crushed. Same with the cinematography, the narrative, and the dialogue. So he goes for the last criticism: "No, the CGI was really great! They really managed to animate these gigantic dumb ass robots and it looked totally believable when they punched each other." Turns out Larry is right! The CGI was actually really well done and received praise. Guess what? You all still saw a shitty movie because it had an ass for a narrative, dialogue made out of wood and a lack of chemistry, shots that made no sense and obscured the action, and acting that could have been better accomplished by putting toddlers in front of the camera and letting them drool for three hours. You can have CGI as great as it gets, you can have a President as smart as they come, but if the film or the time spent in office is still abysmal for basically everything in the country, then its a failure. Intelligence and CGI are both tools; they are a means to an end, but not the end in and of themselves. The end for a film is usually a really good narrative, and the end for a Presidency is supposed to be improving the country. If that wasn't accomplished, then who cares if the tool was good? It still didn't work.
I get what you're saying, just it doesn't matter in the context of this discussion. This article itself does not win/lose any debate about the merits of the Bush presidency, because it simply doesn't engage that debate at all. It does however, dispel the notion of Bush being unintelligent, which is an issue entirely separate from success/failure of the presidency. I have no idea why you are conflating the two. It's a non-sequitur. Like someone writing about the great Vitamin A content of potatoes and you talking about how monoculture of potatoes led to Great Irish Famine. About the same general topic, but you're railing against something that isn't the point. Basically, my point is, I have no idea why you're upset this essay didn't to respond points it wasn't even attempting to respond to in the first place. Thesis of the essay: Bush is smart. I'd say they proved that. Why are you looking for something else?
I just don't think that's a necessary explanation. When people say that Obama is a stupid because he's black, and yes I've heard this, I don't acknowledge the argument. It is literally ad hominem. Same with Bush. Its not like the people who earnestly believe that Bush is a dumbass are going to change their mind, nor will the article change any minds about his presidency. Its just the process of stepping up and countering an argument that no student who has ever taken a debate course should use. If you heard the argument of "well Bush is stupid" in a college class, the first thing out of the professor's mouth should be something akin to a small object flying at the student's head for arguing from a logical fallacy before the fight really even began. In terms of why I'm spending so much of my words on my distaste for his time in office, its because I think that's the point of the objections rather than just defending his intellect. Also because then I could write something rather than just say that I agree. I agree with the basic premise; George W. Bush was smart. That is a very boring post to read. I'm losing track of my thoughts I think I'm going to try and sleep now.