Jesus man, when I said ‘keen intellect,’ I meant it as a synonym of ’smart.’ Don’t have a cow, I’m not trying to put words in your mouth, it all means the same thing, I’m not trying to dishonestly mis-characterize what you said, I just don’t like using the same word over and over again. Don’t be so defensive.

As for your evidence -Bush flew jets- well, that doesn’t mean much. If you and I weren’t speaking specifically about Bush, but about what makes people in general smart, I don’t think either of us would bring up the ability to fly a jet as one of those characteristics, do you?

Where Bush stands will be debated forever (as are all lists), but for anybody to say that he is the “worst president in history” shows incredible ignorance, and probably derangement. I think history will be much kinder to him than even his current apologists, and whereever he ends up in the list, it will almost certainly be ahead of Bill Clinton.

With respect to his IQ: Bush is a miserable communicator, and fools like Levi in comment #1 are too obtuse to understand that poor communication presents the facade of stupidity. There are numerous examples of above average intelligence, not the least of which is a degree from Yale (his GPA was nothing to really brag about, but it’s a hard school, he partied his ass off, and he certainly outscored that gargantuan of intellect Al Gore).

You are correct, Rick, that Bush is no Lincoln. He’s no Filmore either.

What is the ‘reality’ and what are the ‘facts’ that point to Bush having a keen intellect? There are countless hours of video and audio tape proving otherwise. And sure, maybe you don’t have to be a great public speaker to prove you’re smart, but wouldn’t you expect to see a few more examples of policy successes over the course of 8 years than Bush could provide?

I’d also like to know how you could consider someone both incurious and intelligent, because those attributes don’t usually go together. Being incurious is probably the single biggest roadblock to intelligence, wouldn’t you agree?

I know it seems counter-intuitive to think that a moron could be voted into the highest office in the land, but that’s only if you think every American is a realistic and informed habitually eager voter. If you start thinking of Americans more realistically (as in, not very smart themselves), then it makes a little more sense.

What is the ‘reality’ and what are the ‘facts’ that point to Bush having a keen intellect?

Where do I say Bush has a “keen intellect?” Unbelievably dishonest on your part. I said he was smart - as evidenced by the fact that you have to have something upstairs in order to fly a jet. Even if you take into account that he may have received preferential treatment to get in to the program, are you seriously saying that a “moron” can fly a modern jet fighter - a task that requires an ability with higher math as well as a general intelligence that probably surrpasses yours?

That’s pretty ignorant on your part if you are actually trying to make that argument.

ed.

Fact is, the second guessing ankle biters on Iraq will be swept away by history, just as all the WWII mistakes are no longer widely known (who knows that more than 1,000 died off of Normandy…..training for D-Day?). In a generation only a few Americans will know what Abu Ghraib refers to. Today some think it was the defining moment of the war.

Amongst Clinton, Bush and Obama, if you could choose to ‘own’ the legacy of one of the three who would you pick, Rick?

Answering the question, “Can Rick Moran give an example of understatement?”

We need to stop using Lincoln and Washington as points of comparison. It’s like asking if a woman is as pretty as Anne Hathaway or Angelina Jolie. I think our new standard of comparison should be Glenn Close. More realistic. As for presidents, why not Eisenhower? He was very good without setting an impossible standard.

And of course Bush is also no Eisenhower. Or Glenn Close, for that matter.

He’s got Angelina’s eyes, though.

ed.

Additionally, any paragraph that starts with ‘Not lacking in brains’ and is about George Bush is by definition, NOT a ‘money graf.’ The idea that Lincoln and Bush are alike in any sort of intellectual capacity is just totally laughable. Both Presidents are in classes by themselves, on opposite sides of the spectrum. Lincoln might be our greatest President, while Bush is without a doubt the worst we’ve ever had. As he gets further and further out of office, and as the American people watch a new President with baseline levels of intelligence and competence do the same job, you will come to accept that assessment as well.

It is a fallacy to believe that George Bush is “dumb.” It flies in the face of reality and the facts.

As I point out in the article, the two men had radically different intellects; Lincoln had “an expansive and inquisitive mind” while Bush was “incurious” about his presidency. It hardly means that Bush didn’t have smarts. But the way the two men used their noggin was vastly different.

ed.