If you still think Obama is intelligent . . .

[werepossum]

He's still infinitely smarter than Bush.

Rather than refuting that, I'll simply liken it to saying she's the hottest chick on the East German Olympic Shot-put team. Maybe it's true and maybe it ain't, but it ain't goin' on the resume either way.

should be easy enough when the original was scribbled on a coloring book.


...but this is one of the lamest most vacuous criticisms I have seen.

isn't it quite possible that he never even saw the speech before he stepped up to the podium to give it? Dude gives several speeches a day, and presidents rarely write more than 20 or so percent of those, no?

one like this is so...regimental and pointless that I'm sure he wouldn't have even reviewed it.

Quite possible, even likely. Still, there's something to be said for a President who can simply say something rather than read it off the teleprompter. Especially if that something is to introduce one's own nomination. If Obama doesn't KNOW who he is and why he was selected, why the hell is he nominating him? Reading a three minute speech from teleprompters merely gives the impression that this nomination is either totally non-important (in which case, why have it?) or news to Obama too.

"Here's my nomination for, um, oh yeah. Another economic adviser. Cool. Pretty soon these two screens will tell me who he is and why I apparently chose him to be this adviser thingy. (You can never have too many college professors sharing their untested economic theories, I suppose.) I could just give you the press release saying what I'm about to tell you, but my voice is so sonorous that just reading this off the teleprompter gives him gravitas and inspires you all to believe that THIS college professor actually knows how to fix the economy."

 

[fskimospy]

He's doing 20 things that day at a minimum. I'm sure he does know why he's nominating him, but when your head is filled with dozens of different things you aren't likely to give the most eloquent and well rounded speech about each and every one of those 20 things.

If you use a teleprompter you don't have to worry about that and can immediately carry on with your day. It's really the only sensible option. I have no idea why Obama's use of them continues to be an issue. Every president uses them... lots. They have better shit to do.

 

[zinfamous]

Rather than refuting that, I'll simply liken it to saying she's the hottest chick on the East German Olympic Shot-put team. Maybe it's true and maybe it ain't, but it ain't goin' on the resume either way.


Quite possible, even likely. Still, there's something to be said for a President who can simply say something rather than read it off the teleprompter. Especially if that something is to introduce one's own nomination. If Obama doesn't KNOW who he is and why he was selected, why the hell is he nominating him? Reading a three minute speech from teleprompters merely gives the impression that this nomination is either totally non-important (in which case, why have it?) or news to Obama too.

"Here's my nomination for, um, oh yeah. Another economic adviser. Cool. Pretty soon these two screens will tell me who he is and why I apparently chose him to be this adviser thingy. (You can never have too many college professors sharing their untested economic theories, I suppose.) I could just give you the press release saying what I'm about to tell you, but my voice is so sonorous that just reading this off the teleprompter gives him gravitas and inspires you all to believe that THIS college professor actually knows how to fix the economy."

Obama is 100% correct in your sig, btw.

 

[ohnoes]

This is true. My point was that no speech was needed. A President should be able to do three minutes introducing one's nominee without memorizing ANYTHING. Presumably President Obama has just studied this man and his accomplishments, as he is nominating him to be an economic adviser.

Fair, but then we are looking at extemporaneous speaking and thinking on the feet. In this case, look at the interviews where he's required to respond to dynamic questioning. Why focus on a speech that was clearly written? You gain nothing from the analysis.

Basically, the question you're originally asking is "why is he using a speech format" but the conclusion you're drawing is from the question "he's not smart and can't think on this feet." They're two very different questions. You can be very intelligent but choose to use prepared speeches.

 

[dali71]

Obama is 100% correct in your sig, btw.

Then I'm sure you're outraged at all of the fuel and taxpayer money that his wife wasted by refusing to wait a day to travel with him to Hawaii, or wait a few hours to go to Martha's Vineyard. Or do you think that his statement only applies to us little people?

 

[ohnoes]

Then I'm sure you're outraged at all of the fuel and taxpayer money that his wife wasted by refusing to wait a day to travel with him to Hawaii, or wait a few hours to go to Martha's Vineyard. Or do you think that his statement only applies to us little people?

Wouldn't there be pre-arrival planning contingents that need to be in place beforehand? I'd think a reasonable assumption would be that they hopped onto a flight that needed to take place in preparation for obama's arrival.

 

[Bird222]

He's still infinitely smarter than Bush.

Rather than refuting that, I'll simply liken it to saying she's the hottest chick on the East German Olympic Shot-put team. Maybe it's true and maybe it ain't, but it ain't goin' on the resume either way.

I would be interested in seeing you refute that claim. I think it's pretty clear from the evidence we have that Obama is smarter than Bush, but please try to convince us otherwise. :thumbsup:

 

[werepossum]

Fair, but then we are looking at extemporaneous speaking and thinking on the feet. In this case, look at the interviews where he's required to respond to dynamic questioning. Why focus on a speech that was clearly written? You gain nothing from the analysis.

Basically, the question you're originally asking is "why is he using a speech format" but the conclusion you're drawing is from the question "he's not smart and can't think on this feet." They're two very different questions. You can be very intelligent but choose to use prepared speeches.

True. This however wasn't really even a speech, just an announcement.

Then I'm sure you're outraged at all of the fuel and taxpayer money that his wife wasted by refusing to wait a day to travel with him to Hawaii, or wait a few hours to go to Martha's Vineyard. Or do you think that his statement only applies to us little people?

This is the true danger of progressives. They actually support dividing society into two groups, one privileged group which may do as it wishes and one serf group which must be managed by a different set of rules. EVERYONE needs to play by the same set of rules. If Al Gore wants me to give up my car, he must first give up his own personal transportation - no limos, no SUVs, no caravans, no private buses, certainly no private jets, and no jetting around the country/world to deliver his speeches and make his business deals. If Obama wants to control what we eat, what we drive, and what temperature we keep our homes, he has a responsibility to first live by rules at least as stringent as what he wishes to impose on others. Accepting Obama's "right" to travel about and take his many vacations (let alone on the public dime) while also accepting his "right" to decide for the rest of us how and where we may travel establishes a royalty class above the law, something this country has rejected from its inception. As a conservative libertarian, I want everyone to have as much freedom as possible, including the right to choose for themselves which car they drive, where they drive it, what they eat, and what temperature they keep their homes, within their ability to pay for it. Where we decide as a nation that this freedom MUST be infringed, the infringement has to apply equally to everyone.

 

[werepossum]

I would be interested in seeing you refute that claim. I think it's pretty clear from the evidence we have that Obama is smarter than Bush, but please try to convince us otherwise. :thumbsup:

I have no particular evidence that Bush is smarter than Obama, which is why I did not try to establish that. Nor do I have any reliable criteria for establishing intelligence through observation. (Not that I particularly trust in IQ tests - I was extensively tested in 8th grade and scored from 110 or so up to over 250, an IQ number whose very existence is contested - but at least that is a quantifiable, repeatable measurement of something related to intelligence even accepting that different tests deliver significantly different results.) Honestly I've seen no evidence that either is particularly intelligent, and plenty of evidence that both are probably above average in intelligence and drive.

However, if you want to show that Obama is smarter than Bush, please apply any criteria without basis. If Bush is an idiot for attempting to enter a White House door that was locked, then Obama must be at least as much an idiot for attempting to enter a White House door that was actually a fixed window. If Bush is an idiot for mangling the English language on occasion or for forgetting an old saw in mid-quote, then Obama must be at least as much an idiot for blowing the number of states or for thanking himself for inviting himself to the White House to meet himself. Whatever criteria you choose, it should be applied without bias, especially the most common bias - whether each agrees with the estimator. It should be open to inspection and critique; claiming great intelligence for Obama based on university achievement is suspect enough in and of itself, but useless if Obama has not released his records. And it should definitely not be something as unarguably not directly related to intelligence as the ability to read a teleprompter.

Wouldn't there be pre-arrival planning contingents that need to be in place beforehand? I'd think a reasonable assumption would be that they hopped onto a flight that needed to take place in preparation for obama's arrival.

I doubt that - an advance team would also be necessary to ensure the safety of FLOTUS.

 

[Bird222]

This is the true danger of progressives. They actually support dividing society into two groups, one privileged group which may do as it wishes and one serf group which must be managed by a different set of rules.

It seems to me based on the policies that "conservatives" support, they are the ones that want a two class society. The rich and the poor with nothing in between.

 

[Bird222]

I have no particular evidence that Bush is smarter than Obama, which is why I did not try to establish that. Nor do I have any reliable criteria for establishing intelligence through observation. (Not that I particularly trust in IQ tests - I was extensively tested in 8th grade and scored from 110 or so up to over 250, an IQ number whose very existence is contested - but at least that is a quantifiable, repeatable measurement of something related to intelligence even accepting that different tests deliver significantly different results.) Honestly I've seen no evidence that either is particularly intelligent, and plenty of evidence that both are probably above average in intelligence and drive.

However, if you want to show that Obama is smarter than Bush, please apply any criteria without basis. If Bush is an idiot for attempting to enter a White House door that was locked, then Obama must be at least as much an idiot for attempting to enter a White House door that was actually a fixed window. If Bush is an idiot for mangling the English language on occasion or for forgetting an old saw in mid-quote, then Obama must be at least as much an idiot for blowing the number of states or for thanking himself for inviting himself to the White House to meet himself. Whatever criteria you choose, it should be applied without bias, especially the most common bias - whether each agrees with the estimator. It should be open to inspection and critique; claiming great intelligence for Obama based on university achievement is suspect enough in and of itself, but useless if Obama has not released his records. And it should definitely not be something as unarguably not directly related to intelligence as the ability to read a teleprompter. I doubt that - an advance team would also be necessary to ensure the safety of FLOTUS.

What is this insistence on Obama releasing his records? Did the faculty at Harvard know one day he would run for president so they wanted him to have good grades all through school? Or maybe they thought his was cute and just gave him A's? I'm going to assume that the faculty had average integrity of other professors and the classes required to get his degree were of normal/average Harvard difficulty. I am also going to assume that Yale and Harvard are on the same level difficulty. Maybe you have info that says that during the time Obama went to school, Harvard only had a bunch of slacker professors that were handing out grades. If so, please share. But the need for 'his records' suggests that Harvard has either shady professors or they don't have a proper curriculum for giving someone a law degree, or both. It's just amazing the lengths some will go to just to put Obama down. If they have to say that the whole world is wrong just to down Obama, they will do it. Just amazing.

 

[AMDZen]

I do not think highly of President Obama, but I choose to find better things to criticize than his desiring/needing teleprompters, especially since public speaking sucks.

Agreed.

I don't like what Obama has done, but for right wingers to question intelligence is hilarious.

Part of me wants to see Sarah Palin in 2012 to see how horribly she can mess things up. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart would be must see TV for her entire term, and years afterward.

 

[werepossum]

What is this insistence on Obama releasing his records? Did the faculty at Harvard know one day he would run for president so they wanted him to have good grades all through school? Or maybe they thought his was cute and just gave him A's? I'm going to assume that the faculty had average integrity of other professors and the classes required to get his degree were of normal/average Harvard difficulty. I am also going to assume that Yale and Harvard are on the same level difficulty. Maybe you have info that says that during the time Obama went to school, Harvard only had a bunch of slacker professors that were handing out grades. If so, please share. But the need for 'his records' suggests that Harvard has either shady professors or they don't have a proper curriculum for giving someone a law degree, or both. It's just amazing the lengths some will go to just to put Obama down. If they have to say that the whole world is wrong just to down Obama, they will do it. Just amazing.

I am not insisting on Obama releasing his records; I think he has established plenty of evidence on which to fairly judge him.

What I am saying is that IF he wants to be thought highly intelligent on the basis of his academic achievement, then he needs to provide full disclosure. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone has any basis to claim Obama's great intelligence except on the basis of his great ability to read a speech from a teleprompter (matched and trumped by Sarah Palin, so I'm assuming that one can be thrown out immediately) and on the basis of his academic achievements, graduating cum laude and being selected the president of the Harvard Law Review. Unless you want to make the argument that everyone who graduates from Harvard (but apparently not Yale) is automatically of great intelligence, his records are key to the claim.

Again, I am making no claims about his education. I'm simply saying that IF you want to use that as evidence of his great intelligence, then the whole record should be used. Otherwise, judge his intelligence as you would anyone else's. Personally I'm not impressed; YMMV.

 

[CallMeJoe]

... on the basis of his academic achievements, graduating cum laude and being selected the president of the Harvard Law Review. Unless you want to make the argument that everyone who graduates from Harvard (but apparently not Yale) is automatically of great intelligence, his records are key to the claim...

Graduating from Harvard is no de facto proof of intelligence, but magna cum laude Juris Doctor is rather more convincing than a common baccalaureate.

 

[jman19]

I can't believe such a stupid thread made it to 4 pages. P&N is truly amazing.

 

[Nemesis 1]

He's doing 20 things that day at a minimum. I'm sure he does know why he's nominating him, but when your head is filled with dozens of different things you aren't likely to give the most eloquent and well rounded speech about each and every one of those 20 things.

If you use a teleprompter you don't have to worry about that and can immediately carry on with your day. It's really the only sensible option. I have no idea why Obama's use of them continues to be an issue. Every president uses them... lots. They have better shit to do.

He wouldn't have to do 20 things at once. If he wouldn't go on vacation so often .

 

[Nemesis 1]

Agreed.

I don't like what Obama has done, but for right wingers to question intelligence is hilarious.

Part of me wants to see Sarah Palin in 2012 to see how horribly she can mess things up. The Daily Show with Jon Stewart would be must see TV for her entire term, and years afterward.

Ya and most leftwingers show their smarts by how many unborn babies they can murder . or to teach our children in school that experimenting in sex with both male /female is OK . Ya real intelligent

 

[WackyDan]

I do not think highly of President Obama, but I choose to find better things to criticize than his desiring/needing teleprompters, especially since public speaking sucks.

I've done hundreds of speeches. Considering that he gives the same speech over and over or essentially with the same talking points - a three minute speech for someone who was fawned over for being such a great speaker should not need the hardware.

 

[Pens1566]

He wouldn't have to do 20 things at once. If he wouldn't go on vacation so often .

To this point in his administration, he's spent 1/3 as much time on vacation as W did clearing brush on his ranch in Crawford.

 

[fskimospy]

To this point in his administration, he's spent 1/3 as much time on vacation as W did clearing brush on his ranch in Crawford.

I read this somewhere (can't remember where), but there's something really weird about the vacation attack. The people attacking the vacationer almost always hate the policies of the guy in office, but then they complain he isn't spending more time at the office... which would undoubtedly be used to implement more policies they don't like.

 

[ShawnD1]

To this point in his administration, he's spent 1/3 as much time on vacation as W did clearing brush on his ranch in Crawford.

People bitch about vacations, but the president doesn't really take vacations. People still talk to him, he still talks to other people. It would be like if you went on vacation and the people at your office are still calling you and asking you shit about the server and how to log in and all this other stuff.

Lots of jobs are like that. Some of the people in my office still communicate through email when they are on vacation.

 

[Bird222]

... on the basis of his academic achievements, graduating cum laude and being selected the president of the Harvard Law Review. Unless you want to make the argument that everyone who graduates from Harvard (but apparently not Yale) is automatically of great intelligence, his records are key to the claim.

No, I am not making the argument that everyone that graduates from Harvard is of great intelligence, but those that graduate magna cum laude and is the president of the Harvard Law Review are probably pretty smart. I don't need to see all of his records to come to that conclusion, unless I think the Harvard faculty are a bunch of retards or if I am just trying to down Obama cause I don't like him.

Graduating from Harvard is no de facto proof of intelligence, but magna cum laude Juris Doctor is rather more convincing than a common baccalaureate.

Thank you.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Like everthing else in the USA that can be bought and paid for.

 

[Todd33]

In late 1988, Obama entered Harvard Law School. He was selected as an editor of the Harvard Law Review at the end of his first year

He did this without a rich and powerful family. He must be a dumb f#$%.

LOL at the OP, really. Just admit it, just like every tea bagger, you hate the fact a brown man is the president.

 

[zsdersw]

The simplest explanation usually being the correct one, I'd say it's standard policy to use teleprompters, regardless of the length of the remarks or speech.. so that's what they did. Reading anything else into it is purely a function of personal bias/agenda.