This story is archived
An Egghead for the Oval Office »
Posted by: Aidenag 2 years, 5 months agoOne thing that should be clear to anyone who's been paying attention these past few years is that we need to go out and get ourselves the smartest president we can find. We need a brainiac president, a regular Mister or Miss Smarty-Pants. We need to elect the kid you hated in high school, the teacher's pet with perfect grades.
Read Full Story at washingtonpost.com »
Submitted By:
Aidenag
Photographer by day, news junkie by night. My main areas of interest are politics and the environment.
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 207
-
Aidenag
June 1, 2007, 9:11 p.m.Really liked this guys take on what we need in a president. We went from Bill, a Rhodes Scholar, To Bush, a Secret Fraternity Jock.. It's time for an "Egghead" again :)
-
Ratskii
June 1, 2007, 11:33 p.m.Gore is ok, though I thought adopting Lieberman as a running mate wasn't all that bright. My opinion: The most intelligent candidate out there is Dennis Kucinich.
-
alakazam
June 2, 2007, 2:31 a.m.I think I am voting for this guy.
http://whitehouser.com/2007/05/16/ron-paul-send...
Be nice to have someone who isn't part of the machine in The Oval Ofiice.
-
Amazing1
June 2, 2007, 8:48 a.m.The guy made some good points. Only one thing I'd disagree with, "He or she doesn't have to be able to do the math..."
Well, I want someone who can do the math. Someone who realizes that if you only have five dollars, you can't spend ten. Matter of fact, I hereby offer to buy all members of Congress, the President and Vice President, their very own hand held calculator. How much is the debt today?
Ron Paul is looking good to me. And he does THINK! What a refreshing idea.
-
onlyonesecret
June 2, 2007, 11:13 a.m.Ron Paul has stated many times that he would like to reinstate the Constitution and restore the Republic. He has earned the nickname "Dr. No" for voting against any bill that violates the Constitution.
If Gulianni/McCain/Clinton/Obama become prez of the United States, the Constitution, our values, and our freedom will be just a faded memory.
Thank you for speaking the truth Ron.
-
Daylight
June 2, 2007, 11:11 a.m.we need to go out and get ourselves the smartest president we can find
I hope he is not dead or yet to be born.
-
onlyonesecret
June 2, 2007, 11:22 a.m.Daylight... The smartest president we can find is Ron Paul. He has a core set of principles that guide him. They happen to be the same principles envisioned by the framers of the U.S. Constitution.
-
nikkibabe
June 2, 2007, 11:28 a.m.The smartest President we can have is Oprah Winfrey, period. If someone spends her own money to set up a school for poor kids, there cannot be a mistake compared to bloodsuckers we have now and those who are aspiring for 2008.
-
gsquare
June 2, 2007, 12:32 p.m.Sorry, but we dont need an egghead. Eggheads are very smart but most cant tie their shoes. Being intellectually smart isnt/hasn't been a good formula for President. Lincoln was smart but not brilliant. Wilson was very smart but considered a failure. Clinton was supposed to be brilliant and let a guy like Arafat yank the rug out from under him at Wye River and it brought down a moderate Israeli government. Unfortunately, you dont know a good president until they've done it. Who knows, maybe Al Gore would be a good president, he got average grades in college.
-
el-jefe
June 2, 2007, 3:35 p.m.You must not know very much about government. Those 1200 lobbyists count for 1200 votes...exactly as much as in a couple of typical voting precincts out of the thousands of precincts in this country.
Lobbyists' influence resides with officials AFTER they've been elected, not before.
-
simonsez
June 2, 2007, 12:57 p.m.I don't think we're limited to those who say they want the job.
Also, I don't like eggheads ... they are too specialized. I want somebody with common sense and good management skills.
My dream team is Bloomberg/Jim Wells. One from each party. No baggage ... both down to earth.
-
lwjr
June 2, 2007, 2:04 p.m.I do not believe it matters who is in the White House. The Media and opposite party will tear the person apart. It is not about trying to make the country better. It is about, "How much power can I obtain and I have to keep my party in control". The really sad thing is we the people might elect them but they (elected politicans) sure as hell don't care what we think.
-
-
hamy
June 2, 2007, 3:32 p.m.During the 2000 election, my mother said that she didn't like Gore because he was a "smarty pants." My thoughts are the President of the United States of America is the one job where you would really want a "smarty pants" in office.
I have said it before and I will say it again. Everyone who voted for the "president you could drink a beer with" should be ashamed.
-
-
LiberalsSmell
June 2, 2007, 4:05 p.m."What you probably wouldn't have predicted is the counter-buzz that Gore, poor fellow, is just too ostentatiously smart to be elected president... Gore betrays familiarity with history, economics, even science. He uses big words, often several in the same sentence."
-How could the author have left out the fact that we owe our gratitude to Big Al for inventing the Internet? And is also the guru responsible for the certified factual Best Documentary "An Inconvenient Truth"?
-Thank you Mr. Gore. America, no, the whole world, is forever indebted to your wisdom and benevolence.....
-
spikecwc
June 2, 2007, 4:54 p.m.The story is ridiculous. Jimmy Carter has a very high IQ. Look how bad his presidency was.
-
truthiness
June 2, 2007, 4:57 p.m.we are in desperate need of intellect in govt in america.
the leaders of our nation must deal with the economy, diplomacy, military strategy, nuclear brinkmanship, fiscal responsibility, population distribution and related employment factors, the ecological ramifications of industrialization, to name a just a select few.
all of which require forethought and preparatory education for proper dispensation. If you cant pronounce those words, let alone spell or define them, you have no business seeking authority over them.
and we have no business granting authority without identifying if our candidates are cognizant of the import of these arenas of human society.
ultimatly in democracy you get the government you deserve.
-
royal-m
June 2, 2007, 4:57 p.m.The last thing we need in the white house is another regular guy with "simple ideas that he always sticks too" It is correct that brilliant hasn't always meant effective ie Carter etc....but if you start in the hole, if you start with a man that has a world view set in stone by the age of 17 and who doesn't understand much less appreciate the value impartial analysis and deductive reasoning when he sees it then you have no chance of sucess...you are **** from the start
-
youqueef
June 2, 2007, 5:32 p.m.After reading all these posts.. I really like hamys and foksipaynes point a president you could drink a beer with...even tho that'd be bad we've learned from history :)
But more so I think we need a president who has once been a poor and struggling, rather then a college person who was rich and spoiled, might of worked but never worked hard to know anything about running a country. Most the presidents help rich people, who really don't need help..they're rich. A person who has struggled on the other hand would know how to manage the countries money, rather then blowing it on a useless war because the president was disgraced his dad couldn't finish it. A poor person would help people who needed help and get better government funding for everyone. Minimum wage here is $6.15 and gas is $3 a gallon. College for classes and books are over 500$ for a semester.. Would someone who's parents put them through college care about this? They may be smart..but there smart struggling people too.
-
Poulenc
June 2, 2007, 6:13 p.m.I don't agree that smart-squaddies wouldn't touch the job of president--what could be more intellectually challenging?
As someone else said, the life a politician is a magnet, generally, for the ambitious and mediocre--actually, the job is sufficiently defined by the will-to-power.
The trick, I think, is to steer a course through the amazingly complex battle of interests--to find the wisest course. In light of this, being smart is a distinct advantage.
-
bilwod
June 2, 2007, 6:18 p.m.President George W. Bush is the best we have had in many a year and why not change the constitution and elect him a third time. I like the low unemployment and the tax dollars rolling into our treasury like it is. He has the best cabinet ever and is great with our homeland security. He tried to get us oil in the ANWR and fix social security.
-
agentX
June 2, 2007, 6:40 p.m.Unfortunately, the 'bar' of presidential excellence has been set SO low by this administration that pretty much ANY candidate (except Newt and possibly Rotten Rudy) or any geek of the street (except for those Jackass actors) could do a better job.
The real key to improving the executive branch will be to keep the Neo-Cons out of power and out of the process. All candidates should not accept money from those that funded them, if possible.
Just because someone passes an IQ test well, doesn't make them 'smart' it just means they're good at IQ tests.
-
pneumaticus
June 2, 2007, 7:02 p.m.Why not just elect an egg? That way we can have him soft-boiled or hard-boild, scrambled, fried, poached, or as an omelette or benedict, or just plain raw. Come to think of it, though, that's just like the president we have now.
-
The first 179 comments are shown. Show all 207 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
