In 2000, when George W. Bush was first elected to this nation’s highest post, I was cautiously optimistic. Sure, he wasn’t my candidate. And, even at the time he wasn’t regarded as any great intellectual. But, he seemed like a nice enough fellow, a good ‘ole boy, and definitely someone you might want to ‘have a beer with’.
At the time, our country was in pretty good shape. The economy was humming with low inflation, low unemployment, rising home prices, an economic surplus, and a stock market that was soaring to historic highs. On the national stage, the United States had a solid reputation, and we were at peace.
I figured our next President had a pretty simple gig. All he had to do was surround himself with smart people and, in essence, avoid rocking the boat. Or, to use another analogy, the ship was pointed in the right direction and our nation’s next leader just needed to avoid steering us off course.
And, how much power did the President really have anyway? Economic cycles are driven by a myriad of factors, few of which can be actively managed or controlled. And, when it comes to foreign policy, how hard is international diplomacy when you represent the strongest nation on earth? This President thing was a simple job that a nice guy with a big-shot daddy could certainly handle, right?
Okay, so I couldn’t have been more wrong. Apparently, the President has a lot more power and influence than I had assumed. And, it seems that surrounding oneself with a few brainy buddies and some ambitious ‘yes’-men isn’t a sufficient proxy for intellectual competence and sound decision-making.
I no longer believe that the President himself doesn’t need to be smart. In fact, a President should be more than smart. He or she should be the most intelligent person in the room, brilliant even.
How else will someone be able to solve the complicated issues our country faces? These are issues that have enormous costs and long-ranging consequences. They are issues that not only impact US treasure, and the air that our children breathe, but also the very lives of our military servicemen and women. They are issues our President needs to agonize over, to debate, to challenge, to question, and ultimately to understand. It’s not shoot-from-the-hip kind of stuff. And, there are no easy answers or simple solutions.
Obama has said that the current election should not be a "personality contest." That instead it should be about "issues." I respectfully disagree. That’s not to minimize the importance of issues. But, at the end of the day a President can and should change his or her mind on at least some issues when the facts or circumstances so necessitate. Therefore, a President’s personality is of the utmost importance, and intelligence is a key component of that personality.
We shouldn’t want someone who is merely ‘like us,’ or someone who we can really relate to in the White House. We should want someone better than ourselves; someone with sound judgment, an even temperament, upstanding character, an innate ability to lead and to inspire, and, yes, someone brilliant.
So, which of our candidates is the most brilliant? Is it the one who finished 894th out of 899 at the Naval Academy? Or, his vice presidential running mate who attended five colleges in six years before she finally graduated from the University of Idaho? Or, is it Barack Obama who was the Editor in Chief of the Law Review at Harvard University before teaching Constitutional Law?
Don’t get me wrong, pedigree alone does not guarantee intelligence – just look at George W. Bush. But, for the Republicans to tote this anti-intellectualism as a good thing, is simply pandering.
Personality does matter, which is exactly what makes the stronger choice Barack Obama.