Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Super genius, arbiter of all matters cerebral, U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski, has pronounced that the world's favorite target for derision, Sarah Palin, lacks the intellectual curiosity to be president.
I am really tired of liberals implying they have a monopoly on intelligence. Their claimed compassion monopoly is tough enough to endure, but the intellectual thing is getting old too. If you're conservative, you're presumptively moronic. If you're a Christian conservative, you're stupid on stilts.
Liberal politicians always seem to have the "trappings" of intelligence, the IQ street cred, as it were. The intelligentsia depicted Brahmin John Kerry as Mensaesque. Jimmy Carter was reputed to be the smartest that guy ever to wear a pair of Buster Brown shoes.
But beyond the lib stereotypes, what about the premise underlying Murkowski's lament, i.e., that robust intellectual curiosity is an essential qualification for the job of the presidency? And, while we're at it, what is intellectual curiosity? I'm curious.
Murkowski apparently attempted to edify us on those questions. She said, "You know, she was my governor for two years, for just about two years there, and I don't think that she enjoyed governing. I don't think she liked to get down in the policy." Murkowski went on to explain that she would prefer a candidate who "goes to bed at night and wakes up in the morning thinking about how we're going to deal with" important issues.
To quote the Church Lady, "Isn't that special?"
Sounds to me like she's describing a policy wonk, not someone who's intellectually curious. In fact, as I think about this isn't that what the lib elite really means when they talk about intellectual curiosity? Don't they mean people who recreationally ruminate about policy?
It seems to me that the libs' ideal president is an academician or someone who cogitates with the best of them. But are these types really best suited for the big issue decisiveness that great presidents have often displayed? Or are they better equipped for "nuance," minutia and intellectual handwringing?
We know that Jimmy Carter -- the smartest guy in every room ever constructed by carpenters inside and outside Habitat for Humanity -- was not an effective president. He was terrible -- not just because his policies were disastrous, but because he was woefully unsuited for the job.
I'm sure all libs would agree that Carter possessed an abundance of intellectual curiosity, so what does that say about the relationship of this attribute and effective executive governance?
Interestingly, though, these same lib snobs (and a few conservative snobs to boot) swore that Obama was the smartest messiah since Jimmy Carter. Though we haven't seen his transcripts, he certainly went to the right schools. So he is definitely intellectually curious right?
Well, let's see. If you use Murkowski's intelligence yardstick: dreaming about policy and enjoying governing, we know Obama doesn't quite fit the bill. We're told from a growing number of sources that Obama really doesn't like the details of governance; that he can't be bothered.
Well, you might say, "that may be true, but you can't deny he's a policy wonk. He has big ideas and he is pushing them passionately."
I'll concede he cares about policy to the extent that he wants to shove his grand vision down America's throat. But how can any reasonable person characterize Obama's approach to ideas as open or curious? He's the most dogmatic ideologue we've witnessed -- and that's saying something. There doesn't appear to be an ounce of intellectual curiosity in his bones. He isn't curious. He has known all the answers for a long time. Curiosity is an annoying distraction at best. Listening is foreign to his being.
But, truth be told, intellectual curiosity is euphemistic for "enlightened liberal," so Obama qualifies. So what Murkowski is really saying is that Palin would not make a good president because she doesn't subscribe to the liberal worldview.
And, according to the Murkowski perspective, Sarah Palin, no matter how smart she is, cannot possibly be intellectually curious. I know many conservatives are convinced Sarah Palin is intellectually challenged, but I'm not one of them. My appreciation of Palin grows in direct proportion to elitist criticism of her. Plus, I think she has refreshingly good instincts.
I'm sure Lisa Murkowski considers herself intellectually curious. Do you think she'd make a better president than Sarah other than in her own mind?
- Comment (51)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
As I understand it, the prime motivation for the Murkoswski-style politician is the appropriating, regulating, and the opportunities for corruption that flow from the first two. A majority of Alaskans seem to want that type of representation in Congress; the careers of Stevens, Murkowski, & Don Young make that plain. They get the government they want and, perhaps, deserve.
We'll have to do what we can to resist them...
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Intellectual curiosity makes for a good academician. But Murkowski's idea of what makes good governance varies significantly from mine. Actually, that's a good subject for discussion: what makes for good governance? I'll give it a stab. I look for:
I'm sure there are other things that I'd add to the list if I sat and thought about it for a bit longer, but those are things that jumped to the forefront.
Jun '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Well put David!
Intellectually curious about what? - policy. What kind of policy? The kind where the government restricts (let's be honest, it doesn't regulate anything, except in its "intellectual" dreams) more and more of American society.
I like a curiosity that asks - What government laws/restrictions are getting in the way of creative people innovating more efficient and effective means of achieving their values - for themselves, for their communities, and for humanity? How do we impair people from creating solutions to the problems they perceive/face? How are we currently incenting people to play the system rather than playing the game of thriving?
Sep '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
I can see pressure from my House(of Representatives).
May '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Anyone else think Lisa Murkowski is being a wee bit reckless with her political future if she wants to start measuring I.Q.s?
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Mark Lewis
I like a curiosity that asks - What government laws/restrictions are getting in the way of creative people innovating more efficient and effective means of achieving their values - for themselves, for their communities, and for humanity? How do we impair people from creating solutions to the problems they perceive/face? How are we currently incentivizing people to play the system rather than playing the game of thriving?
Nov 16 at 10:25am
Ditto! (P.S. Mark -- I feel as though I haven't seen you around these parts in ages. Hi!)
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
I agree David--is intellectual curiosity really a requirement to be president? I can see how courage and resolve may be, but intellectual curiosity?
Don't get me wrong, I think intellectual curiosity can be a great quality--but one that is perhaps more essential to other professions, as you say.
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
"It seems to me that the libs' ideal president is an academician or someone who cogitates with the best of them," David writes. My comment: This is true. Just look at Barack.
"But," David continues, "are these types really best suited for the big issue decisiveness that great presidents have often displayed?" My comment: Most certainly they are not. Again, just look at Barack.
(One of the many things I enjoy about you, David, is that all the stuff that annoys you annoys me, too.)
May '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
David Limbaugh:
My appreciation of Palin grows in direct proportion to elitist criticism of her. Plus, I think she has refreshingly good instincts.
I know exactly what you mean. When the self-selected "elites" come so unhinged by someone, you suspect they are perceiving something threatening. Neither Bush nor Palin pays much attention to what they say, or genuflects toward their status credentials. With their confidence so rooted in their badges of superiority, that sort of insouciant regard must be unsettling.
The trouble Murkowski has now is that having spoken critically of someone else's intelligence, she opens herself up for examination. Every misstatement and clumsy choice of words will be held against her.
Aug '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
This is beyond pathetic, verging on pathological. Who are the models they hold up? Barack Hussein (Don't call him that! He's not a Muslim! Except when he goes to Egypt, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia...) Obama, John Kerry, Al Gore, Bill Clinton (Hey Bill, nice gig on 'The Hangover II' , coming to a theater near us!), Ted Kennedy...
Before that the "intellectuals" were Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale, Jimmy Carter, Adlai Stevenson (Ann Coulter's investigation showed that Stevenson never read any books as an adult, and when he died, had no library of any kind).
A political party that holds forth such people as paragons of "intellectual curiosity" and high intelligence are fit only for a mental hospital, and eventually the flaming dustbin of history.
Oct '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Good instincts trump amorphous intellectual curiosity. If two policy wonks endorse competing positions on the same issue, the one with better instincts will more likely be correct. Moreover, a marginally informed but prescient and sober analyst is more likely to make the right call than a highly educated idealogue. Wasington, Boston, New York, San Francisco and Seattle are crammed full of the latter. The former tend to be spread more evenly throughout the land.
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
I don't think "intellectual" curiosity is all that important in a chief executive either, David. I'm not even sure what "intellectual curiosity" even is, except in the liberal definition meaning, "is not a conservative."
What a chief executive needs is managerial curiosity. She needs to be able to ask really hard questions of her direct reports, to set high standards, to be the toughest cross examiner in the room. Everyone I've ever known who has worked for a tough CEO has always said the same thing: you had to go into the room prepared to answer every question, not because the CEO knew more than you did, but because the CEO expected you to know all the angles.
To me, the big Palin Question is, does she have that kind of managerial toughness. I don't know, right now, but I wouldn't want to bet that she doesn't.
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
I'm with you David. The Left is chock-a-block with folks with a great CPU--give them a problem and they will provide the back-of-the-teacher's-edition answer--and a lack of common sense. In real life an awful lot depends upon how you frame a problem; sometimes you're not even answering the right question.
In practice, to a political liberal intellectual curiosity means questioning everything handed down to us by the Founders and Framers or, to state it another way, incuriously accepting the Marxist critique of the United States. Depart from scripture on this matter and you are a complete dunderhead, no matter your grades or which college you attended.
Edited on Nov 16, 2010 at 10:59amRe: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
The degree of intellectual curiosity I would demand of a politician is one sufficient to be aware--and respectful--of how much he or she is apt not to know. The offshore drilling example is a good one; foreign policy toward, say, the Balkans is another. I don't ask of a politician that he or she understand either subject deeply. I do ask for a politician who grasps well that there's a lot you need to know before you can make policy on certain subjects intelligently--and that therefore, you need to get the right people advising you, and you need to listen to what they're telling you. "Sufficiently curious" to me means "sufficiently aware that some things are difficult and complicated." The ability to choose the right advisors is a key political talent that we don't acknowledge enough.
Jul '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Like David Brooks, I like my intellectuals to have a razor crease in their trousers. Throwing a baseball like a girl is a plus.
Edited on Nov 16, 2010 at 11:04amMay '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Murkowski's just getting her own back after the Divine Sarah knocked off her dad for governor. She's entitled; she won. So she just grabbed the most hackneyed anti-Palin trope to hand. And the press nods sagely.
Though it seems starting a devastatingly effective nationwide movement from a Facebook page shows a lot more creativity and thinking outside the box than being appointed to the senate by your dad.
May '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
The intellectual curiosity meme is phony but the "doesn't like to govern" knock has some teeth. She quit her job to become a pundit and gadfly. She has been very effective in that role but she seems to enjoy it more than being governor. I am troubled by how much petty small-p politics she leaves in her wake. Is Alaska really that dysfunctional?
I think an effective executive manages people well. Don't see much to suggest Sarah Palin has that skill set.Also not sure that a sassy, Tweeting, pot-stirrer is what's called for in international affairs either.
I'd like to see her sit still and do something for a year or two and then maybe I could take her seriously in the presidential role... maybe she should run the Republican party after Michael Steele?
Oct '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Well said, David. This "intellectual curiosity" mantra sounds eerily similar to the moral equivalency from the left, i.e. there are no bad ideas or cultural activities, unless its conservative and/or religious.
Did you see the David Brooks NYT piece today? Sure sounds like he’s close to endorsing Sarah Palin’s common sense conservatism to me :-)
“It all makes one doubt the wizardry of the economic surgeons and appreciate the old wisdom of common sense: simple regulations, low debt, high savings, hard work, few distortions. You don’t have to be a genius to come up with an economic policy like that.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/16/opinion/16brooks.html?ref=opinion
I look forward to Mr. Brooks having Milton Friedman’s pencil and a copy of the Road to Serfdom on his desk. But I’m no holding my breath.
May '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Indeed. And it's not just common sense (caution to Lefties: this will hurt), it's a failure of imagination. They lack the imagination to:
Mixed with hubris, their fatuity is insufferable.
More to the point, Palin would seem to stack up fine against her likely Democratic opponents, including our Wunderkind-in-Chief, if her capabilities were looked at more broadly.
Sep '10
Re: Palin's Intellectual Curiosity?
Anyone know how to compost horse manure? Just curious, I’m thinking of going into politics!