NationStates Jolt Archive

Who's the smartest?

My minds already made up. I thought I'd see what everyone else thinks.

John Howard, PM of Australia:
This is a robust parliament. It has seen debates and divisions of view on issues. We had a divided view in this nation on the question of our participation in Iraq. Let me say on behalf of the government that we believe the right decision was taken; we believe Australia was right to join the United States. And I know that all Australians believe that the people of Iraq are better off without that loathsome dictator, Saddam Hussein.

Tony Blair, Ex-PM of Breat Britain
I beg to move the motion standing on the order paper in my name and those of my right honourable friends.
At the outset I say: it is right that this house debate this issue and pass judgment. That is the democracy that is our right but that others struggle for in vain. And again I say: I do not disrespect the views of those in opposition to mine. This is a tough choice. But it is also a stark one: to stand British troops down and turn back; or to hold firm to the course we have set.


George W. Bush,
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we,
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we.

It's George W. Bush, no question. Why even bother asking?

Hahaha.

Your being sarcastic, right?

Am I?

:confused:

Hahaha.

Your being sarcastic, right?

Are you disputing the intelligence of our great leader?

You know we have a Guantanomo Bay for that?

Psshhaaaw.

Theres no intelligence to dispute.

Intelligent leaders? That's an oxymoron. :D (just kidding, though it does seem that as soon as one is elected they lose their ability to display any form of intelligence).

Don't know, but Kaczyński definately takes the "most stupid ploitician" award.

They've all said more than their share of dumb things, to say the least. ;)

Jean Chretien in Canada was great contestant for the dumbest

So basically this thread could have been titled "Which leader do you dislike the worst?"

I don't think anybody on this forum has any expertise or evidence to seriously opine on the intelligence of these three persons. One could give an entire litany of mistakes GWB has made, but there could be a perfectly good explanation for all of them (I'm not saying there is, just that there could be). Before GWB, I think many Americans would have considered Jimmy Carter a pretty horrible president, but oddly enough he was probably the smartest presidents we have ever had (IQ-wise). Intelligence obviously helps in any profession, but there are many other qualities that are far more important in making a good leader.

GWB's two main problems are the fact that his policies are so deeply polarizing and the fact that he is a terrible public speaker. But if any of you remember, Admiral Stockdale (whom Ross Perot picked as his VP candidate) performed horribly in televised debates and was ridiculed horrendously by the media. What the media didn't say is that the man was a POW for eight years, the highest ranking officer to ever be held POW, and that he had a Medal of Honor along with several other citations for bravery. Of course, bravery does not equal intelligence. But believe it or not, it does take a very high level of intelligence to make it through the Naval Academy and to become a flag-level officer.

Another question; does a low popularity rating actually mean somebody is doing a bad job? Being that most Americans are utterly ignorant about the world around them, shouldn't politicians be lauded for having terrible popularity ratings?

Finally, is compromise really a good leadership trait or a sign of intelligence? I think it depends on the issue. Although not all the time, especially when it comes to social issues, there is sometimes an absolute truth or an absolute right way to go. For someboy to recognize that absolute correct policy and fail to follow it for some politically expedient compromise, would be worse than unintelligent. It would be unprincipled. (Of course, the opposite of that is if somebody is actually wrong on the issue and refuses to compromise b/c of principal... then that person just sucks!)