Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (393915)	6/24/2008 5:47:42 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1578704

I don't know why you consider Carter to be a "smart guy." Principled and faithful, yes, but smart? Not really. I thought was a strange remark, too. While Carter may have been "smart" in an intellectual sense, he obviously lacked critical skills for a president, a shortfall which took his presidency to an absolute failure. Some would argue that Carter was "smarter" than Reagan. But Reagan became one of the greatest presidents in history because he was fearless and had a very strong moral compass -- something every Democrat president of our time has lacked (i.e., Carter, Clinton, and LBJ). JFK, we'll never know about, but I think he and Reagan shared some critical attributes. Neither of the candidates we're faced with now have the potential for the kind of greatness Reagan had, imo. Almost by definition, greatness as a president means "political courage" -- something possessed by only a couple of presidents in my lifetime (I see it in JFK, Reagan, and [cringe, gasp] George W. Bush). I think it is a big mistake to confuse "smartness" or "intellect" with "ability". I have known some really "smart" people in my life, but I can think of only one who actually has the knowledge and skills to have perhaps been a president. It is a very rare talent.