Stupid is as Stupid Does

Beyond the liberal chattering classes' insufferable bias that Republican presidents, or wanna-be presidents, are routinely simple and shallow, while Democrats are by comparison relative geniuses, lies a very real question about whether or not what passes for smarts is a necessary component of sound political leadership. Angelo Codevilla usefully points out that absent a standardized measure of intelligence, it's virtually impossible to know how our presidents and presidential candidates stack up on that score. But I would like to take it a step farther and ask whether, even if it were possible to know, would it, or should it make any difference? Are there other, more important, qualities we should look for in those that would lead us?

For example, I'll concede that Bill Clinton probably had high SAT scores. But he also had a high libido. And, as we discovered, the former did little to nothing to compensate for the latter. If one commonplace measure of integrity is sexual self-discipline within the confines of a marriage in which one has promised to forsake all others, then Bill Clinton lacked, to put it mildly, integrity. Was his intelligence of such a superior quality that it ought to have made us indifferent to his integrity? Or, to put it less confrontationally, is intelligence or integrity the more important quality we should look for in a leader?

Moreover, might a superior intelligence not only not help, but actually hinder one's ability to lead effectively? One indispensable aspect of leadership is decisiveness, and particularly so in a crisis. Among the qualities that describe a sophisticated mind, I would include an ability to see, and even anticipate the many sides of a particular problem, to know that the question one must answer is not as straightforward as it may at first seem. But knowing that does not relieve one, if one is in charge, of making a decision nevertheless, of choosing a course, of giving an order. A philosopher can, and should, deliberate, presumably forever. But a leader by definition must choose and act, and often he must do so with dispatch. That quality which would be an unqualified virtue in the former, would be a crippling vice in the latter. Perhaps even a dangerous one.

Thankfully, neither intelligence and integrity, nor intelligence and decisiveness are of such an order that we are forced, by logic, to choose between them. We can, and do hope that our leaders possess all three qualities, and in large measure. But, if we, like our leaders, must choose, is there any doubt which two of three are the more compelling?

Therefore, the next time your liberal friends try to end the argument by pointing out how smart, for example, President Obama is, respond with the not so simple nor shallow, "So?"