Liberal Times readers question Obama’s famous brains and brilliance


The witchy-looking Maureen Dowd starts off her as usual worthless op-ed thus:

Barack Obama became president by brilliantly telling his own story. To stay president, he will need to show he can understand our story.

At first it was exciting that Obama was the sort of brainy, cultivated Democrat who would be at home in a “West Wing” episode.

But now he acts like he really thinks he’s on “West Wing,” gliding through an imaginary, amber-lit set where his righteous self-regard is bound to be rewarded by the end of the hour.

Hey, dude, you’re a politician. Act like one.

The readers’ comments following the op-ed, to which VFR reader Jim C. drew my attention, are interesting. Some of them strike the familiar leftist note that Obama has been too “moderate” and “right-wing” and needs to be more leftist. But many of them—clearly coming from the left, not the right—contest the notion that Obama is brainy and cultivated. Here’s a sampling:

This is a good editorial with a terrible headline sub-title. Obama was never as much as advertised. I am still waiting to see any proof of his “brilliance”. He seems to be a physically attractive nice man with a mediocre mind; and nothing more. I hope I’m wrong, but that is all I see, so far


President Obama was never up to the job for which he was elected. He was in over his head from day one. For Democrats to have any chance, at all, in 2012, there must be a serious primary challenge, which the President could not withstand.


Aah, if Ms. Dowd could only remember who was the biggest cheerleader for the inexperienced, untested chameleon candidate two years ago. If she could only remember who was so in love with him that she affectionally referred to him as “Obambi”, while stomping relentlessly on Senator and President Clinton. Perhaps someone could help Ms. Dowd google that mystery writer of bygone days? Thanks for nothing.


I guess what O did wrong was over-estimate the intelligence of the American people. He just needs a new PR team and a press that understands and communicates what he’s really trying to do. Give the guy a break, will you!!


It is not that President Obama is not communicating well about his policies that have turned a majority of Americans against him, it is the policies itself that are making voters seek other alternatives.

The vast majority of Congress voted for a health care bill that they did not read nor knew what was in it themselves. Nancy Pelosi stated ” … we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it.”

In the end, the bill was passed and over the course of months, people came to realize what was in it … didn’t like it … and now are voting out the politicians who voted for it. The communication as to what is happening in this election is as “simple as that”…. any more questions?


Obama has been an embarassment for the country. He has appeared to be lost since the day he took office. The only certainty about him is that he has too much self-esteem and too little personal responsibility. He has served the Wall Street bankers well; but not so much the rest of us.


BHO is an empty suit. His “genius” reputation is not apparently justified.

He is JFK without the PT boat. (and JFK, with much more material, never bothered to write even one autobiography before his death at age 46; Barry wrote two.)

That Kennedy connection may explain a lot. Recall that he was neck and neck with Hillary in the spring of 2008 when Caroline Kennedy Schlossburg endorsed him, calling him the first truly inspiring leader to come along since her father.

As Caroline’s disasterous senate candidacy showed, she is no JFK. Neither is Mr. Obama.


Obama was never anything more than an election gimmick. The new “shiny thing” to catch the attention of a tabloid-tv loving populace. His fifteen minutes of fame are over. He never accomplished one single positive thing for this country but he will always have his fans because they want so badly for him to be more than he actually is. The next two years are simply the lame-duck wind-down of a wasted opportunity. Maybe the next people can do better. They could hardly do worse.


You wrote “At first it was exciting that Obama was the sort of brainy, cultivated Democrat”. “Culivated”, yes absolutely. To the point of polished mediocrity. ” Brainy”? I hear many people touting this but have yet to see one bit of evidence. I don’t think he is stupid, but he has certainly shown no signs of being anything remotely close to “brainy”. I guess that it more eveidence of the old saying that if you repeat a falsehood enough times, that simple people will start to believe the falsehood.



You are very willing to label anyone on the right as either crazy or inept, but why are you not willing to speak the very simple truth that Barack Obama was not vetted properly as a candidate and he is incompetent?


Obama “brainy, cultivated” ! More like a male, brunette version of “dumb-blonde”. His two years have been a disaster for everyone that isn’t a New York banker. You can be funny, at times. Really funny.


But, Dowd you were so in love with him just a year ago.

I guess that’s how romances go, or should I say fantasies.

Had you and your colleagues been a little more discriminating in your thought, you might have seen that there was a lot more smoke than substance.

A lot of people who have been the subject of your mockery did.

Would suggest that you take you lumps next Tuesday with some grace, no matter how difficult it might be.


- end of initial entry -

LA to Jim C.:

I never would even have thought of reading comments at the Times, so I appreciate your picking this out.

However, I note that the comments are much better written that at other sites; I guess they are moderated, and this leads to better quality.

I am truly surprised at all these New York Times liberals openly stating that Obama is not smart. This is Jim C. heaven.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 31, 2010 09:47 AM | Send

Email entry

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):