I can’t take it. A pro-Bush conservative pundit trying to take down Obama over what he calls Obama’s “lack of intellectual curiosity”? Pul-leaze. George Bush has demonstrated all the intellectual curiosity of a tree stump. He has over the course of almost eight years refused even to learn how to pronounce the word “nuclear,” and yet Dean Barnett, a staff writer over at The Weekly Standard, would have us understand that Barack Obama is unqualified to be president because of his lack of intellectual curiosity and his “naivete and arrogance.”

Get this: “But the time has come to be more precise with our terms. Yes, Obama undeniably has a high level of cognitive ability. But it’s becoming increasingly apparent that he either has read few books or retained very little from the books he read. Either that or he’s spent his time reading books that don’t help him understand history and won’t help him carry out his tasks as president.”

Oh my mercy god. If only Republicans had been "more precise" with their "terms" in 2000 and set that as a standard for their own candidate, think what we might have avoided.

Rebecca Vasko's blog | login or register to post comments