The Harvard degree doesn’t cut it as:

1) there may be a whiff of affirmative action and possibly quite mediocre marks as the transcripts are locked up in a legal Fort Knox for some inexplicable reason.

2) If people like Gates can make Professor there in a “discipline” that boils down to permanent race mongering and in a chair named after a hate-America-first communist, Harvard has lost its way.

3) Lawrence Summers voted out by Harvard staff for speaking scientific truth about differential gender abilities.

I could go on an on, but it should be pretty clear that a degree from PCU (Political Correctness University) is strongly deflated in value.

There is credible analysis that Obama’s books were ghostwritten.

He is a stumblebum off the teleprompter. His impromptu efforts at wit are completely lame and/or backfire as on the Leno show kibbitzing about the Special Olympics.

As for being more knowledgeable on foreign policy than the average American pharmacist? Bill, you’re too kind. Obama didn’t know Canada, his first whistlestop outside the USA has a Prime Minister instead of President, thought Austrians speak Austrian, didn’t realize that Russia has a veto on the UN Security Council and would not vote to censure itself on Georgia, and didn’t know the POTUS does not bow deeply to a jumped up camel driver King of Arabia. At least he didn’t call himself a jelly doughnut at the Brandenburg Gates photo op.

Then there’s the one little geographical factoid that should have made the Harvard brain unelectable if it had been properly reported. Obama didn’t know how many states there are in the country he now governs, even though he supposedly hails from the 50th and last state to enter the Union. Not many Gr. 5 students who wouldn’t get that right.

Finally, what intelligent man in his 40’s still serves up warmed over marxist claptrap that killed a hundred million in the past century and mired hundreds of millions in poverty as “hope and change”?

So still waiting for actual evidence of intelligence on Planet Obama instead of the media’s merely repeating the word a gazillion times.

But where’s the text version? This one is hard to quote from. I hope you’re not giving up plain-old-text writing because of your awesome new video powers. Most of this piece would work just as well to read as to watch, I think.

(”See this room? The bridge of the USS Enterprise? This is America!” Yes!!!)

Oh, I see you already have.

“Captain, our fazers are having no effect!! This Dowd Conundrum babe is one dried up bag of… of… Envy!!

“I’m Captain Kirk!!! I’m Captain Kirk!

“Looks like we’ll have to set those Fazers on…

“Tune in again next week, for Part Two of The Mysterious, Seemingly Unstoppable– (duhduh DUMM!!) DOWD CONUNDRUM

I too have been baffled by how liberals can be so consistently wrong on everything.
In order to be that wrong, you would first have to know what the right answer is, right?
But what explains why anyone would then choose to be wrong?

If you are puzzled by this conundrum, then the following leads may be helpful:

Video: “How Modern Liberals Think” by Evan Sayet.

Video: “History of Political Correctness” by the Free Congress Foundation.

[I learned about the above videos from PJM subscribers Proud Conservative and Moogie -- thank you!]

On the brainwashing tactics of the Left, George Lakoff is the guru who taught the mainstream media morons how to distort the value significance of words.
Video: “Idea Framing, Metaphors, and Your Brain – George Lakoff”.

Ayn Rand first analyzed the nature of the modern liberal in the early ’60s, and her work remains the most penetrating and integrated analysis that I know of. Those essays are collected in the book,
“The Return of the Primitive: The Anti-Industrial Revolution”.

As Thomas Jefferson said, “State a moral case to a ploughman and a professor; the ploughman will decide it as well, and often better, because he has not been led astray by artificial rules.”

“They exist in a different reality, and they believe what their friends and colleagues, their family, CNN, Hollywood, Stand up comedians, late night tv hosts, their school teachers and professors, and most of their government tell them. Who are they going to believe, us or their lying eyes?”

Plato’s cave analogy. Until they build enough courage to turn around (and question the source of the shadows), they will never leave the cave. Just my observation.

I think there is a natural human tendency to underestimate the difficulty of things until we’ve tried them. How hard can it be to run a business or plan a battle or figure out how mortgage lenders should operate? I can ask that because I’ve never tried any of those. I have taught math and also designed computer software and so I know how hard those are.

I also think that many of the liberal prescriptions for problems are naive, and that is because the formulators of those prescription don’t appreciate the difficulties involved, because they’re not the ones doing it.

This is also why young people are overwhelmingly liberal. They have no experiences and so everything seems easy to them.

Ironically, the more bright and successful one is in one area, the greater the tendency to underestimate the difficulties in other areas. If someone is really smart and knows it, they tend to think that they could easily do other people’s jobs, and easily solve other people’s problems if only they spent just a little time thinking about it.