In their quest to widen the low-road and increase its rider-ship, the liberal Washington, D.C-based website Politico just offered up this hackneyed but oh so predictable headline: “Is Rick Perry Dumb?”

Really? While it’s no surprise to conservatives and independents that the liberal mainstream media would pull out the old “attack Ronald Reagan” hand-book, dust it off, and use its previously discredited assaults to go after the surging Perry, a better question to be asked is: “What are they all so afraid of?”


First of all, something which must be highlighted and stressed by all who care about fairness and accuracy is that Texas Gov. Rick Perry not only honorably served in our military but that he was a decorated Air Force pilot.

At about the same age that President Obama (by his own admission) was trying to find himself and experimenting with drugs, Perry was strapping himself into the cockpit of multi-million dollar Air Force aircraft.

For those on the left who may not understand as many look down upon our military and mock its very existence, getting through flight training and becoming a pilot in the United States Air Force is a very exacting process which actually does take a high degree of intelligence, skill, judgment, and even courage.

Between Obama and the front-runners now seeking the GOP nomination, only Perry served in our military and only Perry was an Air Force officer and pilot. Should that service make a difference?

Absolutely. As terrorism grows and our borders weaken, every president for the foreseeable future will be a “war-time” president. A candidate with military service brings a unique and needed perspective into the Oval Office.

Beyond that obvious truth, another interesting question for the compromised liberal mainstream media to ask would be: “Would Obama have been intelligent enough to get through flight school and become an Air Force pilot?”

Some on the left already have serious buyer’s remorse and admit they should have been asking tougher questions about Obama in 2007. One such liberal being Drew Westen.

In a piece for the liberal New York Times, this far-left professor lamented:

“Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted ‘present’ (instead of ‘yea’ or ‘nay’) 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues.”

Remember, this is a previously strong supporter of Obama saying this. Not only is he now questioning the “disquieting aspects” of the president’s biography, but he is also calling into question the accepted myth of Obama’s “brilliance.”

Maybe now more on the left and more in the liberal mainstream media will ask by what criterion did they elevate Obama to the level of “brilliant?” As Westen points out, beyond Obama’s “singularly unremarkable career as a law professor” -- or anything for that matter -- is the very question of his actual competence.

Beyond the mandates of political correctness, how is a man who refuses to release the results of his SAT scores, his I.Q. test, or his transcripts from Occidental college deemed “brilliant?”

As the left and some in the liberal mainstream media seem more open to asking that very legitimate question, maybe they can also take a field trip to an Air Force base and observe the rigid screening process, dedication, and yes, high degree of intelligence needed to become an Air Force pilot.

It will be an eye-opening education for them. Especially those who avoided asking Obama the proper questions in 2007 and are now desperately trying to manufacture discredited attacks against Perry.

As the American people watch our nation spiral further and further into chaos under the “leadership” of Obama, they are onto this smear game and recognize the real-deal when they see it.

They are going to hear Perry out. Period.

Douglas MacKinnon is a former White House and Pentagon official and author of the forthcoming memoir entitled “Rolling Pennies In The Dark.” This piece originally appeared in The Washington Examiner on August 31.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/31/could-obama-have-made-it-as-top-gun/#ixzz1Wdqs8fp5

Hit the nail right on the head. Obama chose drugs, Perry chose the military. The judgement right there is enough to vote for Perry, then you factor in the lack of experience, leadership, accomplishments and voting present more then ANY OTHER Senator at the time. The only thing Obama could make a decision on was being a constant candidate.

Wow, the Looney Left isn't running in to defend their Fuhrer?!?

Not Quite, OBama chose drugs AS A TEENAGER. AT about the time he graduated undergrad with his BACHELORS IN POLITICAL SCIENCE

PERRY had graduated with his BACHELORS IN ANIMAL SCIENCE

When OBama completed is Bachelor he went on to Harvard to Graduate Magna Cum Laude from Law School

When Perry complted his Bacholor, he was commissioned(which initially is based upon what level of college degree one earns) into the Air Force where he went on to complete Pilot school and become a Pilot


I , personally, would call neither man stupid or unaccomplished considering the level of work both had to put in to reach those goals and the intelligence required.

SO I agree the heading of
Is Rick Perry Dumb, is rather suggestive and dishonest

but its strange that a network which does THE EXACT type of reporting on OBAMA would be complaining about it,,lol

We're going to be seeing a different Fox News production about what a valiant pursuer of Bid Laden Bush vowed to be after 9/11. Do you really expect us to take this stuff seriously?

Obama is not very accomplished OR experienced when you look at the other contenders. His one claim to fame is being a US Senator where he was basically a "Lame Duck" Senator who favored the "Present" vote because he either couldn't make up his mind and was lazy. He was nothing more then a paycheck collector in the Senate.

AND Obama was using drugs and sucking the glass dic in his college years.

Being this is a non-partisan life long military, pentagon and governmental worker your statement makes no sense what so ever.

it depends upon what 'experience' one values


Perry

1972- bachelors in animal science from A and M
1972-1977 commissioned Air Force Pilot
1977-1982 worked in fathers business
1984-1990 TEXAS house of reps
1990-1998 Agriculture commissioner
1998-2000 Lt Gov of Texas
2000-2010 Gov of Texas

accomplished by the age of 60 years old
5 years military
13 years in agriculture
18 years in politics


OBama

1983- BA in Political Science, specialty in international relations
1983-1985 worked at BIC and a public research group
1985-1988 Director of Devlping Communities Project in Chicago
1988-1990 JD Magna Cum Laude Law degree from Harvard(While working summers interning at law firms and running the school paper)
1995- first biography published
1992-1996 lecturer at Chicago Law School (constitutional law)
1996-2004 Sr lecturer at Chicago Law School (constitutional law)
1993-2004 law associate and counsel with civil rights law firm
1994-2002 board of directors for several community building funds
1997-2004 Illinois Senate
2004-2008 US Senate
2009-present US PRESIDENT


....accomplished by the age of fifty

13 years community research and development
12 years in law(constitutional)
14 years in politics


so they have both learned the political 'game' (18 years and 14 years respectively)

OBama has a concentration of effort and achievement in community development and constitutional laws

Perry has a concentration of effort in military and agriculture


,, again , I personally think they both have their own unique strengths, and that neither are dumb or unaccomplished by any stretch

its possible and likely he used some drugs(from his book weed and 'some occasional blow') in college,


as to 'sucking the glass dic',,, doubtful

The exact words of a former major Obama supporter and public figure(Who is still a registered Democrat)


“Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted ‘present’ (instead of ‘yea’ or ‘nay’) 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues.”



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/08/31/could-obama-have-made-it-as-top-gun/#ixzz1Wfbx6Fix

Unremarkable legal career.

and?

thats one persons opinions, not sure what he would consider 'remarkable' thats pretty subjective

I consider it REMARKABLE to graduate magna cum laude from Harvard
and REMARKABLE to pass up on incredible money to serve in building communities instead,,,but hey, I guess that is inferior to serving in the military or being in the family agricultural business.....

more accurately, OBama chose HARVARD LAW(after OCcidental College) at the same time Perry chose the military(after he obtained his BA)

as to the present issue

he NEVER voted present in the US senate
and in the illinois senate he voted present in about one of every 31 votes

from politifact.com

"Obama acknowledged voting "present" -- a vote similar in its effect to "abstain" -- 129 times during his eight-year state Senate tenure, according to a Boston Globe fact-check at the time. The Globe said that Obama cast about 4,000 votes as an Illinois legislator, meaning that he voted "present" in about one of every 31 votes he took. The New York Times reported that the records show at least 36 occasions in which Obama was either the only state senator to vote present or was part of a group of six or fewer to vote that way.

Some of his "present" votes came on contentious issues -- abortion, juvenile justice and gun laws among them -- and critics have suggested that Obama's decision to avoid a "yes" or a "no" vote in those cases stemmed from political expediency. Other analysts have cited a more benign reason, saying that voting "present" has long been used as a way of expressing protest about the way a bill was put together, or displeasure about a specific provision contained within a bill.

"You get a lot of 'present' votes from minority members to avoid the traps set by the majority," said University of Illinois at Springfield political scientist Kent Redfield. "Obama was in the minority most of the time he was in the legislature, and his present votes are slightly below the average for a member of his caucus."




,keeping in mind how the media works, and they can take a PART of the bill and use that vote to say the candidate was 'for' that item if they voted yea to the bill or 'against' that item if they voted nay on the bill

History aside, I think the election (if Perry gets nominated) will be about Obama's job as president vs Perry's job as governor. Perry will get some points for being in the military.

I agree, I personally go about forty percent on history(employment, education) and about 60 percent on current knowledge and presidential 'demeanor',, which I usually use the presidential debates to figure out,,,

That's what it will come down to, , government experience, work experience, personal experience and life experience. Perry trumps the Fuhrer in all those catagories.

Yes it is inferior to the military, ESPECIALLY when every President for the next ten to fifteen years will be a war time President.

Magna Cum Laude's are a dime a dozen, no big deal.

No more or less rare than pilots,, like I said, its all in what personally impresses one person from the next,,,


Im impressed by those with the intelligence to graduate LAW SCHOOL or PILOT SCHOOL, let alone HARVARD LAW, or AIRFORCE PILOT

I also dont hang a Presidents job so exclusively in one area, like military

many different issues face the country a President leads and there are many types of experience relevant to them all,,,

I dont see such a clear cut advantage for either one. Unless we vote merely on age, which I hope doesnt happen, then PERRY has OBAMA by ten years (thus having LIVED ten years longer to have more experiences in his life)

AND has military experience which we need since he will be a war time President.

so? just because it is 'wartime' doesnt diminish the need for a healthy economy, civil rights, superior heatlthcare, superior education,,etc,,,

it still,for me, doesnt make mere military experience the only or most significant 'qualifier' to lead the country