June 7, 2011--We aren't always what we do, and what we do doesn't define our intelligence.

So, a few weeks ago, a friend posted something about Sarah Palin, which wasn't designed to portray her in the smartest light. Another friend commented on the post, pointing out that he himself, and the original poster are not heads of state, so they had no right to say that Sarah Palin isn't smart.

I found myself feeling defensive about what they each do for a living, because I don't think what either one of them does is a reflection on how smart or dumb they are.

I have a bachelor's degree in mass communications, an associate degree in graphic arts, and one in veterinary technology. I spend about seventy-five percent of my day cleaning up after, or handling feces for a living. I don't think my close relationship with feces has any bearing on how smart I am. I would go even further, and say that my co-workers who do not have the level of education I have, who also handle feces for a living, are not any less intelligent than I am.

While handling feces for a living doesn't make me dumb, I also don't think being governor of Alaska made Sarah Palin smart. Being a senator certainly hasn't made Anthony Weiner smart.

One of Albert Einstein's early jobs was as a temporary math teacher. Abraham Lincoln's first job was bringing cargo up and down the Mississippi River. Bono pumped gas. Madeline Albright sold bras. Madonna worked at Dunkin Donuts. Regardless of your personal opinion about any of these people, their ultimate successes go far in establishing that a job doesn't determine someone's intelligence or potential.

A person's intelligence is reflected in their actions and words. It isn't necessary to discuss whether or not I think Sarah Palin is intelligent or not, because her actions and words speak for themselves. It isn't necessary for me to discuss whether or not I believe Albert Einstein was or was not a genius, his legacy speaks for itself.

When it comes to examining the intelligence of our leaders, my guess is our opinions about their intelligence are colored red or blue, depending on the party we support, and not so much by the voracity of their intelligence quotient.

I personally think it's smart to tackle global warming, find new sustainable sources of energy and to provide better nutrition and health care options for our entire world population. I think it's dumb to subsidize companies that show profits in the billions, to depend on coal and oil, and to cut education spending.

Notice a pattern?

I'm pretty sure there are some very bright and smart conservatives in senate seats and capitol buildings, even though I probably disagree with all of them. Their positions on issues do not make them smart or dumb. Their ability to get elected doesn't make them smart or dumb.

So far, I haven't seen any requirement for a degree in rocket science to serve in a public office. So, we all stand a chance.

http://youtu.be/lMgU5B2TZIA

Pin It