There are those who seem to think that intelligence is dangerous and that education does not consist of learning how to think logically. It is not, as some seem to think, just a matter of learning a lot of facts by rote. It consists (among other things) of learning to search out information and analyze it critically. Education is not merely indoctrination--brainwashing--as some would have you believe.

Yes, an intelligent, well-informed person can indeed be dangerous. That person is not easy to con, nor is that person easy to simply lead around by the nose. An intelligent, well-informed person is liable to ask, "Why?" Frequently. So there is a vested interest on the part of would-be con-men and tyrants to chose attractive but less than optimally intelligent people to front for them. And to take the blame when certain policies they want to implement prove unpopular.

This sort of thing is as old as the hills in politics. Cesare Borgia knew this. Niccolo Machiavelli knew this. Karl Rove and Dick Cheney know this.

Considering George W. Bush's record as a slacker in college, a draft-dodger during the Vietnam War (using papa's influence to jump the line and get into the Texas Air National Guard—and then, even though he became quite a good fighter pilot, being a notorious no-show), his record of incompetence as a businessman, and as a baseball team owner (traded Sammy Sosa!). Then, as governor of Texas, he proved to be an ideal front for the forces that wanted to be "dagger behind the throne" and implement policies that no intelligent, well-informed person with real leadership ability and with any genuine interest in the well-being of the citizens of his state would ever have done. But he did what he was advised to do.

Why had the daggers behind the throne chosen such an incompetent? Because he had name recognition, and once in office he wouldn't have a clue, and would have to be TOLD what to do.

Yes, Sarah Palin would make an ideal shill for those who want to accomplish their agenda but have the blame fall on someone else.

Anyone recall the movie in which Robert Redford played "The Candidate?" Idealistic at first, he becomes so obsessed with winning that he starts taking the advice of dubious backers. With the aid and support of these backers, who had actually talked him into running in the first place, he manages to win the election. And then, when he is told that he has won, he looks around in panic, like a trapped rabbit, and says tremulously, "What do I do now!??"

Don Firth