Sarah Palin would be a good president of the United States.

What makes a good president? I contend it is honesty, sound principles, and executive competence. Sarah Palin fulfills those requirements to make a good president. The potential interference of religious doctrine with governing has been tested and has never been an important factor. Historical experience with Nixon (a Quaker), Kennedy (Roman Catholic), Carter (Evangelical Fundamentalist), and Obama (Black liberation theology) shows that whatever one thinks of the relative merits of these Presidents, religious doctrine has not been a significant factor. The process of getting to be president ensures above average intelligence. Beyond that there is no correlation between IQ and presidential performance. Our "low IQ" presidents include George Washington and Harry Truman, our "high IQ" presidents include Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. Washington never got beyond elementary school, but is perhaps our greatest president. http://www.unionleader.com... James Madison, author of the Constitution, is certainly one of the most brilliant of the presidents, but his lack of administrative skills made him a poor president. Conservatives like George Will are after policy wonks, which Palin is not, but Palin has more important attributes. She is honest, has proven executive talent and experience, has sound principles, and is smart enough to select competent people to staff her Administration. I doubt there is a conservative alive who would not prefer Palin to a left-wing ideologue, no matter how brilliant the ideologue is or how conventional the ideologue's religious beliefs. Con puts forth only two objections to Palin. His first contention is that a reliable indication of Palin's governing can be derived from the beliefs of the church she attends, even though she hasn't said anything about the particular beliefs Con attributes to her. If Con is correct about religious doctrine prevailing in presidencies, then we should, for example, be able to deduce the governing principles of Richard Nixon from his atypical religion. Nixon was a Quaker. http://www.kimopress.com... Some things seem to follow from that such Nixon's strong opposition to racism, but anyone who supposed that Nixon would be a pacifist, teetotaler, or even honest would be grossly mistaken. http://en.wikipedia.org... Nikon was certainly exceptionally intelligent, a graduate of Duke Law School and an outstanding debater. (We all agree that good debaters are brilliant, right?) This bears on Con's second contention, that very high intelligence is a critical requirement for the Presidency. Jimmy Carter was an evangelical fundamentalist. Teetotaling was consistent with Carter's fundamentalism, but virtually nothing else followed from his religious beliefs. Carter was a leftist ideologue and poor administrator. Carter was also one of our most intellectual presidents. He was a micomanager who spent time scheduling the White House tennis courts. He was an indecisive leader. He was a poor president overall, but it had nothing to do with his religion or his intellect. If Con is correct that church beliefs can be attributed to presidential candidates, then we must consider President Obama in that light. Obama was a long-time member of Trinity United Church of Christ. The church espouses something called the "Black Value System," which includes calls for congregants to be "soldiers for black freedom" and "disavowal of the pursuit of middleclassness." The system clearly spouses Black values as being distinct from those of other races, and requires allegiance to Black Community. The Reverend Wright, Obama's pastor, was an outrageous racist and anti-American. Obama finally abandoned the Reverend, but Obama didn't renounce the radical theology of Trinity United. Whether one believes Obama is good president or not, there is no evidence that Obama is a Black separatist or a racist. Obama, like Palin, was a member of a church just as part of the local community. JFK's religion was major issue in the 1960 election. The concern was with Catholic doctrine interfering with JFKs governing. It did not. Nancy Pelosi is a Catholic. May we therefore conclude that Pelosi reflects Catholic doctrine in her political life? Not at all. The Supreme Court had five and will soon have six Catholics, so shall be presume that Roe v. Wade will be overturned? No. What is going on is that people are quite good at sorting out religious doctrine from real life. That is not to say that religious belief has no influence at all, but there is no evidence it has the dogmatic effect that Con supposes. We don't know what Palin's IQ score is, but as a graduate of a four year college and a governor, it is probably in the 120-130 range. George Washington, who many historians now place as our greatest president, was in the low end of presidential IQs. Harry Truman and John Kennedy are put among the least IQs of 20th century presidents. Truman never went to college and Kennedy squeaked through college with "gentleman C's." Neither were policy wonks. Both are ranked highly as good presidents. Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, and Woodrow Wilson are high on the list of most intelligent presidents. Among Wilson's many failures, he entered World War I a few months after winning on a platform of not entering the war, and he was a blatant racist who segregated the civil service. High IQ enables a president to rationalize failed policies and wrong actions as successes. High IQ often leads to an arrogance that resists accepting sound advice from those with more expertise. Of course, these failings are not inevitable. Lincoln and Jefferson are examples of highly intelligent good presidents. Studies of scientists and other intellectual professions show low correlation with above a threshold level. http://www.danielgoleman.info... For presidents, the ability to assess and cope with complex situations has been identified as a key attribute of success, and that is not determined by IQ score. "Most definitions of intelligence include environmental adaptability in them, but ordinary IQ tests don't measure this very well. Sternberg calls this kind of ability contextual because it involves tacit learning. This is knowledge that is not explicitly expressed or taught, but is only implied or indicated. It has to be learned directly from one's environmental context. People who are good at this tend to come out on top in almost any real world situation, even if they are not especially intelligent in terms of IQ or insight. The head of General Motors or the President of the United States are good examples of people with this kind of ability." http://www.prometheussociety.org... Palin has shown high contextual intelligence. When Palin resigned as governor, nearly every commentator proclaimed this to be a foolish decision, fatal to her political future. The commentators were wrong. Palin has emerged as a more powerful political figure, with four of the five candidates she endorsed winning in this week's primaries. The ability to assess complex situations is the critical skill for presidents, and Palin clearly demonstrated that ability. Palin was the most popular governor in the history of Alaska, the result of a record of doggedly rooting out corruption, cutting state spending, and running an open and transparent administration. http://www.weeklystandard.com... She was a tough and competent administrator. Palin has the attributes of a good president: honesty, sound principles, administrative skill, and contextual intelligence. Con's objections are shown by hisotory to be irrelevant to the job of president. Palin would be a good president by virtue of what is relevant. The resolution is affirmed.