You're gonna have to forgive me, but I need to try something:

[rant]

If a <game show host> is too smart, people are intimidated and distrustful. They want to feel as if Pat Sajak is an average Joe, and not somebody better than themselves. Thus, people are able to forgive Pat for being ignorant about world politics. I think they might have a harder time if he quoted the great classics every time he had Vanna turn a letter.

Damn, I'm not trying to mock, but I, too, find the notion awfully disheartening and I could not help but recast it. This kind of "ordinary Joe" outlook is fine for game show hosts, but it'd be nice to think that folks would expect more in the role of the Presidency (oops, I forgot Reagan...). Is this what we are reduced to?

When I was in grammar school, JFK was newly elected and was a huge (as yet untarnished) hero. Eighty percent of the boys in my classes in 1961-62 had probably read _Profiles in Courage_ and had solid plans to become President one day. Well, guess what? None of us did. If someday somebody actually gets elected who is principalled, witty and (shock!) *SMART*, how should I and my old school chums respond? Are we going to get pissed off because they are better than us??? Oh, damn, probably, if this has all become a game show. When are going to get comfortable with the fact that there's *always* somebody who is bigger/faster/stronger/smarter?

In general, the President is *supposed* to be smarter than us.

[/rant]