Replies

I'm not a huge Rush fan, as you may have guessed. But success in business is not an indication of brilliance. George Soros is a huge success, too. I doubt you'd give him the genius of the month award. I wouldn't, either.

I am not disagreeing with your assertions about liberals being stupid. But that's not the same as Rush being 'brilliant.'

The same is true regarding education. The more education you have, the more likely you are to vote Democrat, based on the studies I've seen. Education and success in academia doesn't get you 'brilliant' marks, necessarily, either.

Very few of the individuals popular society holds up as brilliant or intelligent are in fact qualified as such in my judgment. Criteria for brilliance ought to be qualified to an arena or outright unqualified, and if the latter, I'd say it would be exclusive of persistence, wealth or education, achievements instead demonstrating that the person so described was far ahead of his peers in inventiveness and intuitive intellectual ability. An Einstein or Franklin or DaVinci or Tesla would be to me brilliant; a Salk or Pasteur might not qualify under those terms.

Rush might be a brilliant promoter or have brilliant timing or even a brilliant businessman, but I'm cynical enough to believe he is not on the short list of the world's most all around brilliant.