Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Huntsman, Cain.

My most fervid reader insists that I make a comparison of all the GOP POTUS candidates. It is not an easy task because it is nye on to the impossible to make a reasonable list of comparison features.

For example, each candidate has a strong resume. At one time, I believed that Huntsman's China experience was significant. It is, but even Babe Ruth has to be at bat to hit a home run. Huntsman simply can not get in the game.  Additionally, Perry and Romney have both been governors so they are not political neophytes. Gingrich was House Speaker so he too has political savvy. Lest I forget, Cain has no genuine political experience, which may be an advantage in the corporate world, but a genuine disadvantage in the world of twisted interview questions.

I would love to make a comparison based on their individual platforms. However, I can not discover all the details of the platforms. Gingrich is the most transparent in disclosing what he would do as POTUS. Currently, he has the best sound bite. He asks,"Who would you like to see debate Obama?" Obama would crucify all the GOP candidates except Gingrich. I must admit it would be a memorable debate. It would pit Gingrich's intelligence and knowledge versus Obama's smile and clever phrasing. Unfortunately, Gingrich could win, but no one would know it. 

It happened in a recent debate. Gingrich was asked a stupid question with a false premise by the interviewer. Gingrich rejected the false premise and proceeded to correct the interviewer's premise and answer the appropriate question. I am not sure if the viewers understood who had won in this verbal exchange or lost.   

Sometimes it is hard to recognize true intelligence when it is so much different than we are used too.