AP - Al Jefferson wouldn't allow his Minnesota Timberwolves to collapse in the fourth quarter again.

Somewhere between the best and brightest sought by John F. Kennedy and the buffoonery of George W. Bush, the American electorate developed a taste for mediocrity. Rather than seek the candidate most qualified for office, voters preferred a leader with whom they could share a beer.

To elect a president we eschewed brains for bravado. We voted for George because he was a regular guy, no threat to us, just like us, someone we could be comfortable with over some chips and dip and a game of football. We'll overlook the fact that he was from a wealthy elite family. The cowboy hat convinced enough voters he was a real bubba, and that was sufficient reason to cast our vote for him. His lack of curiosity, his disdain for science, his dismissal of reason, his impatience with nuance, his avowed disinterest in complexity and his mangled syntax actually attracted voters. In an odd twist of political irony, intellectualism had become associated with liberalism, and therefore something to be dismissed.

This shift toward anti-intellectualism has had dire consequences, culminating in the disastrous past eight years. Leading the free world is a difficult task that requires some brain power. While that should be self-evident, the election of Bush shows otherwise, and we suffered terribly as a result. Think of any other endeavor in which failure has serious consequences, and we always reach for the best and smartest. We would never choose a brain surgeon, astronaut or Boeing 747 pilot on any criteria other than competence. Why did we fail so badly then in demanding competence, ability and candlepower when electing our nation's leader? Because our culture had adopted the false perspective that politicians can only understand us if they have lived our lives. The electorate confused empathy with ability, an error even more grave given that the alleged empathy was a myth created through clever advertising, reflecting nothing about the man we sent to the Oval Office. Our yearning for understanding was ripe for cynical manipulation, and Karl Rove became the master.

Obama's great legacy of course is becoming the first African American president. But I think he has done something else quite important that is a bit lost in the glory of that accomplishment. Obama has ended the era of dumb government in which we celebrate ignorance as a virtue. He rode to the rescue just in time.

Sarah Palin may or may not have thought Africa was a country rather than a continent. More frightening is an electorate who thought that such a mistake, if real, was not only excusable but acceptable. Fewer than half of American teenagers know in what century Columbus sailed to the New World or the Civil War was fought. Not the specific years - the century of those events. Just over 85% could not locate Iraq on a map. Nearly 30% could not identify the Pacific Ocean on a globe. About 20% of adults in the United States believe the sun orbits the earth. Even today about 70% of voters believe that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the 9/11 attacks. Almost 40% believe in replacing evolution with creationism in school. We come to these sad statistics because we lost our quest for intellectual excellence. We abandoned the principles of Thomas Jefferson, who said that a free government and ignorance could not co-exist. The election of George Bush reflected the wishes of a population no longer celebrating knowledge as power.

Our descent into mediocrity over the past eight years, and the horrors deriving from bubba's failures, finally stirred the populace to action in time to save the republic from Jefferson's worst fears. We really do want the best doctor to perform surgery, and the most qualified politician to run the country. Whether he is like us or not, whether he would be fun to hang with, or shoot hoops with, has finally, thankfully, become irrelevant.

Of course, being smart is not enough. Intellectual ability is necessary in any good leader, but that quality by itself will not carry the day. Jimmy Carter is an honorable, smart, decent man who was an ineffective president. Richard Nixon was smart, and he gave us Deep Throat and expletives deleted.

An effective leader will bring to the office a suite of complex characteristics, and among those will be intellectual curiosity and ability. Obama seems to be the whole package. He has launched a new era in which we can once again embrace and celebrate intelligence, curiosity, subtlety, and knowledge. Not a moment too soon.

We're not the only ones obsessed with CNN's over-the-top magic wall, which they use in equal measure to cover elections, entertain babies and just fill time — fake TV news has been milking it for all it's worth. Now The Daily Show is on the case, and they've sent John Oliver to talk to Jeff Han, the man behind CNN's recent multitouch renaissance. What he finds aren't easy answers to his questions, but an unexpected mix of new technology, furtive military operations and terrifying, omnipresent newsreaders. This is bigger than CNN's secret baseball — so much bigger. [The Daily Show — Thanks, Rafael]

Turbine's Mines of Moria expansion to its "one fantasy MMO to rule them all" hits today, and we've got the scoop with Lord of the Rings Online executive producer Jeffrey Steefel.

Turbine's Mines of Moria expansion to its "one fantasy MMO to rule them all" hits today, and we've got the scoop in our four-part interview with Lord of the Rings Online executive producer Jeffrey Steefel.

A historic election is over and our next commander-in-chief faces daunting challenges. Barack Obama must deal with a struggling economy, two wars, health care reform, all complicated by huge budget deficits. And, of course, let's not forget about the four-legged family addition.

I watched the winning candidate speaking in Chicago's Grant Park on election night and truly enjoyed the moment when he paused to praise daughters Sasha and Malia and then added, "You have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the White House."

It was an authentic family friendly telecast for me and millions of other viewers, but in my mind a little voice called out, "Sir! Wait just a second! Do you truly know what you're getting into?"

Adjusting to a puppy is not unlike starting a new administration. It's a complex process that practically cries out for its own transition team. As someone who's survived the experience (more or less), I'd be happy to lead such a group if the Obama team reads this and wants me onboard.

So, Mr. President-elect, while I await that call (if the line is busy just keep trying), here are some key points to keep in mind as you embark on the path of canine companionship.

1) Establish schedules for feeding, playtime, and other activities. It's very important for the dog to learn rules and understand your expectations about good behavior. Get him into a routine and then make him stick to it. If he knows you're happy, that will make him feel happy. Also, you might want to think seriously about using this same technique when dealing with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

2) Let the pup socialize with people. Grab an old shirt from Joe Biden so the little tyke gets accustomed to his scent in the Oval Office, and can track him down quickly if the senate needs to break a tie.

3) Barking is not necessarily bad. If the puppy seems scared or agitated, find out what's causing the anxiety. Barking may be a sign that a family member has fallen down an old abandon well, or that Dick Cheney is still hiding behind the curtains in the Oval Office.

4) Never sign an important treaty with, say, North Korea, and then leave the document on your desk to go chat with reporters in the Rose Garden. When you get back inside, that landmark agreement may be shredded into diplomatic confetti.

No need to be alarmed by any of this, just prepared. Lots of American families have made this transition successfully. Remember not to panic in the middle of the night if a Secret Service guard wakes you out of a sound sleep and says, "Sir, we just caught the puppy chewing on the priceless antique headboard in the Lincoln bedroom."

At such moments, you may grit your own teeth and think, "Was this dog idea a huge mistake? Can we really handle the trials, tribulations, and endless surprises that keep popping up, day after day, for years to come?"

The answer, Mr. President, is three simple words: Yes we can.

Read more reaction from HuffPost bloggers to Barack Obama's victory in the 2008 presidential election

Anyone not under a rock for the last week is aware of not only the domestic, but international scent of excitement that continues to fill the air with political optimism, the result of the election of Barack Obama. I, like many others, read the articles, watched the news stories, and saw the poll numbers that illustrated how popular our President-elect is abroad. However, it was not until I traveled this week to the Netherlands for a conference sponsored by the Club de Madrid that I realized that I am no longer a citizen of the country that I was three weeks ago.

The Club de Madrid, a pro-democracy organization whose membership is 70 former heads of state, convened a Global Leadership Forum on Shared Societies. As an invited speaker, I prepared myself to talk about the work myself and others have done on civil rights and human rights, the conflict resolution between blacks and Latinos, Christians and Muslims that challenge the notion of a truly shared society in the U.S. However, the only thing many of the leaders, moderators, and even participants wanted to talk about was how I, as an African American man, was feeling about the new President-elect.

Beyond asking about my opinion on the November 4 results, it was as if I was being rewarded for the decision of the U.S. electorate. Everyone from local Dutch youth leaders to former African and European heads of state expressed their excitement and confidence in the change possible from an Obama administration. Nevertheless, if that was not enough, I was surprised when a young woman at a restaurant felt compelled to come to my table and after confirming my nationality wanted me to thank "America" for making the right decision. Congratulations and proclamations of excitement followed me to the extent that even my feelings about the country I had just days earlier departed shifted. I was seeing first hand the power of the vote to not only select internally, but inspire externally.

The few days I spent in Rotterdam filled with conversations on the challenges facing our global community as we struggle to create a shared society. The plethora of leaders and other participants who attended also recommended solutions world leaders, communities of faith and the broader citizenry could actively engage in. From climate change to issues of migration and immigration, we were presented the wisdom and practical experience of former Presidents from Tanzania, Mozambique, Ireland, New Zealand and even President Clinton. I felt privileged to be a U.S. representative to the Club de Madrid event that has a mission to be the type of bridge globally that many say President-elect Obama has been in the U.S.

Yet, I am not confused by our extended celebration in the shadow of our historic election. We as a nation have much to do before the U.S. can claim favored nation status in the hearts and minds of our global neighbors. However, I must admit how good it felt to travel abroad for the first time in years without being frowned upon by the rest of the world. For now, I am a citizen of the United States of Obama.

Presidents have historically made their greatest marks and most lasting impacts when surprising the public with actions that defy the expectations of narrow ideology. Given the historic nature of Obama's election, his incredible popularity and majority mandate, Obama has an opportunity to do the same, and to change the course of history. Let's see how.

We all know the classic example of Nixon going to China. In the context of the Cold War in the 1970s, a Democratic president simply could not have initiated dialogue with Mao Zedong without being accused of being soft on Communism. Republicans would have skewered that president alive with cries of selling out, naïveté and perhaps treason. But such accusations would ring hollow when levied against Nixon, who built his career as an enemy of Communism, starting with his slime campaign against Helen Gahagan Douglas. The same social dynamics of "reverse credibility" worked in favor of Reagan when he engaged Gorbachev during the transitional periods of perestroika and glasnost.

Obama has the stature built on the people's good will to go where no Democrat has gone before. With his liberal credentials unquestioned, Obama can do something that no Republican could accomplish without being accused of social treason. Obama can redefine the role of a limited government in a society of expanding expectations of personal responsibility. We could be entering the Obama era in which the executive branch is reduced to an efficient organization tackling only those issues in which the government has a true comparative advantage, leaving the rest to individual states or to a properly-regulated private sector where appropriate. This would be a time when citizens expect less from the government and more from themselves. Obama can explore the outer limits of small government solutions like no conservative ever could.

This idea might seem the height of lunacy in the face of two wars, the Wall Street bailout, government handouts to Detroit, ballooning deficits, a $10 trillion debt and a crumbling health care system. But this time of crises is exactly when we have an opportunity, and obligation, to look for a new path so that the next generation can avoid the calamities we now face. Clearly what we are doing now under Republican leadership is not working. Doing more of the same and expecting a different outcome is a form of insanity.

Only a popular Democrat can reign in a government out of control, just as only Nixon could talk to Mao. Our time has come.

We must, first, once and for all reject the ridiculous myth that Republicans are the party of small government and fiscal responsibility. Indisputable facts prove otherwise. Ronald Reagan, the icon of the right, proposed the largest tax increase in U.S. history, following the catastrophic failure of his tax cuts. He oversaw the most bloated growth of the federal government. Reagan created, with his proposed budgets (not that of Democratic Congress), the largest debts and deficits in history at that time. It took a Democrat, over the hard-fought objections of a Republican Congress, to balance the budget, reduce the debt, decrease the size of the federal workforce, reform welfare, and usher in an eight year period of non-inflationary growth and prosperity. Then we have Bush, a Republican who epitomizes financial mismanagement. He mushroomed our debt to $10 trillion and exploded our deficits in an orgy of prolifigate spending with no off-setting revenue. By fighting two wars with no way to pay for the efforts, Bush has effectively raised our taxes to record levels; we just have not yet gotten the invoice in the mail. The money has to come from somewhere. That would be us. Now we have to cut the checks. Have no doubt that Bush instituted the biggest tax increase in our nation's history. Bush is like an identity thief who has gone wild with a stolen credit card. He has lived high on the hog without ever paying a cent for his excessive lifestyle and he is now handing us the bill as he drives away in his new car, with a big screen TV in the trunk. We are that guy in his rear view mirror, standing forlornly in the street, with ruined credit and a foreclosure notice on the door.

The facts speak clearly. Republicans have proven themselves to be fiscally irresponsible. This simply cannot be disputed. This is a fact, an undeniable, verifiable, indisputable fact. The Republicans, not Democrats, have raised taxes to record levels, expanded the federal payroll, created record debts and tapped out the public credit card with unprecedented deficits. Stop, stop, stop, stop this outrageous lie that Democrats are the party of tax and spend big government. Forever silence the ridiculous idea that Republicans are the "daddy" party imposing discipline and Democrats the "mommy" party devoted to pampering. Since World War II, only the Democrats have proven to be effective fiscal leaders. That is a fact. As Bill Maher might say in his "New Rules" segment: stop borrowing from your grandkids while pretending to be fiscally conservative.

Bill Clinton, not Ronald Reagan, was the leader who declared that the "era of big government is over." Obama can now take that to the next level. Every American would agree that our government has a proper role in protecting our national security. While not universal, most Americans believe federal funds should also support basic research and development, space exploration, and efforts to protect the environment within our borders and internationally. Most Americans believe that our health care system is broken, and that the federal government will have some role to play in creating a viable solution. A majority of Americans now clearly understand that the government must better regulate commerce and provide more effective oversight to protect our financial system from fraud and abuse.

Obama can focus on these issues that only the federal government can address. He can approach all problems from the perspective that smaller government is better than bigger. He can emphasize from his bully pulpit the importance of personal responsibility. Once past the economic crisis that he inherited from an out-of-control Republican, Obama can reinstitute a pay-as-you-go philosophy to reintroduce fiscal sanity to Washington.

Republican failures have led to the worst big-government interventions of all to save Wall Street. Once Obama cleans up this Republican mess, he can build on the Clinton legacy and lead us to a new era of prudent government.

We need a government as small as possible but as big as necessary. Obama can do that.

Comic Book Resources has recruited writer Jeff Parker to host a new feature over at their site called Writer vs. Artist. It’ll feature a battle to the death between Parker and an artist of his choice. Not really; actually, he explains the concept in this first one:

CBR is kindly testing out this new feature wherein I directly engage a potentially hostile artist in the wild and attempt to coax him or her into sharing with our fellow process junkies valuable secrets of hammering out a readable comic book.

For the first one, he talks to MAD Magazine artist Tom Fowler, who is drawing a new Wildstorm book Parker is writing called Mysterius The Unfathomable. If you’re a process junkie, it’s definitely worth a look.