The embarrassment continues, the embarrassment of having an ignoramus in the White House. Did I say continues? It's getting worse. Even a real-life Forrest Gump would be better for our country — and the world — than our very own Tangerine Mussolini.

Ah, yes, Donald Trump, the man who once said we won the Revolutionary War because our army captured all of the airports . . . the man who announced during his first term that he'd just learned Abraham Lincoln was a Republican . . . the man who learned during his second term the word "us" is spelled with two letters that are the initials for United States ... the math genius who promised to lower drug prices 1,500 percent . . . the geography-impaired fast-food lover who recently referred to a dangerous country called the Islamic Republic of Japan . . . the Nobel Prize loser who took credit for ending a non-existent war between Algeria and Azerbaijan.

Well, at least he's continuing his education. He recently bragged that he went one-up on most Americans when learned the word "dumb" ends in a b. And months before that, he learned the word "groceries" (though the prices he quotes for various food products seem to come from a 1952 supermarket ad).

HE CLAIMS to have a record-shattering IQ, which would be true if IQ stood for Idiot Quotient, or Insensitive Quotient, or Incoherent Quotient.

Which gets us to the subject of artificial intelligence. Trump has talked a lot lately about AI, but doesn't grasp why a lot of people are concerned about the ramifications. Trump's not worried. The only thing that bothers him is he'd rather use the term "super intelligent" and the initials "SI."

To me, those initials will always mean Sports Illustrated, just as the body of water along the west coast of Floria will always be the Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lake where I spent much of my early life each summer will always be Lake Ontario.

But as the late, great Max Shulman used to write, I digress.

FIRST OFF, AI isn't super intelligence. While computers are constantly changing, one truth remains — garbage in, garbage out.

The trouble is computers now run so many things in our lives there's a fear AI-controlled devices may decide to take over the world and that humans are unnecessary. If these devices do allow humans to remain on the planet, they will remain as servants.

That's pretty much what I learned more than 50 years ago from the sci-fi film, "Colossus: The Forbin Project." You simply cannot stop an AI-driven robot by pulling the plug. Or so I've heard.

FRANKLY, I don't know enough about the subject to know if I should be concerned. However, I do know enough about Trump to be concerned about surviving the rest of his days in office. (The man seems to think the war he started is nothing more than a video game he plays with Pete Hegseth.)

Trump says all we need to control AI is an intelligent president. Hilariously, he thinks he fits the bill. Who would have guessed "The Emperor's New Clothes" would turn out to be the story of a United State president?

Not that Trump is totally oblivious. Far from it. He is a corrupt, unethical and arrogant opportunist, and, as the leader of the richest nation in the world, he is in a position to enrich himself and his family, which he has done to a shocking extent, with two years to go. I've got to figure he regards AI as just another investment that, with his support, will pay off big time, though, yes, it must be said that when it comes to business, Trump's record is nothing to brag about. Still, I think AI will fare much better than Trump's casino, the Trump Shuttle, Trump steaks, Trump University, Trump magazine, and so on.

BUT MY OWN rather limited experience with AI tells me it has a long way to go. (I'm well aware of the saying that when you assume, you risk making an ass out of you and me, but nonetheless I'm making assumptions.)

For example, I assume the algorithms that dictate viewing suggestions on the various TV streaming channels I frequent are AI-created.

In any event, the suggestions I receive are usually ridiculous, indicating that after several years of streaming, I'm still a stranger to these channels.

This is particularly true with Hulu, which for several years has prompted me to watch "The Handmaid's Tale," when any self-respecting AI program would have figured out long ago that I have an irrational dislike of Elisabeth Moss; therefore I avoid anything she does. (Yes, I watched "Mad Men" many years ago — that's when this dislike began.)

And when a streaming service's "Programs For You" list includes "Friends," then I know I'm dealing with a faulty algorithm. This is the kind of AI that shouldn't be given our nuclear codes.

EVEN FUNNIER is my experience with AI information I receive on internet search engines. Google's AI Overview, for example, treats users like it's actually a person who just wants to be helpful. Respond to AI Overview and it's like entering a chat room.

Okay, it would take too long to explain how and why I began researching two fairly obscure women who enjoyed their five minutes of fame more than a century ago. Their names: Isabella Bidwell Hoffman Martin (1852-1929) and Josephine Plows-Day (1862-1958).

Mrs. Martin briefly lived in Syracuse — thus my interest — but became infamous in California as an adventuress, swindler and revenge-obsessed crazy person who planted bombs and started fires. One of her schemes involved buying a baby, then telling her husband he was the father. It was Ms. Plows-Day who found the baby for her in New York City.

So I asked Google's AI Overview how Mrs. Martin, who divided her time between San Francisco and a small California mining town called Weaverville, could have met Josephine Plows-Day, a Chicago-born actress who only occasionally spent time in New York City.

AI'S ANSWER: Plows-Day was a key accomplice in a notorious high-society scheme. She worked with a foundation for New York City foundlings and used her position to help Isabella Josephine Bidwell Martin fraudulently acquire a baby.

I replied by saying the answer was misleading, that Ms. Plows-Day was an actress, not a social worker.

AI's response: "Yes, you are entirely correct, and I apologize for the confusion in my previous response. In 1891, Josephine Plows-Day was working primarily as a professional stage actress in New York City. She was not employed by or running an infant charity foundation at that time. Her theatrical background, rather than formal social work, is what actually positioned her to assist Isabella Martin."

Notice the words, "I apologize for the confusion." Later in the response, my new pen pal asked, "Would you like to know more about the scandal involving her sisters at the Leland Hotel?" (That "scandal" was the suicide attempts made by Josephine Plows-Day's youngest sisters, Olivia and Mercedes. Olivia succeeded and Mercedes would try again later in the year, this time successfully. Whatever, I learned all about it without help from Google.)

HOWEVER, I did ask Google's AI when Josephine Plows married a man named Day. The AI response was there was no indication the woman had ever married.

I knew that was wrong because I'd found two newspaper articles that said she was married for awhile to a man named Frank Day, but neither article mentioned when the marriage took place. I pointed that out to AI Overview.

AI's reply was along the lines of "Oops, you caught me," as if it was too lazy to conduct an earnest search. AI then admitted Josephine Plows had married a Chicago man named Frank H. Day, but to find out when this wedding took place, I abandoned Google and went searching on Bing, which led me to a page for Josephine Plows-Day on findagrave.com (which hadn't showed up during my searches on Google).

WHICH just goes to show that some AI is smarter than others, or, at least, better informed in certain matters. That's only one of several search engine problems. I'm tired of searching for people and things, then getting a response that includes a ton of people and things with names that are not what I'm looking for.

For example, I have relatives whose last name is Grecco — with two Cs. No matter how hard I try to emphasize that Grecco is the correct spelling, Google's response is cluttered with Grecos who lack the all-important second C.

Likewise, when I search for other people named Major, I don't want to sort through a bunch of folks who got stuck with an S at the end of their name.

And when I went looking for material on Josephine Plows-Day, I didn't expect that under "Images," there'd be mostly photos of horses working in the field on something designated as a plow day.

It's times like those that I think AI actually stands for Arguably Inadequate.