For their 10th anniversary, Slate is reprinting some of their most memorable articles. This one, from two years ago, is a fascinating look into the mind of Bush. Please don’t comment unless you’ve read the entire article.

How Bush chose stupidity

The question I am most frequently asked about Bushisms is, “Do you really think the president of the United States is dumb?”

The long answer is yes and no.

In Bush’s case, the symptoms point to a specific malady–some kind of linguistic deficit akin to dyslexia–that does not indicate a lack of mental capacity per se.

Bush also compensates with his non-verbal acumen. As he notes, “Smart comes in all kinds of different ways.” The president’s way is an aptitude for connecting to people through banter and physicality. He has a powerful memory for names, details, and figures that truly matter to him, such as batting averages from the 1950s. Bush also has a keen political sense, sharpened under the tutelage of Karl Rove.

What’s more, calling the president a cretin absolves him of responsibility. Like Reagan, Bush avoids blame for all manner of contradictions, implausible assertions, and outright lies by appearing an amiable dunce. If he knows not what he does, blame goes to the three puppeteers, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld. It also breeds sympathy. We wouldn’t laugh at FDR because he couldn’t walk. Is it less cruel to laugh at GWB because he can’t talk? The soft bigotry of low expectations means Bush is seen to outperform by merely getting by. Finally, elitist condescension, however merited, helps cement Bush’s bond to the masses.

But if “numskull” is an imprecise description of the president, it is not altogether inaccurate. Bush may not have been born stupid, but he has achieved stupidity, and now he wears it as a badge of honor. What makes mocking this president fair as well as funny is that Bush is, or at least once was, capable of learning, reading, and thinking.



  1. Smartalix says:

    I’ve always maintained that Bush isn’t stupid as much as he is willfully ignorant because he doesn’t give a shit.

  2. AB CD says:

    The President pushed Social Security reform, but it didn’t pass. He talks about the obviuous contradictions between tax cuts and the deficit. The deficit has been dropping since he wrote that article. Similarly with the other policy recommendations. It should be titled how the author chose stupidity.

  3. AB CD says:

    I don’t get the correction about Ann Richards. She said this at the 1992 convention.”Poor George, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth.” Yet they corrected 1992 to 1988.

  4. RTaylor says:

    The American public has always valued stupidity to a degree. They’ve always exhibited disdain toward intellectuals, preferring the hard working sweat of the brow type. I believe it’s a legacy of early colonial times and early Puritan work ethos. It’s different in Europe, where a University Professor typically is given far more respect than a laborer. Lincoln knew this when he presented himself more as fence rail splitter than a lawyer.

  5. James Hill says:

    While I agree with the above coments, don’t lead yourself into thinking that Bush “won” both elections by being the common man (or the lowest common denominator, if you will). While the man doesn’t use an ounce of tact in his own actions, those in place around him do so to great degress.

    In the end, he really did turn out to be the CEO President: Lazy in his own actions, protected by those around him.

  6. K Ballweg says:

    Yes James, and possibly as damaging in the long run as those who guided the corporate model once beloved by CEOs of Bush’s cohort: Enron.

  7. Roc Rizzo says:

    Calling Bush a numbskull is an insult to numbskulls.

    I too believe that he is willfully ignorant, and wants to stay that way.
    He is so far in denial about this country’s problems, that he should be sleeping next to the Sphinx.

    But I blather……….

  8. Max Bell says:

    Yeah, maybe the public does value stupidity on some level. The thought does nothing to increase my trust of the public, though.

  9. David says:

    As much as I consider this man a real dolt, not following the liberal agenda is not the way to validate this assumption.
    Then again smart people don’t cause problems do they?
    Clinton left the world and this country much better right?

  10. Angel H. Wong says:

    I’d rather have a horny president that leaves the office with a surplus than a dumbass who reads the bible everyday and screws the economy.

  11. Gary Marks says:

    I want to protest your post, Uncle Dave. Telling us “don’t comment unless you’ve read the entire article” is like telling Bush not to tinker in the Middle East until he’s studied the history and culture of the region.

    You’re tying our hands, and I protest!

  12. doug says:

    11. Gary – on behalf of the rest of us who did not read the whole article, I predict that the blog will welcome us as liberators, and that our postings will largely pay for themselves ….

  13. Gary Marks says:

    LOL – I can’t conceive of a perfecter followup, doug.
    (oops, is that a Bushism?)

  14. pseudolus says:

    Actually if you ever saw him speak during his run for gov. of Texas you would be amazed at the difference. He was quite capable of delivering a serious and sober talk without malaprops or stammering . Why the big change I can’t say, unless he was replaced by an android by our Space Insect Overlords.

  15. Mike Voice says:

    Why the big change I can’t say….

    Don’t forget the box he had under his jacket… [grin]

    http://img.slate.com/id/2108354/?nav=navoa

  16. Fred Perry says:

    Most people think a speach impediment means a person is stupid, but personal experience tells me otherwise. But, then if it makes you feel better to think he’s stupid, more power to ya’

  17. Mister Mustard says:

    Dumbya is the only “president” I could imagine who could make me wax nostalgic for Reagan. Evil and stupid. What a combo.

    And, Mike Voice, I too want to know WTF WAS THAT BOX UNDER HIS JACKET?? Where are those darned liberal mainstream media pot-stirrers when you need them. I guess they pooped out on the “box” issue, just like they pooped out on following up on the Swift-boat liars mendacity. Huh. Some liberal mainstream media 🙁

  18. Max Bell says:

    Gary, doug, don’t feel too bad. I didn’t read the article OR the bit about not posting before I read it.

    I’m an American — I don’t NEED to read anything to have an opinion on it.

    (Shhh, don’t tell nobody, but I actually read the article after it was published originally.)

  19. Gary Marks says:

    Max… Oh, yeah? Well I almost NEVER read, and when I do, it’s at a 4th grade level, and I bet I have more opinions than YOU! So THERE!

    Contest of the Dumb and Dumber.

  20. Max Bell says:

    Yet then you read this sort of thing and the kind of remarks it inspires and it seems inevitable that one would conclude the biggest problem in America is that its chock full of Americans.

    This being true, there’s a kind of logic, however false, in the public gravitating towards leadership who poses the same liability to their well being as they do. This way, every time something else goes south, they can vow to bring justice to those responsible, and head off arm in arm, secure in the knowledge that eventually they will accomplish just that.

  21. ECA says:

    I would like to see his school records, unadulterated.

    He has been in charge of a business, that went Bust.

    He was a Govenor, for a State that needed to be run by the corps, and is THINKING that the nation should also be that way. IT DONT.
    He doesnt see whats happening as he is to used to someone telling him what NEEDS to be done, and hasnt the ability to see other options, as he has never been taught how to think independantly.

    He is a puppet.

  22. Chris says:

    Ignorance is not something to be mocked, as it often cannot be helped. However, WILLFUL ignorance can be helped…so I generally liken that to stupidity (why wouldn’t you want to know more?).

  23. Edward Marchand says:

    I don’t know that this post will make it on this blog, but I must say my true feelings about Bush. Bush is an arrogant, egotistical individual, who is also as dumb as a stone. He has turned out to be the perfect conduit in which corporate America has been able to execute their agenda of profit at any price and no regard for the security and economic health of the U.S.

  24. Matthew says:

    Has anyone noticed that when bush used to get words jumbled, he would insert a word that would come later in the sentence. Sort of like when you are repeating something someone says while they are saying it; or like when you are writing one sentence and someone is talking to you – you insert the words they are saying into your sentence.

    What I’m saying is that it seemed like he was a word or two behind the what was coming from the earpiece and every so often he would say the word he just heard.

  25. Uncle Dave says:

    Edward you apparently haven’t been around here too long. Vastly worse has been said about Bush for a long time.

  26. AB CD says:

    >want to know WTF WAS THAT BOX UNDER HIS JACKET??

    I want to know WTF WAS IN THOSE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS UNDER SANDY BERGER’S CLOTHES?

  27. Frank IBC says:

    And yet the Democrats can’t seem to find a candidate smart enough to beat this “moron”.

    So which is the stupider party?

  28. Frank IBC says:

    I would like to see his school records, unadulterated.

    He got better grades Kerry did.

  29. Johnny-Cakes says:

    The thing is, what intelligent person really wants the job of being the president?

    I actually think the people just wanting the job are a few bricks shy of a full load. So that leaves us with the current crop of wanna-be presidents and current president. They’re all kind of lame aren’t they? Is there really anyone that’s head-and-shoulders above the rest that people actually rally behind?

    Sure, Bush won, but from what I remember there wasn’t that much enthusiasm for him. Sure, he had supporters and such, but even back then no one was really gah-gah over him. Their between-the-lines talk seemed more like “meh…he’s the best guy we got so I guess we’ll support him”.

    He won the last two elections also because the public were the same way…”meh, we got two guys here running for president….both are kinda wishy-washy…close your eyes and choose as there isn’t really a winner here”. Imagine if Bush ran against Clinton….not saying Clinton was “better”, but he certainly had quite a few followers that were totally drop-on-the-floor goofy for the guy.

    Bush won the last two elections because he was the lesser of the two “meh’s”.

  30. Max Bell says:

    It depends on how representative you’d consider yourself, I suppose.


1

Bad Behavior has blocked 5024 access attempts in the last 7 days.