The “Bush is dumb” meme was always unfair. Those who’ve known him, and not just his loyalists, have always disputed such a characterization. First off, something I didn’t know, “Bush scored a 1200 on the SAT (roughly equaling 1300 on today’s re-normed SAT), placing him in the top 16% of all college applicants.” We also know he had better grades than the smarter-seeming John Kerry at Yale…the best estimate of Bush’s IQ at 120-125, in the top 10% of the population and above average for a college graduate — about the same as estimated for Eisenhower and Ford.
The problem with Bush’s leadership style was never lack of intelligence. It was something much closer to intellectual laziness or lack of curiosity. As the authors put it: “Critics charge that President Bush does not seek out information or opposing viewpoints; disdains complexity, nuances, and expert opinion; views policy issues in black-and-white terms based on his own preconceptions; and, refuses to rethink problems or change his views. The research largely bears out these popular perceptions.”
Even though I voted for him twice, that second paragraph hits the nail on the head. Just like Clinton, he seems the guy you could sit down and have a beer or coffee with, but probably not agree with on a lot of issues.
If it walks like a duck ….
Bush’s biggest downfall was his inability to build a consensus. While his ideas were often right on target (such as understanding that immigrants are vital to the US), he couldn’t get others to latch onto them.
And, of course, he had to deal with “politics as usual.”
I think that, in the end, he just said, “fuck it, I’m going to do what I think is right, and if anyone else wants to come on board, that’s just icing on the cake.”
The summary sentence that concluded the story says it all. If only president Bush could have demonstrated half that flexibility and agility (of Reagan).
just thinking, an IQ of 125 isn’t dumb by any stretch, i still wouldn’t want someone with that level of smarts leading a country of 300ish million people.
surely for a position as important as president (or politicians in general now that i think about it) they should be choosing from the top .1% of people rather than the top 10%
#5 “surely for a position as important as president (or politicians in general now that i think about it) they should be choosing from the top .1% of people rather than the top 10%”
Me? I’ll take someone with common sense anyday – and that is pretty hard to find in our national political world today.
Another way of putting it: smart enough, but already too old (intellectually) to run the corner grocery on the day he scored his first celery.
A person has already strutted about voting for Bush Jr. twice. A sure sign that the Bar-bloom is off the O-rose.
Today it’s still pretty rare in Canada to find anybody who admits voting twice for (two-time prime minister) Brian Mulroney. Gotta admire the candour of los Yanquis.
Maybe the masses should use another word besides stupid when they don’t agree with someone. Plenty of intelligent people disagree with each other, they usually don’t resort to calling each other stupid. What the real problem with Bush was that no one could offer any other solution that made sense to him. Basically, the opposition was not very persuasive.
Obama, on the other hand, seems to be more open to other ideas but in reality I don’t think he is. He seems a little patronizing to me.
So he can pass a test, so what. Academic achievement does not necessarily equate to “Smart”. I meet “well educated” people every week who haven’t got a lick of common sense and to often have the interpersonal skills of a badger. Stuffing your head full of facts and figures but not having the wisdom to use them is not smart. In fact a President doesn’t have to be the best academically because ideally he is surrounded by staff to provide him with the information to make wise decisions (assuming they don’t lie to him).
#2 – If it walks like a radical…
Ronald Reagan had tons of social smarts, which are the most difficult smarts to learn. He also had a habit of listening very, very closely to people whether he agreed with them or not. Finally, he was genuinely funny and completely comfortable with himself.
GWB is missing all those things.
Barack Hussein Obama has only been in office for less than a year …and already even democrat loons are looking back on Bush’s time as the good ol’ days! Just another example of the failure that is the current goon.
I never thought Bush as stupid as people claimed, just that he, like Clinton, had poor judgement skills. The difference is Clinton, like Reagan, had the social skills to cover it.
My personal take on GWB,is that he wasn’t as bad as many people made him out to be and that he could have been better than he was.
I hope that when all the “bush-bashing” dies down, history will reflect upon GWB in a true light.
@Chris
I suppose to you anyone to the left of Atilla the Hun is a left wing radical. I was a Reagan Republican once upon a time. I stopped being a Republican the day that Bush and his cohorts started shitting on the Constitution and banging the war drums for Iraq (Remember those nasty WMDs?).
Sure, he isn’t dumb. I believe you.
My company forced me to go sit through one of his “speeches” on his post-presidential speech tour. The guy is a f-ing moron. Period.
His problem was that he was stubborn and inarticulate. So he knew what he wanted and wasn’t going to change his mind, but he was completely unable to change YOUR mind either. Or even explain why he thought the way he did.
I was telling people back in 1999 that Bush wasn’t dumb. It was intellectual laziness and arrogance that got him. And unfortunately, he surrounded himself with people who agreed with him, or at least mostly did, and in some cases (*cough* Cheney *cough*) knew how to manipulate him. And it made for a bad combination of traits.
What’s the difference between “stupid” and “doesn’t care about facts?”
So… he’s an intelligent idiot? Massive alcool doses can really screw a brain … how about his SAT before getting into office?
Rather a moot distinction. It’s not that he wasn’t CAPABLE of using his intellect, he just choose not to use it. Whatever.
Purposefully ignoring “reality” and choosing the see the world in comic book simplistic terms will never lead to good results. It might make you feel good, it might make the public feel good. But it’s not safe, sane or useful.
Yea, you were fooled. Then again Bush was trying to fool you. The only election he lost, it was when his opponent branded him an ivy league elitist out of touch with the district.
I’d always wondered how someone who flew a jet in the Air Guard could be so dumb. “Intellectual laziness or lack of curiosity” provides my answer. Not dumb, just “might as well be dumb.”
It is not how big your dick is it is how you use it and President Bush peed his pants.
I agree he’s not Dumb – He’s Dumber
An old question from my teaching days: What’s sadder; a person who can’t read, or a person who can read, but won’t? The analogy being: What’s sadder; a moron, or a smart person who acts like a moron?
The whole “Bush is dumb” game was just a ruse to keep the liberals occupied. He needed a plan to unsure they were out of the way and spending their time on nonsense issues while he protected America from those who want to destroy it.
25. If Bush peed on himself, then by the same standard of measurement, Obama just dropped a mini Obama in his pants.
The only reason Bush was able to get away with half of the crap he did was that the people calling him dumb were so stupid they made him look Fing brilliant.
I have to agree with #13. GWB wasn’t dumb and would have been a hoot to be with at dinner. He just didn’t know was appropriate – socially or otherwise.
He didn’t have a subtle thinking process like, our favorite moron, Alfred1.
Everyone knows he’s stupid as a brick, of that there’s no denying.
“Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”
Duh.
I guess some people will say Palin is smart, as well, even though she took 5 years, 3 states and 4 universities to get through.
She must have been busy reading all those magazines and Supreme Court decisions.
@right
I think Palin’s got social smarts and tremendous camera appeal. She has zero interest in governance and is a populist which makes a dangerous combination.