|
This was a question asked recently by... no, not an extreme Left Wing activist, not by some Liberal Blogger, not even by Cindy Sheehan... but by a former Republican Congressman and well-known Bush apologist, Joe Scarborough. He ddedicated an entire show to the subject.
Actually, the same question was asked of the famed "Ozone Man" Al Gore, and - frankly - his answer was much more insightful, intelligent, and well-thought-out:
"I don't think he's unintelligent at all. He's incurious ... there's a puzzling lack of curiosity."
Well, there you go. I think it sums up Bush perfectly. It’s not that’s he’s stupid, exactly, it’s just that he has this “curious lack of curiosity“.
Bush simply doesn’t want to know anything “new“. There is nothing new under the sun, and nothing new to learn; everything is black and white, and can be resolved through the sites of a gun. If you are having some new or unusual problem, then it must be a problem of your own making - deal with it. It’s your fault, after all, for not foreseeing it in the first place. And yet, he’s always making excuses when he hasn’t foreseen a problem.
Actually, there was a Science-Fiction novel that predicted this. Surprise! No, it wasn’t Orwell’s 1984 (although everyone should re-read 1984 and think about it). I’m actually talking about Asimov’s original Foundation trilogy. The major factor leading to the downfall of the existing Empire was the lack of new research, new findings, new “curiosity”. The consensus was that there was no new research to be done, that they already had all the facts, and all research papers simply argued over details of previous research papers and reports. (Intelligent Design and Biblical arguments, anyone?).
Further, when the people with legitimate concerns petitioned the Emperor to address these concerns, the Emperor sent one of his Bureaucrats to “address their concerns”. After listening to all the concerns, this Bureaucrat made a speech which gave great hope to all the concerned citizens and greatly eased their minds. At least, until someone actually analyzed the speech itself. In the novel, the speech was given to a mathematician who assigned positive and negative values to sections of the speech (the most unbiased system that the author could think of), and it turned out that although the speech itself was very uplifting (what we call “spin” today), the Bureaucrat also made qualifying statements that completely negated anything “positive” that the people thought he was saying.
Although the people felt very positive and reassured by the Bureaucrats visit, the Bottom line:
Assurances from the Government - none. Zero. Zilch. Goose egg, Commitments from the Government - none. Zero. Zilch Goose egg. Amount that the Government cares - none. Zero. Zilch. Goose egg.
It’s a really good series. And all of the novels in the original series are short, so you could read them in a day or two. Oh, and since so many people now are farm animal ignorant, here’s a clue - mules are the result of breeding a horse with a donkey, and therefore mules are sterile and cannot reproduce on their own.
You’ll understand before you finish the second book.
But to answer the question as to Bush's IQ - no, he's not "dumb" he does have a curious lack of curiosity. He doesn't worry about new questions, and he doesn't seek new answers. "Stay the Course", even if it leads you over a cliff....
|