Politics (urgh) and paranoia
Oct. 31st, 2005 05:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hafoc
I said before in these non-pages that George W. Bush is not stupid, he just doesn't learn from his mistakes. To which ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
athelind gently pointed out that this is the definition of stupid.
But not quite, I think. I still don't think W is quite as dumb as people take him credit from. He's of only slightly subnormal intelligence, not the drooling idiot he appears to be. He "lulls us into a false sense of stupidity," astephra_adularia said.
It isn't that he's completely unable to think. It's just that he jumps to his decisions based on what he thinks or wishes the situation was, thinking that's the same thing as having principles. And then he refuses to admit he was ever wrong, and spends what intelligence he has trying to argue everyone else into believing him. Since refusing to admit mistakes is, again, "being principled" in his view.
This is such a good imitation of total incapacity that it makes us misunderestimate him. Therefore he's able to do something halfway crafty every once in a while, and get away with it.
I fear his supreme court nomination is an example of this. He has to know, based on history, that whenever a President has a heavy cargo of resentment and disapproval, the Senate is probably going to skewer any Supreme Court nominee the President sends them. But then, in order to appear reasonable, the Senate will apporve the next candidate. If I remember correctly, that's what happened with Bork, the second nominee being Thomas.
So we get W's legal adviser Harriet Meiers to subject herself to the mudgobbing and deadcatting of everyone who is angry at W. She then steps down, and W nominates the hopeless ultraconservative he really wanted. Which, since the Senate has to appear reasonable, they will approve.
I hate to think W was smart enough to see that coming and plan it that way. But I have my suspicions.
athelind gently pointed out that this is the definition of stupid.But not quite, I think. I still don't think W is quite as dumb as people take him credit from. He's of only slightly subnormal intelligence, not the drooling idiot he appears to be. He "lulls us into a false sense of stupidity," as
tephra_adularia said.It isn't that he's completely unable to think. It's just that he jumps to his decisions based on what he thinks or wishes the situation was, thinking that's the same thing as having principles. And then he refuses to admit he was ever wrong, and spends what intelligence he has trying to argue everyone else into believing him. Since refusing to admit mistakes is, again, "being principled" in his view.
This is such a good imitation of total incapacity that it makes us misunderestimate him. Therefore he's able to do something halfway crafty every once in a while, and get away with it.
I fear his supreme court nomination is an example of this. He has to know, based on history, that whenever a President has a heavy cargo of resentment and disapproval, the Senate is probably going to skewer any Supreme Court nominee the President sends them. But then, in order to appear reasonable, the Senate will apporve the next candidate. If I remember correctly, that's what happened with Bork, the second nominee being Thomas.
So we get W's legal adviser Harriet Meiers to subject herself to the mudgobbing and deadcatting of everyone who is angry at W. She then steps down, and W nominates the hopeless ultraconservative he really wanted. Which, since the Senate has to appear reasonable, they will approve.
I hate to think W was smart enough to see that coming and plan it that way. But I have my suspicions.
