Is he really too dumb to be president?

by

Gerald Plessner

August 23, 2006 - Joe Scarborough of MSNBC has been conducting a discussion about whether George W. Bush might be too dumb to be president. It is a very important question, one that has been avoided for all too long. Our thanks go to Scarborough for bringing it up.

The president's mental capacity is an important issue for all Americans. It is not a new question for those of us who doubted his intellectual depth from the start. We knew from the first time we heard him speak as a potential candidate, that there was, as Winston Churchill said of Clement Atlee, "A lot less there than meets the eye."

For us, the doubts never faded away. Rather, we just got buried by the right-wing propaganda machine that worked to convince Americans that he was a man of great depth.

Even when the majority of Americans came to understand the president's limitations --- as a result of his miserable performance in response to Hurricane Katrina --- they had difficulty admitting that they had been fooled. Their egos and their embarrassment just wouldn't let many average citizens accept the idea that they had been snookered. And many still refuse to face the truth.

In a time when political propaganda is almost effective enough to be branded as brainwashing, it is not surprising that the ruling political party can continue to market their hapless ghost of a leader as a man of great insight, good instincts and profound religious values.

Add to that, the fact that a large number of devout Christians believe he was sent by God to lead us in these perilous times, and you almost have a worshipful belief in the man in the Oval Office that is akin to medieval worship of royalty.

America is now in an age of anti-intellectualism when looks, posturing and marketing are much more important than brains and ideas. It all began with George H. W. Bush's choice of Dan Quayle as his vice president. Then, with the nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, being dumb almost became a qualification for high office in Republican politics.

And George W. Bush is a product of the same party that gave us Dan Quayle, Clarence Thomas and Rick Santorum.

The fundamental truth is that George W. Bush was profoundly unprepared for the presidency. He never had the requisite intellect, curiosity, fortitude or temperament for the job. He had no knowledge of international affairs and little experience in domestic policy or politics outside his home state of Texas.

The president's performance at the recent Group of 8 conference in St. Petersburg proved once again the mistake of his election.

But in spite of all his shortcomings, I will never blame him for his inadequacies because, contrary to what some of my readers believe, I do not hate George W. Bush. (Dick Cheney? That's another issue!)

America must have an honest discussion about the real cause of George W. Bush's leadership inadequacy, which is the skeleton in our national closet.

George W. Bush is an alcoholic who has not been rehabilitated. The president was a big drinker, probably beginning in high school, continuing into his college years and beyond, and he has never succeeded at any kind of withdrawal until well into his middle years.

Recent studies tell us of the terrible damage done to the young brain through heavy consumption of alcohol. We now know that binge drinking, as when one passes out, is especially harmful. We also know that the damage resulting from youthful alcohol consumption is never completely repaired.

I believe that the president's difficulty with language results from his drinking, although I cannot get any expert to go on the record about this.

There are probably all sorts of issues that effect the president's needs for alcohol and they are probably not all his fault. To have put him into the highest stress job in the world, as was done by Dick Cheney and his sponsors in Texas and the energy industry, was an act of criminal malevolence.

Those who enticed him to run for president and put him over on the American people should be punished. Their lack of concern for his best interests, their acts of greed and their pursuit of power have brought us to the place we are today.

Is the president intellectually adequate for such high office? Definitely not. Is it his fault that he is there? Not entirely. Is there something that can be done to remedy the situation. Probably not with regard to his personal health, but perhaps with regard to the danger to our country and the world.

These are very dangerous times. Americans must pull together as we go through the next two years. We must be realistic about what the president can and cannot do and we must demand that our other national leaders exercise their influence to keep this administration on a straight and narrow path.

The administration must succeed in the fight against terrorism while they return to respect for the Constitution and the laws which make American democracy the wonderful gift that it is.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Gerald Plessner is a Southern California businessman who writes regularly on issues of politics and culture. He would be pleased to hear from you and may be contacted at gerald@geraldplessner.com.