Still, the fact remains that Bush is a prodigious, industrial reader, and this does not conform at all to his critics' idea of who he is. They would prefer seeing him as a dolt, since that, as opposed to policy or ideological differences, is a briefer, more bloggish explanation of what went wrong.Yes, as opposed to something more columnish.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Like I said in the previous thread, I take it for granted that Presidents read books. You don't get extra points for doing that which should be done anyway.
Now if I ran the world, I would ask the both of them to write me a ten-page research paper on their reading for the last year. If I remember right, Rove never graduated from college and spent nearly all of his time while there working for the College Republicans.
Dropping out is fine, I have no problem with that (there's a bone for you, T-NC), but you better have some chops to show. Being able to ingest information is child's play, it's all kids are capable of for the most part. But until you can synthesize that information, you ain't got no game.
I like the term 'industrial reader', that really gives me that assembly line monotonous repetitive feeling. It seems like a back-handed compliment implying, as you did earlier, that Bush just reads the words without giving pause to consider their meaning.
...as opposed to policy or ideological differences, is a briefer, more bloggish explanation of what went wrong.
Briefer, more bloggish explanation rather than the nuanced, MSMish insight Cohen offers. And no one is talking about military policy or economic policy these days.
I don't know why we are not giving them extra credit for their realization of the importance of knowledge. When you have two folks who didn't have the time to read (because daddy will call the professors to give them a passing grade anyway, why should they study) when they were in college, now understanding the importance of knowledge--we should be grateful that young kids will no longer think it is fine not to study--because you could be President like Bush who did not study.
And guess what? As we all know, Karl called Obama arrogant because he could read,write and speak well. What is my point? Smart is back!
Shalom Ta-Nehisi,
OK, so Cohen took a cheap shot. And you replied in kind. Point Coates.
But Cohen's basic point is correct. Every time someone calls President George Bush an idiot I tell them they're wrong. Idiots don't become president of the United States of America. They just don't.
And every time we think of President Bush as an idiot we let him off the very real hook of his crimes against the United States and humanity.
I know too many people who proudly proclaim that they haven't read a book in ten years. I don't care what Bush reads or how fast he reads. That he reads at all puts the people who want the easy out -- he's an ignorant dolt -- on the spot.
I agree that he is probably superficially looking for reinforcement of his existing reality and not interested in challenging his perceptions of how the world works, but feck, the man reads.
B'shalom,
Jeff Hess
I think he means to say "industrious" reader.
Do these people believe, or do they assume that we believe, that reading books, in itself, makes someone intelligent? Do they think all books are the same? If Bush has been devouring 2 books a week for the past year, that in itself doesn't say very much about his intellectual abilities.
Industrial is probably a better word - just read the words, check your mark, and move on to the next one.
Later on in the column, Cohen makes the point that almost nothing in the list would have challenged any of Bush's assumptions about the world. Not much room for thought and reflection, there.
And every time we think of President Bush as an idiot we let him off the very real hook of his crimes against the United States and humanity.
You have different friends than I. Anyway, I'd have been impressed if they had brushed up on Middle East history or read that crazy CR blogger, Tanta, on mortgage securitization.
Here is my view on all this, I say let them sell the lie. The reason being is that most people because of Bush's country bumpkin dumbass routine always thought he was more clueless and evil and that must have meant that Dick Cheney was the one always pulling the strings. Now people will see that Bush has more than 2 brain cells and maybe start holding him accountable.
Now don't get me wrong, I still don't believe he read anywhere close to that many books and whichever ones he did "read" were probably books on tape that he just listened to. But I think this is another example of Republican strategy backfiring. What Rove doesn't seem to get is that they are never going to sell people on Bush being a genius. They keep talking about history being kind, well in the past history has been kind because there were only a few people who wrote it. This time there are youtube clips of htat blithering idiot that will last forever not to mention books and blog posts. Nobody is going to look back and say "wow Bush read some books, that means the he really didn't lie his way into the Iraq War and he really didn't screw the pooch in Katrina and hte economy actually didn't crash at the end of his presidency"
A more bloggish approach would question whether Bush actually read two books a week. Even if he just listened to them on tape...
I tend to believe Rove's story because the childish competition element rings true. But the whole story gives me the impression that Bush came to reading very recently. Like say, 2004, after he had grown bored of prosecuting a messy war and had long since delegated all his duties to Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Hadley, which surely gave him a lot of free time.
Everyone is absolutely correct that the act of reading does not prove a person's intelligence without some demonstration of comprehension and analysis of the material. I remain highly skeptical Bush has any skills on that front. I have no doubt that he read a bunch of books on Churchill and fancied himself to be the Churchill of the War on Terror, but those kinds of conclusions are more worrying than impressive.
Calvin and Hobbes:
"Reading goes faster if you don't sweat comprehension."
That's true, but in a strictly semantic sense. People may be technically incorrect by calling Bush an idiot when he's actually a fool, but that doesn't make him any less a fool.
It may be an important distinction though. As far as history goes, a fool's worse than an idiot since a fool ought to be smart enough to know better. If he were actually stupid that wouldn't be his fault any more than I'm to blame for having a bit of a big nose.
I agree with Jeff Hess upthread. What the story told me about Bush was not that he was dumb, but that he's hypercompetitive and likely to cheat, or to bend the rules so far as to be an exact duplicate of cheating.
He has an extreme devotion to winning every time. In America, we like to think of that as a good thing, but it isn't. It makes you throw bad money after good. It makes you go for it on fourth and one, regardless of field position. It's what makes The Surge.
Hypercompetitiveness also distorts or undermines the original purpose, which was to read more, presumably because you want to know what's in those books. But when you're reading so much, so fast, you don't retain so much. So it becomes an empty exercise. Like the security theater practiced in airports these days.
Cohen's column reinforces what others have said about Bush and his Churchill complex. That he will take a shit storm now, but he is convinced history will judge him more gently.
Shalom ASB,
OK, if you define idiot as any person who disagrees with your intellectually superior world view, then I'll accept that President Bush is an idiot.
But the definition I hold to is that an idiot is a feebleminded person not having a mental age exceeding three years and who requires complete custodial care.
George Bush is no Chancey Gardner. No that's wrong, Chancey was no idiot either.
B'shalom,
Jeff
Still, the fact remains that Bush is a prodigious, industrial reader...
This is a "fact" based on what evidence? The testimony of Karl Rove? Gawd, if Cohen seriously believes that anything Rove says about George W. Bush must be the gospel truth, small wonder he has a job at the Washington Post. This is our modern media.
Shalom Steve,
Good point.
B'shalom,
Jeff
Jeff,
Bush isn't an idiot, that is right. He is a fool, as another commenter put forward. But there's something else he represents that doesn't get alot of play (mainly because it's a little embarrassing to America):
He is NORMAL.
That's right - bonafide unremarkable, normal, ordinary and plain. His IQ is probably 105 and has been his entire life. His moral development probably sits between a 2 and a 3 on the scale, meaning he avoids crimes and immoral acts primarily because of a fear of prison but also because of his religious beliefs.
He probably fits into the 50th percentile in terms of his reading comprehension, critical analysis skills and general knowledge of ethics.
What we should all be doing as we drag our scarred, broken bodies over the finish line that is the 20th of January 2009, is constantly reminding ourselves and our country that "normal" doesn't cut the mustard for national government.
BTW
If he were an idiot, our plight probably would have been better; most idiots know they're stupid and act accordingly, with caution and deference to those who know better. Bush is half-educated and fully arrogant.
Great tread. Bush might not fit the mental definition idoicy, but he is really a dunce. I am apolitic and don't describe myself as a Liberal or/and a Conservative. Bush is something akin to mix of a fool, a blind, and a mental midget. I respect the intellect of Richard Nixon, he was a crook, but he understand the way the world works. Bush I was also a smart and intelligent man, albeit a patrician who was cluesless about a large part of his voter's angst. I would have respected Bush II is he managed the war efficiently and effectively, is he reacted to Katrina like a true professional politician would have. He didn't any of those thing, ergo he is an idiot!
I have never though Bush was an idot per se. I have thought he was intellectually incurious (he knows what he knows and doesn't need to know more) which makes this story "funny" - at least to me.
That's right - bonafide unremarkable, normal, ordinary and plain.
And like most (I'll go with) "average" Americans, he wastes a whole lot of time when he should be working. Two books a week? Teachers often lament their inability to find time to read for pleasure during the school year and they're only responsible for the welfare of a handful of people.
I agree with Skyhook. I'm a pretty quick reader, but reading two books a week would require about 2 hours of reading a day, right? Bush shouldn't be reading two books a week.
Frankly, I just think it's cool that Jeff begins his post by saying "Shalom." Nothing wrong with a little civility.
Jeff, I apologize. I was using the term "idiot" in a colloquial sense, as a term roughly meaning "stupid person". You have been using the term "idiot" in a more specific sense, defined as "a feebleminded person not having a mental age exceeding three years and who requires complete custodial care." As Bush certainly seems not to need complete custodial care (despite his spotty history with pretzels and segways), he is, by your definition, quite clearly not an idiot.
I don't think it matters whether Bush actually read those books. It probably just reinforced his delusions of greatness if he did. But the whole thing rings true not at all. Why should we trust the primary architect of the cult of Bush to inform our vision of this failed president?
As to whether he is an idiot, or a fool, or whatever label you wish to put: He's a bad president who has made bad decisions. Did he do it because of ideology or stupidity or a lack of moral compass? I don't care. I just can't wait until history pushes this tiny man aside.
Anyone who believes that George Bush actually read the books it's claimed he read, I have a land deal for you. Even with his very limited work schedule, a lot of those books are heavy lifting--you ain't breezing through them.
And sgwhiteinfla, idiots have been raised up to the throne throughout history by Machiavellian behind the scenes schemers. Especially idiots with a famous pedigree, be it royal blood or the prestige of the Bush name.
Shalom Asb,
Apology accepted, though no offense was taken.
B'shalom,
Jeff
p.s. @ ta-nihisi: if i did less, my grandmother would reach down and slap me upside the head.
p.s.s. @ zak822, alex and others suggesting the mere thought of president bush reading two books a week smells: i agree. as i've though more today i considered how much time it would take me to read those 100 or so books. i'd be hard pressed to do it in a year with my other obligations.
Maybe that was Bush's fatal flaw; he reads too much! I guess he was engrossed in the memoirs of Rutherford B Hayes when the Al Qaeda warning memo crossed his desk. He was too busy reading up on Warren G Harding to be interrupted by a pesky little hurricane named Katrina. The war on Iraq was clearly inspired by the Flight of Icarus from Greek mythology and he mustve consulted Hoover for economic advice.
Perhaps the operative point here is not whether GWB read the books in question, but what he got from them. Judging by his record on New Orleans, environmental protection, Iraq, the current economic depression, and the colossal deficit he has run up, one can only speculate as to what he read and what he took from it. And if you find "idiot" technically unacceptable, Jeff, perhaps you'd be happy with "schlemiel" instead?
Salaam Aleikum
"Nincompoop" pretty much captures the glory and command and tremendous acumen of Dumbya Bush. May he suffer from ulcerated hemorrhoids, public drunkenness, and herpes of the eye for the rest of his life.
The image of W with nose in book at all times is too funny. Reminds me of the old SNL skit with Phil Hartman as super-smart, multilingual mastermind Reagan.
Idiots don't become president of the United States of America. They just don't.
This is such bullshit. Insisting that Bush is not an idiot despite all evidence to the contrary is just being too clever by half. He acts like an idiot and sounds like an idiot for a simple reason: he is an idiot. All the Richard Cohen column tells us is that Bush is not illiterate. But you can read a book a day and still be an idiot.
What makes you think there's something magical about the presidency that idiots cannot ascend to it? If you don't think Bush is an idiot, what about Spiro Agnew or Sarah Palin? Change a few accidents of history, and both of those grade-A idiots are sitting in the oval office.
Shalom Husseinfistbump,
Thank you for the chuckle first thing in the morning; schlemiel is one of my favorite Yiddish words.
But that still misses the point when it comes to President George Bush. Only sgwhiteinfla, and then only obliquely, used the one word that I truly think is appropriate: Evil.
When we use words like idiot, stupid, fool, bumpkin, dumb, dumbass, schlemiel or even normal and let ourselves off the moral hook.
Evil. Now Evil we all have a moral obligation to oppose, to fight. But idiots? The world is full of idiots and no one wages a serious campaign against idiocy.
If we call President Bush and those around him what they really are: Evil, then we have no choice but fight because History is filled with examples of what Evil can do.
B'shalom,
Jeff
Bush is not stupid nor is he an idiot. He is often quite shrewd. What he is, however, is proudly ignorant (different than stupid: ignorance is curable) and intellectually incurious. And THAT is why I don't believe the reading story--because reading that many books is the province of the intellectually curious.
But why anyone would believe a word that comes out of Karl Rove's mouth is beyond me. Now THAT's stupid.
it doesn't bother anyone else that neither bush nor rove seem to know books are being written by women these days?