I don't agree, Harry. The ultra-left has painted GW as a good natured
moron. IMHO, he is neither.


There are a number of facets to intelligence. Nobody scores extremely highly in
every category.

Whatever brains Bush has, they are not
apparent in what some would call his verbal IQ. He may be a whiz with
space/size relationships.....(I'm not, I used to look at those complex diagrams
of unfolded forms on school tests and make a wild guess which of the optional
shapes
would result when the object was refolded).
He may be slick with arithmetic or even complex math. There is abstract
intelligence and pragmatic intelligence.
Bush's ability to reason in the abstract is not very good, so perhaps he is
strong in the pragmatic.

My wife is a good example. She is a very bright woman, but she is perhaps about
average in the verbal category. She is excellent with numbers and accomplishing

projects. She has a knack for dealing with people. She outshines me in many of
the aspects where she excels. She has less imagination than I do, and often
gets lost in the middle of a sentence while whe figures out how to say what she
is trying to communicate, but neither of those characteristics make her less
"smart" than someone who speaks more effectively, just different. In the areas
where she is more talented, she is among the best.

Nobody has an overdose of all types of intelligence. Bush is deficient in the
verbal category, and that is an area where a national leader, (called upon to
answer questions at press conferences and to make speeches), should be
proficient enough to stave off objective criticism of
obvious errors in grammar and syntax.
Unfortunately, politicians fall into a category where they *are* judged by the
words they choose and their ability to speak.