Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dummies
Townhall.com ^ | January 2, 2009 | Linda Chavez

Posted on 01/02/2009 6:30:48 AM PST by Kaslin

Karl Rove's recent revelation of President George W. Bush's passion for books wasn't a surprise to me. In a Wall Street Journal column last week, Rove explained that for the last three years, he and the president have had a friendly rivalry to see who could finish more books during the year. Rove won each year -- but the president was no piker. In the three years of the competition, the president read 186 books to Rove's 250.

Much of the intelligentsia no doubt will be shocked to learn George W. Bush is an avid reader of serious books, but it simply confirms something I already suspected. During the first real discussion I ever had with then-Gov. Bush in 1998, he brought up a book written by a former colleague of mine at the Manhattan Institute.

Myron Magnet's "The Dream and the Nightmare: The Sixties' Legacy to the Underclass" isn't the sort of book you come across if your taste goes to light reading. A scathing dissection of good intentions gone awry, Magnet's book lays bare the folly of liberal interventions on behalf of the poor and the devastating role of the counterculture in creating the underclass. But it's no red-meat screed of the sort that has propelled many well-known pundits to the top of the best-seller list either. Magnet is not a polemicist, but a serious scholar and elegant writer. Bush's reference to the book spoke worlds to me.

Liberals have always believed they have a monopoly on intelligence. Of all the Republican presidents in my lifetime, I can only recall one who was given high marks for raw intellect: Richard M. Nixon. But he was considered by many liberals as a Machiavellian exception that proved the rule that conservatives are dopes. In liberals' telling, Eisenhower and Ford were middle-brow Midwesterners who preferred the golf links to books; Reagan was a B-film actor capable of giving a good speech that someone else wrote; and the two Bushes were Yale graduates by way of money and pedigree, not merit.

Of course we now know -- thanks to the publication of "Reagan, In His Own Hand," a reproduction of Reagan's early handwritten speeches -- that Ronald Reagan was often his own best wordsmith and that his ideas were original, not borrowed. And perhaps liberals will now grudgingly acknowledge that Dwight D. Eisenhower must have had something on the ball, if not for his role in defeating the uber-smart Germans during World War II, at least for contributing to the gene pool of granddaughter Susan Eisenhower, who proved how smart she was by endorsing the brainy Barack Obama.

Contrary to the stereotype that all conservatives are narrow-minded dummies, I've found that conservatives are far more likely to be familiar with liberal intellectual thought than liberals are with the views of conservative intellectuals.

Bush's reading list was instructive not just because it was so long but because it included authors whose political orientation was different from the president's own. Included on the list provided by Rove were works by authors David Halberstam, Doris Kearns Goodwin, and James M. McPherson, all liberals, as well as the novel "The Stranger" by Albert Camus, generally regarded as an existentialist, though he eschewed the label.

It would be a little like learning that Bill Clinton's reading list in office included works by James Q. Wilson, Stephan Thernstrom, and Harvey Klehr, as well as Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead." But what we know of his reading habits reveal Clinton to be predictable. A list of his 21 favorite books, compiled for his presidential library, included authors Maya Angelou, Ralph Ellison, Taylor Branch, Reinhold Niebuhr, and, naturally, Hillary Clinton -- all well to the left on the political spectrum.

Bush's book list isn't likely to convince his critics that the president's intellect is equal to their exalted own. And I can even imagine some complaining that the number of books the president read proves he was ignoring his job. But perhaps Rove's article will at least dispel a favorite caricature: Bush the Dummy.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: bush; readinglist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 01/02/2009 6:30:48 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Great. So Bush spent more time competing with Karl Rove on how many books he could read instead of being a leader. Bush should be arrested for being AWOL from the Republican Party and it’s ideals.


2 posted on 01/02/2009 6:36:58 AM PST by MAD-AS-HELL (How does one win over terrorists? KILL them with UNKINDNESS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“But what we know of his reading habits reveal Clinton to be predictable...” Yeah, -Hustler, Swank, Penthouse...


3 posted on 01/02/2009 6:37:34 AM PST by J40000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

His mother taught him well and his wonderful wife continued the molding of a good and very bright man!


4 posted on 01/02/2009 6:37:36 AM PST by WellyP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MAD-AS-HELL
I only wish he had read these books:

"How to Use the Veto",""Standing Up for Proven Conservative Principles","Tough Love:Saying No to Bailouts and Handouts!","Why America is a Republic,and the Dangers of Democracy"

5 posted on 01/02/2009 6:45:29 AM PST by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will yo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: J40000

You forgot BUFF for Men who like PLUS SIZED Gals. LOL


6 posted on 01/02/2009 6:47:47 AM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
RE: "But perhaps Rove's article will at least dispel a favorite caricature: Bush the Dummy."

We have two choices, either he is stupid like the liberal stereotype goes or he is a liberal mole that was determined to destroy the republican party and capitalism, and give democrats absolute power. Either way he has earned our contempt.

7 posted on 01/02/2009 7:04:09 AM PST by sickoflibs (GWB : "Give me a 700B blank check to save the UAW until Obama takes office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; IbJensen; Man50D; PubliusMM; ckilmer; BuffaloJack; ari-freedom; Impy; swordfishtrombone; ..

save GWB failed legacy ping


8 posted on 01/02/2009 7:08:32 AM PST by sickoflibs (GWB : "Give me a 700B blank check to save the UAW until Obama takes office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

There’s a third choice I incline toward: both.


9 posted on 01/02/2009 7:09:51 AM PST by jammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’ve no doubt that President Bush is an intelligent man.

My problem with him is that, while claiming to be a conservative, he has presided like a Republican.


10 posted on 01/02/2009 7:15:08 AM PST by upchuck (Get ready for 2009: Pray; Raise/conserve cash; Pay your debts; Pray; Stockpile; Buy ammo; Pray)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
One doesn't obtain a Harvard MBA without having a decent intellect. And, one doesn't maintain that intellect without reading.

I suspect Obama doesn't actually read much, preferring the "digest" books electronically. But, no matter how much one dislikes Bush - over the course of the next 8 years, people will long for his days in office. Our worst days are ahead....despite the fact that the MSM and libs are telling us that "the one" has arrived and will cure all.

And, spare me the rose-colored-glasses routine about the GOP rising again. If you think Bush was flaccid....he was only reflecting his party "leadership."

11 posted on 01/02/2009 7:20:05 AM PST by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun

Conservatives do not vote for anti-Conservatives. Today’s Republican party is DOA.


12 posted on 01/02/2009 7:24:00 AM PST by gathersnomoss (General George Patton had it right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Contrary to the stereotype that all conservatives are narrow-minded dummies, I've found that conservatives are far more likely to be familiar with liberal intellectual thought than liberals are with the views of conservative intellectuals.

Boy, is that the truth. They have no idea what we actually stand for. If you ask, they launch into some caricature of a drunken redneck.

13 posted on 01/02/2009 7:24:27 AM PST by A_perfect_lady (History repeats itself because human nature is static.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I despise the liberal arrogance when it comes to intelligence, but this spin is absolutely laughable. The numbers are beyond credulity.

The president would have to be turning over a book roughly every two days, no matter what. Rove would be turning over two books about every three days, no matter what. Both these men have ultra-demanding jobs, families, other hobbies, etc. How do either of these claims pass the laugh test? At best, they are both sitting and flipping pages in order to win their stupid bet. (I wouldn't put this past either of them knowing their well-documented competitive streaks.)

There is no earthly way either of them could read and internalize 200 books on top of the memos, letters, policy documents, proposed legislation, etc. they are presented with every day. It's not possible.

Reading as a hobby is a sure sign of intelligence. I think we can all agree that the president is intelligent whether he is an avid reader or not. He wouldn't be able to function in the presidency without high intelligence. However, claiming to have read absurd numbers of books in order to rebutt the liberals’ claims of “stupidity” is not helpful. It only makes the president look defensive on the matter.

14 posted on 01/02/2009 7:29:57 AM PST by Loyolas Mattman (Sarah Palin: America's Governor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Liberals have always believed they have a monopoly on intelligence.

Why do we always have to refer to the liberals' belief that they have more intelligence? The more it's mentioned, the more they believe it. Liberalism needs to be discredited as the idiocy it is.

Why not make more references to the facts that liberal thinking is purely dumb and caters to the ignorant and clueless of society. It should always be pointed out that, it is liberal thinking, including their socialism, that has damaged the countries were it has been practiced. Many countries will never recover from liberal ideas, especially when the liberals continue in control. begin to What liberals do have in abundance is idiocy. Why keep going back to socialism when, any place that it has been instituted and practiced has turned into failure? Doing it over and over again with the expectations of different results is just pure lunacy and idiocy.

The past election was a great example and a direct indication of just how dependent liberalism is on the ignoramuses of society. Liberalism can only sustain itself in crowds of idiots or ignoramuses. Real thinking people and knowledgeable people don't bother with socialism.
15 posted on 01/02/2009 7:33:22 AM PST by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I've sent so many letters to GWB that went unanswered that I assumed he was illiterate.

I'm positive he hasn't written any letters to the martyred Campean and Ramos.

Those two individuals are the hallmark of el presidente Bushie's legacy. That's what he's all about!

Republicrats: you're on notice. If you don't get in there and fight, and I mean really fight, you're toast. Not only won't you be eating government grub nor will you be sucking up the bucks, but your DemocRAT buddies will be long gone as well.

You are as useless as boar tits.

16 posted on 01/02/2009 7:33:36 AM PST by IbJensen (MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE! Next year: famine and communism!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anniegetyourgun
If you think Bush was flaccid....he was only reflecting his party "leadership."

I have always thought of the president as the top representative of his political party. With that and with the belief that leadership starts at the top, then Bush was culprit number one in the descent of conservative ideals in the last decade.
17 posted on 01/02/2009 7:44:48 AM PST by adorno
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Loyolas Mattman

In fairness, I misread the article. It was 186 and 250 over a three year period.

It’s still a little more than a book a week. Do-able for someone who spends a ton of time on international flights, but still seems high to me.


18 posted on 01/02/2009 7:49:12 AM PST by Loyolas Mattman (Sarah Palin: America's Governor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: A_perfect_lady

“If you ask, they launch into some caricature of a drunken redneck.”

Very true, but one has to admit we have our own stereotypes for liberals.

I know a few highly intelligent and moral ones: Their goals are actually similar to ours, but they see a different path to get there.

I just don’t agree with them.


19 posted on 01/02/2009 7:49:23 AM PST by EEDUDE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Loyolas Mattman
RE :It only makes the president look defensive on the matter.

It's called generating a legacy from a failed presidency. Clinton did the same thing. September 11 and GWBs initial reaction made Clinton look like the sex and party administration and republicans look like the nation's natural leaders.

Now GWB has got the public to trust democrats on all issues over republicans. He truly has earned our contempt, and I dont care if liberals hate him. He is the gift that keeps on giving democats.

20 posted on 01/02/2009 8:03:19 AM PST by sickoflibs (GWB : "Give me a 700B blank check to save the UAW until Obama takes office")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson