dragging out the scapegoats

[Paul Mackin]

I might agree with Terrance that saying Bush's intelligence is low is the
wrong approach. I'd rather want to try to see if it were possible to find
any good traits in him. If he can't talk, can he write?  And if he can't
write can he think? Anyone observed any hidden talents? His presentation at
the Mosque in Washington the other day seemed quite spontaneous and
effective--pleading tolerance for all regardless of religion etc. Some will
say it was just smoozing. But smoozing is a lot of making the world go
round, most especially in Texas perhaps. Of course Clinton was even better
at it and he could speak, write AND think. But that's the past. Reagan is
said to have demonstrated that America doesn't really need a president. But
he could talk. What will W end up proving? Just dunno.

            P.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terrance" <lycidas2 at earthlink.net>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: dragging out the scapegoats


>
> >
> > >
> > > Personally, I wish we had a man of Clinton's intellect, capability and
> > > empathy in the White House right now, rather than that comic strip
cowboy
> > > and the hard-to-believe collection of evil fuckers that surround him.
It
> > > would have been better to have Al Gore - the "smartest kid in class"
as he
> > > was so condescendingly referred to during the election - in there, as
well.
>
> I'm still baffled by those that bash Bush for his apparent lack of
> intelligence.
> I think he is a very smart man with a language problem, but his
> difficulty with the English language, with language itself,  tells us
> nothing about his intelligence. We may say that his policies are stupid,
> but this would be a criticism of some very intelligent men. So what we
> are really saying is that we disagree with the administration's
> policies, and rather than critique those policies, we will keep calling
> Bush a dunce simply because he can't speak very well?
>