George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography - Get a Free Blog

legendary hunting exploits of killing vast quantities of birds and animals, his prodigious
feats of physical exercise and, later, his hollow martial posturing as a "Rough Rider."
The polar opposite to Theodore Roosevelt on all of these points of world outlook and
literary expression is Abraham Lincoln. Bush was often paid lip service to Lincoln as a
great president, and even organized a lecture in the White House about the contributions
of the Civil War president. But there have also been a few unguarded moments in which
Bush has revealed his instinctive hatred for Lincoln. In mid-1990, Bush attended a
performance at Ford's Theatre, which is still used for dramatic productions and other
events in downtown Washington. At the end of the evening Bush was asked by a
correspondent if he had enjoyed his evening. Bush remarked that whereas Lincoln had
only been able to enjoy the first act of the play he had seen at Ford's he, Bush, had been
able to enjoy the entire evening. This quip was reported in the British press.
Bush's affinity for Teddy Roosevelt is based most profoundly on the shared cognitive
impairment of these two political figures. In the case of Bush, the inability to think is
expressed most demonstrably in the incoherence of verbal expression. Thanks in part to
Dana Carvey, who has some insight into this side of Bush's character, the "Bushspeak"
issue has been on the table at least since 1987-88. But Bush has been spewing out garbled
verbiage for a very long time. The following sample was recorded by Elizabeth Drew in
February, 1980, during a ride from Worcester, Masschusetts to Boston. Ms. Drew
commented that Bush seemed to enjoy campaigning. Bush replied in part:
I do. Isn't that awful? I really enjoy it, and I say 'awful' only because I'm just beginning to
wonder what the hell's happening to me, you know, but I really do enjoy it. I loved going
through that cafeteria, kidding with them and learning stuff and sitting and chatting and
trying to be responsive to the person and yet have a concern for what concerns them. I
mean it when I say I'm better. I'll be better, more sensitive, stronger, from things like that.
And there is the smell of the greasepaint and that other crap; there's some of that. I mean,
this is very different today. There was a time nobody'd stand out in even hot weather to
see me. I was all alone four months ago, and here people are waiting. And there's a
certain forward adrenaline that exists today. Hopefully, there will be more of them.
Maybe not: maybe I'll be lousy and they'll go away, but that's part of the fun of it. Part of
it is the process itself. It's a good process. [fn 4]
The leading feature of this sample is Bush's total lack of rigor; his personal idiom is
incapable of expressing causality or precision. Already the subject-object relations are
blurred, antecedents are a realm of anything goes, and verbal action has dwindled to
insignificance. Underneath the avid and enthusiastic persona is a mind that is petulant,
bored, and blase' about everything that does not touch the interests of the ego. The result
is an impression of overwhelming, undifferentiated banality. One is reminded of a
narrative voice like the following:
If you really want to hear about it, the first thing you'll probably want to know is where I
was born, and what my lousy childhood was like, and how my parents were occupied and
all before they had me, and all that David Copperfield kind of crap, but I don't feel like