This article is rhetorical slight of hand, written by a man who directly benefits if history takes a kinder view of the GW Bush administration.<p>The author asserts that GW Bush is smarter than [the typical reader]. Howard Gardner describes nine different types of intelligence. ( <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences#Critical_reception" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligenc...</a> ) Is GW Bush smarter than me in every metric? I am skeptical. Is he smarter in only some out of nine categories? If so, the the statement "is smarter than you" is missing a dependent clause.<p>The article relies on anecdotal evidence from biased sources. People who were invited into the administration based on loyalty and ideology all think that GW Bush is super smart? That is both unsurprising and unconvincing.<p>The author slams the cultural biases of the coastal elites, while indulging in his own.<p>"He is an intense, competitive athlete and a “guy’s guy.” His hobbies and habits reinforce a caricature of a dumb jock, in contrast to cultural sophisticates who enjoy antiquing and opera. This reinforces the other biases against him."<p>Bush 41 was an athlete. GW was a cheerleader. I understand that the whole point of this essay is to rewrite history but know your limits, man.<p>I readily concede that a group comprised entirely of smart individuals can make bad plans, or execute a good plan so badly that the outcome is the opposite of what they intended. If your best intentions regularly have calamitous results, does that matter when judging your intelligence? I would argue that it does. If you declare Iraq, Iran, and North Korea to be existential threats; let North Korea get The Bomb; dramatically strengthen the regional influence of Iran; and turn Iraq into a hellscape whose only export is terrorism, does your alleged intellectual superiority provide any solace?<p>The author mentions an anti-Texas bias. Having spent decades in close proximity to Texans, I would like to make an observation. There are Texans, and there are Texan Secessionists. I have found the former group to be open, generous, hospitable people more often than not, and frequent contributors to art and culture. The latter group never miss an opportunity to remind you, "Texas can secede if we want. It's in our constitution. We were a Republic before we were a state."<p>Want to understand the term "Ugly American?" Spend a couple of years listening to Texans act like they're doing you a favor by not seceding.