It's the stupidity, stupid

I just wanted to let you know that I am a Harvard graduate, and a holder of a master's degree in mathematics, who nevertheless intends to vote for Bush. I will do so enthusiastically, and am having success in encouraging all my Ivy League friends to do so. Like Bill Buckley, I know the meaning of the words "traduce," "irrendentist" [sic] and "hagiographic" along with any other vocabulary words you'd like to quiz me on. Despite all of this, George W. Bush is much better qualified to be president than I am.

I would attempt to refute your calumnies of our future president one by one, but that would be pointless. I would rather savor Gitlin's extreme discomfiture as he contemplates the impending electoral defeat of his liberal orthodoxies. His side is going to lose, and lose "big time," if you know what I mean.

It merely amplifies my appreciation to see pretentious pseudo intellectuals like Marty Peretz and Gitlin whine about their increasing irrelevance.

We'll see who is stupid in November.

-- Will Slaughter

Gitlin's condescending view of Bush, and those who support him, is both irritating and puzzling. Like many voters, I am sometimes bemused and frustrated by Bush's awkwardness and difficulty articulating his ideas. Does Gitlin really believe, however, that Bush is stupid, or lazy, or unable to think or write coherently? My understanding is that George W. Bush is a graduate of Yale, and of the Harvard Business School, two of the greatest -- and most competitive -- universities in the world. His family connections may have helped him get in, but I don't think they helped him get out. Harvard and Yale are quite accustomed to luminaries, and their offspring. I don't think you graduate from those places unless you have the brains to do the work.

-- Richard S. Smith

To determine intelligence and intellectual appeal one must look beyond the occasional mangled syntax and labored debate answers cited by Gitlin and instead focus on the actual policy initiatives proposed by Bush. Proposals to reform Social Security (the oft-mentioned "third rail" of American politics) through partial privatization as well as support for school vouchers demonstrate a creative and bold intellect, willing to take political risks in order to address societal needs. The true "anti-intellectual" candidate in this election is Gore who is relying on demagoguery and a tortured populism ("I will fight for you") in an attempt to paper over the fact that his policy proposals represent nothing more than the traditional liberal Democratic answer to all social issues: Spend more money.

-- J. Brandt Zembsch

Todd Gitlin must not understand politics. A huge number of people vote based upon the issues, not the intelligence of a particular candidate. If you are a pro-life, pro-NRA, tax cut person you are going to vote for Bush. If you are a pro-choice, government activist type of person you are going to vote for Gore. What does Gitlin think, that all those pro-life Republicans are going to switch their vote to Gore just because he writes a couple of pages on Bush's questionable intellect? If intelligence was the criteria by which we chose our presidents we would all write in Stephen Hawking's name and be done with it.

Moreover, the fact is that intelligence plays a very small part in the makeup of a good president. By most accounts, Nixon and Carter were intelligent men and lousy presidents; FDR and Reagan were of average intelligence and excellent presidents. I would suggest to Gitlin that he write more on why George W. Bush is wrong on the issues. That way he could spend less time complaining about a campaign that increasing seems devoid of them.

-- Bradley McKinley

• View blog reactions