I think I might be able to speak for most that believe Bush an idiot in that it's possible to believe he's slow on the uptake but surrounded with very shrewd staff that keep him afloat. I would find it extremely hard to believe that even Bush's most ardent supporters don't see a drastic difference between the way he handles speeches and public appearances where the topics are known well in advance and those times when he has to think quickly on his feet and improvise. My 10 year old does a better job of analysis and has a better command of the English language in situations like that.

Bush has had in his political life a huge fortune and power base behind him to not only cover up his mistakes but to also carefully control his agenda and the questions that are presented to him. Language and reasoning skills are certainly not the only indicator of a person's intelligence but in politics it's often the only exposure we get.

There is also a factor of selective intelligence. The Bush team in its entirety especially Karl Rove, are skilled politicians and cannot be dissed for getting results even if many of us believe that the techniques are hardly ethical. Should that be the component of intelligence we look for though? I would think knowledge skills in history, world politics, military strategy, scientific technique would be more beneficial for our long term outlook.