Of all the armchair psychological theories out there attempting to explain why this president is such a failure (Oedipal, Christianist fanaticism, stupidity, etc.) I find the “dry drunk” theory most convincing (though it would not surprise me in the least if he wasn’t completely dry—remember the “pretzel” incident
?). Certainly I find it more convincing than the whole Oedipal “gotta beat my father” theory. I think the central thing that needs to be “explained” about Bush is why he is so awful. How has he managed to take the enormous outpouring of goodwill towards the Unitied States (remember La Monde saying “we are all Americans now?”) and squandered it? Katrina, Iraq, the budget deficit, energy reform, the list goes on. The Oedipal theory may explain why he’s tried to do some of the things he’s done. But it doesn’t explain why he’s made such a mess of them. The alcoholic theory does a better job. That and the fact that the Republican ideology Bush has wedded himself to is inherently bad for our country. Remember- It’s not just Bush that’s wrong, it’s the whole “contempt for competence” philosophy that Republicans have embraced wholeheartedly.
A fairly straightforward presentation of the “Bush as alcoholic” theory can be found in a series of articles by (fellow alcoholic) Patrick Moore starting here
. (Usual HT to my favorite blogmooching source: Sullivan