Peering Inside Bush's Head

It's open season on psychoanalyzing President Bush.

The Washington Post this morning unfurls a 3,000-word attempt to figure out what's going on inside Bush's head as his presidency collapses around him. A particular mystery: How he is able to remain so calm and resolute amid so many signs of his own failures.

Peter Baker leads his piece with word that Bush has been summoning authors and philosophers to the White House -- "looking for answers," it is said, to such questions as: "What is the nature of good and evil in the post-Sept. 11 world? What lessons does history have for a president facing the turmoil I'm facing? How will history judge what we've done? Why does the rest of the world seem to hate America? Or is it just me they hate?"

But to me, it sounds like Bush is looking not for answers -- but for rationalizations for his behavior. There is no sign of genuine introspection, no sign of acknowledgment of mistakes, no sign of any significant change of course. In a pattern familiar to anyone who has ever had a drinking problem, Bush appears to be engaged in a furious effort to persuade onlookers that he's fine -- even if he isn't.

In fact, one could even argue that Bush's search for "answers" from a parade of easily cowed visitors allows him to avoid a hard look at the one place he is most likely to find an explanation for his predicament: Within himself.

The Post Story

---

Baker writes: "Bush is fixated on Iraq, according to friends and advisers. One former aide went to see him recently to discuss various matters, only to find Bush turning the conversation back to Iraq again and again. He recognizes that his presidency hinges on whether Iraq can be turned around in 18 months. 'Nothing matters except the war,' said one person close to Bush. 'That's all that matters. The whole thing rides on that.'

"And yet Bush does not come across like a man lamenting his plight. In public and in private, according to intimates, he exhibits an inexorable upbeat energy that defies the political storms. Even when he convenes philosophical discussions with scholars, he avoids second-guessing his actions. He still acts as if he were master of the universe, even if the rest of Washington no longer sees him that way."

In other words, even while reaching out for advice, he remains firmly in a state of denial. And it's not just about Iraq.

Baker writes that the fight over whether Alberto R. Gonzales should remain attorney general has "exposed a deep fault line" within the traditionally loyal Bush team. "Bush remains convinced that his old friend did nothing wrong ethically in firing U.S. attorneys, and senior adviser Karl Rove angrily rejects what he sees as a Democratic witch hunt, according to White House officials. Yet beyond the inner circle, it is hard to find a current or former administration official who thinks Gonzales should stay. . . .

"Some aides see it as Bush refusing to accept reality. 'The president thinks cutting and running on his friends shows weakness,' said an exasperated senior official. 'Change shows weakness. Doing what everyone knows has to be done shows weakness.' Another former aide said that no matter how many people Bush consults, he heeds only two or three."

The infamous Bush Bubble seems largely intact. One "senior House Republican who met with Bush recently" tells Baker: "There's nobody there who can stand up to him and tell him, 'Mr. President, you've got to do this. You're wrong on this.' There's no adult supervision. It's like he's oblivious. Maybe that's a defense mechanism.'"

And consider the best example aides can come up with of someone telling Bush what he didn't want to hear: "Aides said they do challenge Bush. White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten had what one colleague called 'a lot of hard discussions' with the president after the November midterm elections to shock him into recognizing that his approach to Iraq had failed. Bolten set up meetings so Bush could hear from critics of his policy and sent him written material to emphasize the need for change, the colleague said. That led to the decision to send more troops."