David Harsanyi, a columnist with the remaining paper in Denver, can't understand why anyone would want to read the Bush presidential biography.

Is it conceivable that a politician could write a candid or fascinating book? The answer, I submit, is hell, no. Politicians are inherently risk-averse, obsessed with message control, legacy building and revisionism.

A guy who invaded two countries is "risk-averse"? A guy who wins the 2004 election and announced he's going to take on the social security fiasco? Where the hell has Harsanyi been for the last eight years?

I am stunned at the cluelessness of his remarks, and yet, it all makes such perfect sense, doesn't it? Journalists are the classic example of group-think.

The reason to expect a different kind of book from Bush is specifically because of guys like Harsanyi. Democrats can get away with nonsense, lies and omissions because the crap they write is what their audience needs to maintain their own delusions of moral superiority, I mean how embarrassing is it to be a feminist and find out that "your guy" is making 22 year old interns in the Oval Office? Much easier to make excuses for him than acknowledge your pollyannaism.

A Bush book is quite obviously going to get a much different reception. The same dynamic that allows people to be credulous about "My Life" is going to work against Bush--who is after all--THE DEVIL!!!! The only way a Bush book succeeds is extreme candor backed by rock solid evidence. His critics will scream and yell anyways, but their impotence in refuting his claims will drive controversy and book sales.

Undoubtedly, any book editor willing to extend a contract to Mr. Bush has already understood these facts, but then again, they have real jobs where making money means they get to keep their jobs, maybe get a bonus.

Journalists are such putzes.