No one seems to be writing opinion pieces quite the way I would, so I decided to do it myself.

The name? Taverns are places where one goes to discuss the interesting events and things in the world, so this is my tavern.

I will offer my views on politics, economics, and whatever else strikes my fancy.
I will occasionally publish the entire article from another journal for purposes of causing discussion.

At times Bush's responses to questions he is asked seem totally unrelated to either reality or to the question. Many of us wonder why that seems true.

Bush’s top deputies, when asked why President Bush’s decisions so often fly in the face of the facts, say that he relied on his ''gut'' or his ''instinct'' to guide the ship of state, and then he ''prayed over it.'' This is a strong attraction to the Evangelicals, who believe that Bush is a messenger appointed by God to lead this nation. Bush believes this also. It is the source of his certainty that he is absolutely right in his decisions.

It is also the reason why he can’t explain what his three worst decisions were. He doesn’t believe there were any. God told him what was right, and he did it. There is no room for bad decisions if God told him what to do.

The president has demanded unquestioning faith from his followers, his staff, his senior aides and his kindred in the Republican Party. Once he makes a decision -- often swiftly, based on a creed or moral position -- he expects complete faith in its rightness.

The disdainful smirks and grimaces that many viewers were surprised to see in the first presidential debate are familiar expressions to those in the administration or in Congress who have simply asked the president to explain his positions.

Since 9/11, those requests have grown scarce; Bush's intolerance of doubters has, if anything, increased, and few dare to question him now. A writ of infallibility -- a premise beneath the powerful Bushian certainty that has, in many ways, moved mountains -- is not just for public consumption: it has guided the inner life of the White House.

There is one key feature of the faith-based presidency: open dialogue, based on facts, is not seen as something of inherent value. It may, in fact, create doubt, which undercuts faith. It could result in a loss of confidence in the decision-maker and, just as important, by the decision-maker.

For a truly excellent psychological analysis of Bush as President, see New York Times article by RON SUSKIND