Bush apologists are a strange breed. They are so quick to defend their President as if they were blind, overpermissive parents of high school troublemakers. “Are you calling my son a liar? Not MY George! He doesn’t DO things like that. Why are you teachers always picking on my son?”
It’s been a long time since the buck has stopped anywhere.
I’ve heard a whole lot of talk lately from people trying to take the blame off of Bush for Iraq and for our country’s current financial state and putting it on the legislators or business or the Muslims or the liberals or the consumers ourselves or anybody BUT the president, saying that he’s not responsible, its not his job to regulate what goes on in this country, that he’s just the figurehead. To be the “leader of the free world” you don’t really have to do any actual leading, you just have to be a pretty face and a nice sound bite and let the whole rest of the government take the blame for what goes wrong. (Unless something goes right, which you get the credit for. That’s one of the nice things about being a god, oops I mean president.)
If Bush is just a figurehead then wouldn’t it stand to reason that it doesn’t matter how much experience you have? So that would get Obama off the hook with that inexperience argument. The only person who actually has the experience to be president are the former presidents.
My butt could be the President of the United States as long as it got some sweet photo ops on aircraft carriers,made some endearing comments to give to the media, and did everything its handlers told it to do. Actually it might be even more qualified than the current candidates, since it has a whole lot of experience in sitting around doing nothing and spewing hot air.
