Like many of us, I've been amazed at how Bush's supporters can look at his performance and see competence, when all I can see is that the man has screwed up everything he touches. I think that I've finally come up with a question that frames his competence in a way that may get through to a few of these people...
It's really pretty simple: part of the selling job that we got for Bush in 2000 was that he was an MBA who would "run the government like a business". That leads into the following scenario:
It is 2009 and George W. Bush is looking for a CEO position now that he is out of the White House. You are on the board of directors of a company that is seeking a new CEO. You are also in a position where you have a substantial equity stake in the company, as well as being on the board -- so whoever you select can have a large effect on your net worth. Bush has indicated that he would be interested in the position, and would like you to recommend him for this position to the rest of the board of directors.
Now the questions:
Would you recommend him for the position? If yes, what in his background would you use to justify the recommendation? If not, why not?
I presume that many of the wingnuts would answer an automatic "yes" to that question...but I have a strong suspicion that if it really was there money on the line, a lot of them would have second thoughts.