Thanks for the excellent link, the author does not leave much to say or comment he is so right in his article that it becomes highly shameful for the previous administration. An institute of the sort organized by GWB and his friends truly shows us how little shame they all have, it is a pity they don't do their usual farming work, stay home and keep quiet about their failed administration. The problem is and will always be that the American people said and did nothing during eight years, we saw how the country was going down hill, we felt the economy was doing very poorly, we knew how much corruption there was and how wrong we were with Iraq and Afghanistan but all the same we preferred to keep quiet watch TV, play with our cell phones, think that sex would mend all these woes and feel the all time big bullies from the most powerful nation on earth. We should have done something big enough to oblige GWB to react if he was still capable of doing so but instead we all kept quiet and then he preferred to believe he was doing the right things as he was probably told by his friends and daddy. Yes he is and will always be responsible for what has happened to our country and that we are now owned by China our great landlord and owner. This does not mean we, the American people, are exempted from blame we have become the great accomplices in all the wrong doings of the past administration because we did not have the guts to confront GWB and his friends. When the mentioned institute is set and running just wait and see how everyone will run to hear his great speeches and teachings, and God knows what else. What a pity and shame for us Americans.

The media is not to blame for Bush's mismanagement but they are to blame for him getting away with it. The author fails to mention that.

You think GW mismanaged our government? I bet you voted for our unproven unknown current president, from an unknown country of birth, with a well funded campaign from unknown money, from a man that has never held down any type of serious employment

to operafan: let me just address those quickly-- UNPROVEN--unless voting to reelect someone to the office of president, every candidate is unproven. and even re-electing a current president, you don't know, no one knows what will happen to test their mettle. you can look at a person's track record on key issues, and how they conduct themselves in various settings, but at the end of the day, you're electing the person who makes the decisions, the person who's in the room, who gets critical security information and gets options and chooses one. and no one knows how someone will handle that room, those decisions, even if they have before UNKNOWN--you think Obama is unknown? what? you clearly know him well enough to attack him. do you know what the word unknown means? I'm beginning to think you need a dictionary. if someone is unknown, people don't know them. if people don't know them, they generally don't get elected president, awarded the nobel prize. clearly, people know him. choose a different word, find a dictionary, figure out what you mean UNKNOWN country of birth--he was born in Hawaii. deal with it. and McCain, who wasn't born in the US, also a citizen--being born on an army base or u.s embassy will do that. just because his father is kenyan, doesn't make him kenyan. the fact that he traveled as a child doesn't mean he was born in every place he lived. honestly--the whole, "we don't know where he was born thing is lame" UNKNOWN money - campaign contributions, donor lists, all that is both checked properly every month of the campaign, but it's open to the public. i admit it's a shitload of paperwork to go through and I don't know why you'd want to, be theoretically, you could go through it all NEVER held serious employment - hmm, lets see what consider to be "not serious employment" *writer/financial analyst - definitely not serious, a 2nd grader could do that *director of the Developing Communities Project (DCP) - now he is the director of something here, that sounds serious, but it's church-based community organization. it sounds like a lot of responsibility, eight catholic parishes, but, it's church and community organizing so it's not like it's a real job *he worked as a summer associate at a law firm, but that's just a summer job, who are we kidding? *he was law professor for 12 years, but that's not really serious. everyone knows professors don't get paid much, so it clearly can't be an important, serious job *he worked at a law firm, it wasn't just a summer job, was a real lawyer, but it was civil rights, more of that good for the people law. and he never became partner so it couldn't have been that serious a job. *he was a state legislator, and senator, but honestly, those people never get anything done ----- Are you kidding? If you're going to complain about the man, come up with something better.

In answer to your question: "an opportunity to study how NOT to manage??" It would be, except that the mistakes made, the management errors have all been made before. Were to most, obvious. The only thing learned is to pay attention to history, to common sense, to planning ahead. The Bush administration failures could be seen coming, like an enormous freight train, and everyone who warned was told to shut up. And everything that was recommended about what should be done, was ignored. You want to learn something, learn that you send people who have the right training to do a particular job, not people who agree with your ideals. You want to learn something, don't surround yourself with people who agree with you. Listen to people who know more than you do. Lots of people. Let the best minds in the world argue in front of you. If you surround yourself with people who only agree, trained to tell you to agree, then it doesn't matter if everyone sees that you're about to fall off a cliff. You'll fall anyway. And it doesn't matter if you're falling and people see branches to grab. No one will suggest them. You'll just keep falling.