OK, we've had a laugh, now try being objective.
It would be a better dialog if you were willing to look at both the good and bad. Bush was one of the better leaders in that he didn't run from the fight (radical Islam), he tried to bridge the aisles (much to the chagrin of conservatives), and he made principled decisions based on what he believed best for the country.
Have you read the book so you can refute with facts?
One of my guiding principles is to consider carefully the admonition: Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil. So if you're going to call Bush evil, make a good argument, without all the drama, and be careful not to defend headlines, but the real story. Oft times I hear those who would call Bush a terrorist defending behaviour antithetical to the U.S. Constitution. If you believe crimes were committed, just be sure to apply the same standard to all others as well.
Unless you can make a reasoned argument to the contrary, I believe Bush is not only intelligent, but honest and courageous. I didn't agree with some of his decisions, but I think history will vindicate him. I saw the left go radical, and had seen an email around the end of 2000 which laid out the strategy of disinformation the press and others were going to use to discredit him. Sure enough, all of their petulant bleating got louder and louder, but very few challenged the lies. I'm so glad to see some justice with Mr. CBS, Dan (I'd) Rather (not tell the truth) . In his book, Bush talks about the hurtful lies and misinformation, but felt it was beneath the office to go on the attack. I wished he had come out more to defend the administration, but he had made a principled choice not take a chance to tarnish the Presidency's luster on his watch.
For crying out loud, look up the news reports on the economy in 2005, they were talking about how terrible it was, and yet it was strong. That should be at least a yellow flag for someone who wishes to be objective. Katrina is another example. I saw the press conference a day or so before it hit, and Bush asked if there was anything the governor of Louisiana needed, and the governor said no. The Federal government has to be asked to help, they couldn't unilaterally push in to help without permission. There is blame to go around, so make sure to look at it objectively (think about all the flooded buses in N'orleans). It's time to defend the truth, and I won't defend anyone based on party or otherwise, but based on their actions.
And if you're not willing to take a breath and have a respectful conversation to defend your points, then don't waste the time.