Is it just me, or does anyone else think that President Obama's decision to tap George Bush (along with Bill Clinton) to head up the Haitian relief effort seem a little, um, uh, unseemly? You'd think that after eight years of constant criticism from the press and Obama's immature blaming of him for all the problems he "inherited", he'd pick someone else. John F. Kerry (who served in Viet Nam) comes to mind. Or Nancy Pelosi. Or my next door neighbor.
Obama's choice shows just how well he's able to manipulate his political opponents. Bush couldn't turn him down, to do so would have been political seppuku. Obama's choice fairly reeks of hypocrisy in one way. In another way, it shows how inexperienced he truly is. He must call upon someone who's better equipped to lead in times of emergency.
President Bush is in a position to prove that he's above the petty, partisan political bashing that has become Obama's stock-in-trade. This blog was disappointed that Bush would not respond to the many false accusations leveled at him during his term in office. Here's hoping that Bush will take this opportunity to show himself to be a much better man than the MSM made him out to be, and the rest of us know he is.