I can't agree with Tom Watson's Bode Miller-George W. Bush comparison. Miller, after all, is a spectacular talent (albeit quite a jerk) who just endured an ignominious implosion. But he was, then and now, an athlete's athlete, a golden boy who spent enough time on the slopes and hours on the lifts to hone what was god-given into what appeared unbeatable. He took grace and added grit, and even if he lost, it wasn't because he was undeserving of the opportunity. The comparison would be Clinton, had Clinton's personal failures succeeded in destroying, rather than merely impeding, his presidency. But not Bush. Bush was no talent, no hard worker, no Greek tragedy. He's done bad things to the country, sure, but mostly through his own ineptness and ideology, not by exhibiting brilliant promise only to dim before the spotlights. Bush exhibited no talent, failed upwards, and was never punished, because an aptitude for the presidency is not the same as an appetite for the campaign.
No, George W. Bush is no Bode Miller. And more importantly, Bode Miller is no George W. Bush. in this, Miller's hour of defeat and disdain, let's at least leave him that scrap of dignity.
