All I have to offer is this:
It's better to have an MBA from Harvard, than to be a divinity school dropout. Or another freaking lawyer.
LOL
You wouldn't happen to be making a very pointed comment against some recent alternatives, would you? ;-)
Hmmmmmm.... What did GW learn at Harvard about business? Did he learn that a business has unlimited supplies of money and can spend at will without any thought about they would pay for it?
What makes George W. Bush different from a Bill Clinton is George W. Bush has self confidence. He knows who and what he is. He is comfortable in his own skin. It is the primary characteristic of people who make things happen.
Clinton could not tolerate an employee that was smarter than he was. Thus you see dingbats like Carville, and Madeline Allbright in his administration. The primary defect revealed in Clinton's sexual escapades was his need to prove his manhood. It is very dangerous to have a president who does not feel equal to other men... who must use sexual conquest to prove his manhood. What many do not understand is that Clinton needed to be caught in sexual escapades. It was how he proved his manhood.
It is also the characteristic of many professors. They fear men who have physical prowess. They are also jealous.
Clinton looked for weak subservient people to staff his administrating who followed his every lead and excused his every failure. Clinton was and is at heart a Neville Chamberlain... always looking for a way to avoid conflict. The Europeans liked him because he is a wimp.
Thus he could make a deal with North Korea that should have not been made. Clinton tolerated attacks on American ships, and embassies. He replied with only enough force to keep the media off his back.
George W. Bush would be the same person making decisions the same way no matter what school he attended. That really ticks educators off. They can't make up his mind for him.
If you want to examine a similar decision making process I would point out how Winston Churchill made decisions. Churchill wanted to take on Hitler in 1936. The elite were aghast and pointed out it would likely cost 2 to 3 thousand lives to take out Hitler. So they waited until it took millions of lives.
Oh yes, the elite in great Britain. Had a similar view of Churchill in the 1930s. In their view Winston was much too aggressive and not able to see the obvious shades of gray the in real world. Dumb old Winston tended to see the world as good guys and bad guys. Winston did have one exception to that view. He saw the educated elites as mediocre guys.. and they hated him for that.
In many respects I see a real similarity between Truman and Bush 43. Truman only had a high school education. It made no difference. Derided at the time by the elites it turned out he was right in nearly every move. Bush 43 has a Harvard MBA . It made no difference. Derided in his time by the elites, it is even now apparent that he was right in nearly every move.
History is very kind to men like George W. Bush and like Churchill and Truman .. he knows it.
There was a time when College Professors were seen as foolish impractical men not to be trusted with anything important. This professor makes a very good case for that view.
But we had Craig Benson as governor in NH, who was a "run government like a business" guy, from a successful business background, and he was bad news.
Government is NOT a business. Success in business does not point to success as a political leader.