Ah. Hello, JR.
I'm having the feeling that we're both not in the same thread.
If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say the article was posted out of sheer disbelief that the woman could have said those things.
The only opinion I ever formed about Barbara Bush was a positive one because of an interview she gave once about why she refused to dye her hair and "look younger" like most women of her age and income level. So, to be technically correct, I didn't read this articile with an "objective" view. I began it with the positive view I'd formed on one tidbit. (Other than that, I didn't know a damned thing about the woman.)
However, I'm afraid not dying her hair to look younger doesn't outweigh "they were underprivileged anyway" on my mental scale. My "WTF was this woman thinking?" comment was based on the fact that she couldn't have been thinking. Otherwise, she wouldn't have said those things. I can't even work out what she might have *meant* that could have come out that way.
At this point, there isn't anyone who has an objective balanced view about the current administration. It's an inhuman request to think people are going to wake up every morning with a blank slate, pick up the newpaper and start again. Too much has happened over which one is almost compelled to form an opinion.
"Bush bashing" *is* getting tiresome. Personally, I'd very much welcome the article that says "this was done correctly" about any aspect of our executive branch.
I'm waiting.