XO, I concur that this issue of "buddiness" means diddly in the big scheme of things. There are simply more importnat issues at play.
I wonder how John Patrick Ryan might be as a "beer buddy?"
Then again, these increasing fantasy ruminations about identifying in buddiness with the president could augur sad tidings.
Remember, we are in the midst of a cultural revolution, and our mythology is getting a makeover. Note how celebrities, preferrably vacuous and vain, are replacing our old models of hero, many of whom were proud, but were not narcissistic.
Could be the role of the president has already been reduced so significantly in terms of actual leadership, trivialized to the extent that it has become an object of vicarious auction, an on-loan identity, a mime who can be whatever your fantasy requires.
If you are not president, or don't really need to be, you can be anyone you want.
If you are president, you cannot be buddy, anymore than you can without consequence become buddy to your son instead of father to your son. And despite dripping opinion to the contrary, you cannot be both.
Having essentially empty shells like George W. Bush and cluelss Danny Quayle foisted on us as two supposedly credible representatives of the two top notches in the Executive might well serve to support such a theory.
