Bush and Daniels - attending the same school of government

Everyone should remember Mitch Daniels as Bush's OMB director who told us that the Iraq War could be fought on the cheap. Reading the New York Times' article on Bush's former chief campaign strategist, Matthew Dowd, the following caught my eye:

He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.

Mitch Daniels has the same sort of governing style. Taking Down Words has a few posts on how little Daniels has accomplished outside of selling off the Indiana Toll Road , and annoying a lot of people in both parties (The Details: Road Projects Falling Behind Schedule, Off The Radar,
Hiding Out: Guv Shies Away From Media, Tough Questions This Session, No Push: Red Rover, Red Rover, Send Someone To Lobby For The Guv's Agenda and Help Wanted: Indiana Lost 7,400 Jobs Last Month, Guv's Head Stuck In Sand. Today's Indianapolis Star has the headline Governor, are land-based casinos the legacy you want? , and implies how little Mitch Daniels has done for Indiana. How much has Bush accomplished other than get us into a meatgrinder in Iraq and annoy a lot of people in both parties.

I know that Kentucky's and Ohio's Republican governors got themselves into trouble, but that seemed more like old-fashioned political chicanery than a dedicated effort of misgovernment. I cannot think of any other government executives who have made governance into an exercise of catchphrases without substance (Bush: "Mission Accomplished"; Daniels: "Major Moves"), smearing any criticism (or even more questions) with attacks (Bush - anyone opposing him helps the terrorists; Daniels - Democrats are car bombers), and combining that with an amazingly large amount of incompetence (Bush: Iraq, Katrina, Walter Reed; Daniels: economic development)?

So, is this Bush's legacy - arrogant incompetence?

Or is that both Bush and Daniels are Ivy Leaguers who failed in business who did not understand their own limitations but allowed their egos to carry them to a place they ought not ever held?