Here's my comparison:
Washington led an rag-tag army of insurgents against the greatest military power in the world, Britain....and won. Bush has "led" the greatest army in the world against a rag-tag bunch of insurgents....and after nearly four years, is no closer to victory than when he started.
Washington personally commanded armies in the field, risking his own life innumerable times, including while he was President. Bush has never seen combat, relied on his father's influence to avoid being sent to Vietnam and spent much of his "military service" campaigning for Republican politicians in Alabama.
Washington was elected president by unanimous vote of the Electoral College. Bush lost the popular election and was barely elected by the Electoral College after allegations of election fraud in a state controlled by his brother.
Washington worked hard for passage of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Bush thinks that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are documents that can be ignored by himself and any member of his administration.
Washington was a strong advocate of fiscal responsibility on the part of the government. Bush has cut taxes, primarily for the richest Americans, in time of war, and run the national debt up to $8.4 trillion, much of it owed to foreign countries.
Washington was modest, intelligent, felt himself a true servant of the citizens of the United States....and was a gentleman in every sense of the word. Bush is arrogant, incompetent, cares about nothing but the well-being of his neocon pals and has the manners and deportment of a frat boy.
Shall I go on?
How dare George W. Bush compare himself in any way, shape or form to the man who sacrificed so much to serve his country. How dare he!