I'm responding to your response here, because this is where I first encountered Gaddis' notion of Bush being "Wilsonian."
I read it more as Bush's objectives being Wilsonian in nature, but not at all in the way that he is willing to go about implementing his objectives, so his approach to the realization of Wilsonian ideals is not Wilsonian at all.
Is that closer to the mark?
I just responded by private e-mail by accident. Gaddis has a lot that's good to say, it's just that calling Bush a Wilsonian is a red flag for a certain kind of not very insightful conservative. There are other alternatives to isolationism and realism besides Wilsonianism.