I've read his actual comments. They weren't actually supportive of "intelligent design". When asked about it, he gave a "politician's" answer, trying not to p*** off either side:
THE PRESIDENT: I think -- as I said, harking back to my days as my governor -- both you and Herman are doing a fine job of dragging me back to the past. (Laughter.) Then, I said that, first of all, that decision should be made to local school districts, but I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.
Q Both sides should be properly taught?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, people -- so people can understand what the debate is about.
Q So the answer accepts the validity of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution?
THE PRESIDENT: I think that part of education is to expose people to different schools of thought, and I'm not suggesting -- you're asking me whether or not people ought to be exposed to different ideas, and the answer is yes.
Saying that something should be "properly" taught is not an endorsement. It could well mean, "properly taught by showing that it's lacking evidence and is not a valid scientific theory".
Likewise, being "exposed to different ideas" is hardly an endorsement of all alternate ideas.
But the creationists are spinning this in press releases as a "victory" and claiming that President Bush "supports Intelligent Design", and the MSM is spinning it the same way to make the President appear a flat-earther.
You have restored my faith in Bush. His answer is intelligently designed. I could not imagine a more diplomatic answer to a loaded question. Obviously he was being set up to look like a yahoo.