Not at all... You just didn't like it.
Which is fine.
If all it took for Mubarak to leave was the big nasty president of the USA to say leave, then he was most definitely on his way out.
Even if I give you a billion dollars a year... which isn't true... it went to the country, not Mubarak personally, then if I told you to get out of the US of Nick, and you just listened to me, then that's on you man.
It's not like Obama was going to go in there and roust him out physically... and if he did, then the outcome would have been the same and we wouldn't be having this discussion because I would be agreeing with you.
It was a terrible analogy because it is nothing like the situation in Egypt.
You don't give me anything and then tell me to get out of my house, of course I'm not going to leave. When the US gives a billion dollars a year in military support (which is going to Mubarak because HE controlled the military in Egypt) and then the US goes and sides with the protesters in Tahrir Square (meaning I'm pulling all support of you), leaving you with no options beyond pulling an Assad in Syria - yeah, you're likely to look at the situation differently. As Mubarak was left with no other option beyond killing his own people (which may have brought US intervention a la Libya), he chose to leave.
Is it really that hard to understand? You're a fool if you think we were giving Mubarak $1+ billion in military aid and not getting any influence out of it.
It's funny because the Saudi Royal Family was quite convinced that Obama played a major role in Mubarak's removal yet you think he didn't. They were so pissed that they actually refused to meet with Hillary or anyone in our government after the fact. But I guess they were wrong, haha. Obama had nothing to do with it.