NOT FOR SALE? ( Archived) (51)

That doesn't make sense considering how many endlessly rant on about the US govt. being controlled by corporations.

Oh, perhaps they're wrong?

From the article the total for both sides came to $6 Billion $700 Million more than in 2008. That amount of money disenfranchises the ordinary citizen because he/she feels what good is my $10 $50 or $100 going to do in the face of that much money.

thanks, ooby....i agree.....bushie was one bad dude.....

Hey,Yo,did you really see a Lever for Bush?
Holy Crap,where?

freed? I'm glad Saddam is gone but it didn't have to take 100,000 Iraqi and American and British etc lives to remove him from power.
Least of all while we were in the midst of a war in Afghanistan. I doubt you will find many people today who would say it was a good idea to invade Iraq.

A 2006 Siena College poll of 744 professors reported the following results:

"George W. Bush has just finished five years as President. If today were the last day of his presidency, how would you rank him? The responses were: Great: 2%; Near Great: 5%; Average: 11%; Below Average: 24%; Failure: 58%."
"In your judgment, do you think he has a realistic chance of improving his rating?” Two-thirds (67%) responded no; less than a quarter (23%) responded yes; and 10% chose "no opinion or not applicable."
Thomas Kelly, professor emeritus of American studies at Siena College, said: "President Bush would seem to have small hope for high marks from the current generation of practicing historians and political scientists. In this case, current public opinion polls actually seem to cut the President more slack than the experts do." Dr. Douglas Lonnstrom, Siena College professor of statistics and director of the Siena Research Institute, stated: "In our 2002 presidential rating, with a group of experts comparable to this current poll, President Bush ranked 23rd of 42 presidents. That was shortly after 9/11. Clearly, the professors do not think things have gone well for him in the past few years. These are the experts that teach college students today and will write the history of this era tomorrow."

A 2010 Siena poll of 238 Presidential scholars found that former president George W. Bush was ranked 39th out of 43, with poor ratings in handling of the economy, communication, ability to compromise, foreign policy accomplishments and intelligence. Meanwhile, the current president, Barack Obama was ranked 15th out of 43, with high ratings for imagination, communication ability and intelligence and a low rating for background (family, education and experience).

The C-SPAN Survey of Presidential Leadership consists of rankings from a group of presidential historians and "professional observers of the presidency" who ranked presidents in a number of categories initially in 2000 and more recently in 2009. With some minor variation, both surveys found that historians consider Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Franklin D. Roosevelt the three best presidents by a wide margin and William Henry Harrison (to a lesser extent), Warren G. Harding, Andrew Johnson, Franklin Pierce, George W. Bush and James Buchanan the worst.



So I guess you would say that 2010 Siena poll of 238 Presidential scholars also have a lot of "gall" to rank Bush as the worst?
BTW

Hello Ooby! I am so happy--and our local government and policies went very well, too. thank you for helping keep spirits up. You are a neat person.

Thanks bro. But you give me too much credit. I predicted way back in 2010 that Obama would be re-elected and I never saw any evidence from the other side that made me doubt myself except when I saw Jon Huntsman. There was a guy I thought who would be a real threat to Obama. I couldn't believe how the GOP turned their back on him, what a mistake I thought, if they only knew. They should have told most of the other hopefuls on stage with him, with the possible exception of Ron Paul to go home. Of course Ron Paul was way too radical with his fiscal ideas to make an effective president, he would have decimated our economy because he would try to fix it too fast.

There's no doubt many changes need to be made to make this country work better without the billions Trillions we waste every year but it's almost impossible to get a pig away from a trough.
It may sound strange but I agree with a lot of what the right has been saying, we're too deep in debt, we shouldn't be printing money and we shouldn't be borrowing a penny from China or anybody. In my personal life the only debt I have is the mortgage on my house.

I think Bill Clinton knew it better than anybody that a country can't get ahead while it's under a crippling debt servicing burden (interest). That's why he wanted to raise taxes so we could pay down this debt and get to a point of not having to pay interest at all. This country is run like a family with 1 working adult with a minimum wage job who goes to a payday loan store every week just to put food on the table.
We really need to break this cycle and quantitative easing ain't gonna do it.
Ok, I'm done.