Basically what I try to tell people up here everyday. People call him an idiot, but I doubt that he'd managed to get the presidentpost if he was. Still, I can't say I'm very happy with these last 5 years or so. When Bush got the post (2001) I was simply too young to care about american politics, or politics anywhere really. (I was 10, turning 11). 9/11 caught my undying interest, partly because it was such a terrifying event, and partly because I visited the towers merely 1 month before. But then my interest faded.

In 2003 the war in Iraq began. I was slightly older, and took great interest in the current affairs. Then the years passed, and, for me, it became more and more apparent that Bush didn't do it for me. I don't remember my thoughts of the result after the election 2004, nowadays I think why the hell they let him go on, but it's easy to be "efterklok" as we say it here:smug:

I'll be glad when George Walker Bush steps down from the scene, but I would never, EVER call him "evil", or stupid. He is, IMHO, incompetent, but that's not the same thing.

Yet the dominant party in Congress gains seats while the public has no confidence in the ones who are already there. Go figure:hmm: Too many people judging politicians by what they say rather than what they do.

Obama, Pelosi, Reed and Franks. And I though it couldn't get any worse.

I'm guessing you are missing the point of the "pathetic essay". Do you really think he deserves what he is getting?

Yeeeeeeeeeeeees.....I suppose ex managers of rural town banks would have been more knowledgeable advisors, right?

It's rare to see a more blatant self contradiction. I guess in your little world the value of failed wall street managers depends totally on party affiliation right?

The managers I spoke of are the managers of the failed corporations who are at the heart of the economic problems that we are now facing. Some of them took Golden Parachutes to leave the companies just before they went under so that they could advise Obama on economic matters. So, to anwer your question, ex managers of economically sound rural banks would have been better than these particular advisors.

That is not the point Mikhayl, all of the today's issues are dumped squarely on Bush's shoulders. Everyone in Washington was involved but as these cretins continue on with their political careers, Bush is left to take the brunt. Bush is taking ALL of the responsibility when the likes of Barney Frank continue on their merry way as if it is ALL of Bush's fault. His approval rating is better then Congress yet he is the dork left holding the bag. Does not seem to fair now does it?

Personally, I don't believe that the President isn't responsible for anything. As I said, Presidents do their share to screw things up, but to blame the President for everything is a bit ridiculous also.

Just like so many problems, the pendulum never stops in the middle, it's either wildly left or wildly right. There is no compromise any more. That needs to change, but I sincerely doubt it will any time soon.

I think most members of congress are self serving idiots and that goes in particular for my representatives.

I think that a very substantial majority of americans and the overwhelming majoirty of the remaining 95% of global population think of him as a plague. If that earns him disgust and mockery, then this is welldeserved, so the answer is Yes. I think in January 2009 the dumbest and most incompetent preident in the history of the Us will be forced to leave office. And that comes eight years too late, if you ask me. He should have never allowed in in the first.

We have had our blind trust in Führers, and that is why we do not value it if others will to pledge loyalty to their leaders blindly, for the sake of the mere principle of loyalty, no matter how bad he is. That kind of robotic loyalty is stupid, a betrayal of the nation, and can become criminal and dangerous. The office over the person, not the other way around. Loyalty then means to be disloyal to the person, and putting the interests of the many and the respect of the office above him. If you be loyal, no matter what, blindly, uncritically, and even if serious damage is being done, you are acting the same way those Wehrmacht officers did when defending thrmselves with that they did not like hitler, and thought he was in competent as a military leader, but that they had to be loyal because he was the Fuhrer. History's verdict on that kind of BS morals has been very clear, I think.

He was our captain Ahab...some jumped ship on him...some stayed with him to the end...but "All" Americans helped launch that journey...now we have a new captain...God Help Us.:arrgh!:

All Americans? Not even 50%...!!! Not four years ago, and when I remember it correctly, not 8 years ago as well.

Good argument Skybird and I see your point. :up:

Praise for what? You lost me there.