Bush's Place in History.

[denuseri]

Also included with that article is a poll the results of which I have posted bellow at the time I reviewed the article.

I wonder what the political affiliation of the people who made the rankings was as these things are ussually purely subjective.



What do you think of the top 10 list?
Fairly accurate 59%
Somewhere in between 28%
Way off the mark 13%

What to you think of the bottom 10 list?
Fairly accurate 49%
Somewhere in between 27%
Way off the mark 24%

What do you think of George W. Bush's ranking, tied for fifth worst?
It's too harsh 46%
It's too kind 36%
It's about right 18%

How do you think Obama will be rated after he's out of office?
Somewhere in between 39%
Bottom 10 35%
Top 10 26%


Note the low confidence in Obama's future (belaying the fact he is not pricevied as the messiah after all) and the high amount of people that disagree with Bush's rating.

The article also contained this interesting factoid of opinion on Clinton:

Bill Clinton left office with a high approval rating, but a panel of writers who focus on US politics and foreign affairs at the Times, a British publication, considered him mediocre. The president who passed progressive legislation but who saddled himself with the Monica Lewinsky scandal landed at number 23. As panelist Ben Macintyre put it, Clinton "promised so much, delivered so little and embarrassed everyone."

Additional Kennedy did not make the top ten where as Regan did.

The proof will be in the pudding and I am sure its purely speculative at this point where any of the Presidents should be ranked that held office in the past 50-75 years including Nixion and Bush.

[orchidsoul]

It is all somewhat subjective. Nixon would probably be much higher on the list if it wasn't for a little thing called watergate. Clinton marred anything he did with blowjobs. I'm sort of surprised at the number of people thinking Bush's rating was too harsh. Just goes to show how divided this country is, and was, about Bush.

Though I don't understand the messiah comment, Denu? As someone who voted for Obama, I never knew people viewed him as a messiah! And I'm honestly not sure what I think quite yet- but I know his job is not easy and it's too soon to judge or criticize imo.

It's probably one of the more difficult shoes any new president has ever had to fill in history. I'll be curious where he ranks after 4 yrs as well. However, the confidence isn't listed as low actually. It's pretty much a three way tie as to top, middle, and bottom- leaning heavier in the middle. Personally I think it would be near impossible for him to land in the top 10. No one could possibly even fix the disaster that our country is in a matter of 4 yrs. Nor will he do it all to the publics liking, my own included at some point I'm sure.

[B][COLOR="pink"]
How do you think Obama will be rated after he's out of office?
Somewhere in between 39%
Bottom 10 35%
Top 10 26%


Note the low confidence in Obama's future (belaying the fact he is not pricevied as the messiah after all) and the high amount of people that disagree with Bush's rating.

[DuncanONeil]

The issue of seeing Obama as a messiah stems from the refusal to consider or allow any critical review of any part of his progroms, work history, or advisors. His stint in Congress was spent running for a promotion, his position in Il was spent having legislation handed to him, and largely voting "present". Oh Yes and voting to kill newborns.

[Belgarold]

The issue of seeing Obama as a messiah stems from the refusal to consider or allow any critical review of any part of his progroms, work history, or advisors. His stint in Congress was spent running for a promotion, his position in Il was spent having legislation handed to him, and largely voting "present". Oh Yes and voting to kill newborns.

To me this partisan viewpoint shows that the 'messiah' myth is a partisan one. I don't believe that any bill has been put forth, anywhere that was based on killing newborns. COuld you please explain this inflammatory statement.

[DuncanONeil]

To me this partisan viewpoint shows that the 'messiah' myth is a partisan one. I don't believe that any bill has been put forth, anywhere that was based on killing newborns. COuld you please explain this inflammatory statement.

Nothing partisan about it. That is simply an analysis of how people reacted to Obama and to any criticism of him or ideas.
As a member of the Il Legislature Obama voted for a bill (SB1095eng 92nd General Assembly). This bill would have required that any child that survived an abortion be treated as any other citizen. He voted against the bill in favor of a person not mentioned in the bill. Result he voted to allow the death of newborn.

[Belgarold]

Nothing partisan about it. That is simply an analysis of how people reacted to Obama and to any criticism of him or ideas.
As a member of the Il Legislature Obama voted for a bill (SB1095eng 92nd General Assembly). This bill would have required that any child that survived an abortion be treated as any other citizen. He voted against the bill in favor of a person not mentioned in the bill. Result he voted to allow the death of newborn.

mmmhmmm Nothing partisan about it? He voted against a bill, many people vote against bills for many reason. NO ONE voted FOR killing newborns.

[DuncanONeil]

mmmhmmm Nothing partisan about it? He voted against a bill, many people vote against bills for many reason. NO ONE voted FOR killing newborns.

But that was the result! His stated reason because to vote for it could result in overturn of RoevWade. Yet no one other than the child is mentioned in the bill.

[Dr_BuzzCzar]

Nothing partisan about it. That is simply an analysis of how people reacted to Obama and to any criticism of him or ideas.
As a member of the IL Legislature Obama voted for a bill (SB1095eng 92nd General Assembly). This bill would have required that any child that survived an abortion be treated as any other citizen. He voted against the bill in favor of a person not mentioned in the bill. Result he voted to allow the death of newborn.

Obama opposed the language of this type bill(s) multiple times and his explanation was that the language in the bill(s) would have been a de facto overturning of Roe V Wade through the "Equal Protection" clause of the 14th Amendment. He has said that he supported the similar federal bill that Bush signed into law since the wording protected the right to abortion. When the IL bill added an amendment that precisely mimicked the federal wording in 2005 the bill passed the IL Senate by a 52-0 vote. Obama says he supported that bill as well.

He and others rightly point out that there were already laws on the IL books protecting viable fetuses and that all life is protected by Doctor's Hippocratic Oath requirements.

[DuncanONeil]

There is no language in the bill that even mentions the mother. The only entity mention is the child that survives. In the language of the bill "the words "person", "human being", "child", and "individual" include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
No where in the bill is the mother mentioned. That being the case how does the fact the the child is born alive and has rights affect anyones abortion decisions?

[damyanti]

The issue of seeing Obama as a messiah stems from the refusal to consider or allow any critical review of any part of his progroms, work history, or advisors. His stint in Congress was spent running for a promotion, his position in Il was spent having legislation handed to him, and largely voting "present". Oh Yes and voting to kill newborns.

1. There has been and still is a lot of harsh talk against Obamas program and his work and personal history....which is I assume what passes for "critical review" these days.

2. Nobody ever voted "to kill newborns". Abortion views are a private matter. But if you really insist on it....I suppose its much better to raise them and ship them off to Iraq so they can be tortured and killed and all so some very corrupted rich people can get even more rich.

[DuncanONeil]

1. There has been and still is a lot of harsh talk against Obamas program and his work and personal history....which is I assume what passes for "critical review" these days.

2. Nobody ever voted "to kill newborns". Abortion views are a private matter. But if you really insist on it....I suppose its much better to raise them and ship them off to Iraq so they can be tortured and killed and all so some very corrupted rich people can get even more rich.

1 Harsh talk about a poorly thought out progrom that is poorly veiled earmarks? No there is no reason to question the "plan". That is point in fact evidence of the messiah syndrome.

2. The bill had nothing to do with abortion, except for the fact that it refers to a child that survives the abortion procedure. The bill granted all rights of the nation to that child and your guy voted to deny those rights. Result those children are set off on the side and allowed to die!

[DuncanONeil]

1. There has been and still is a lot of harsh talk against Obamas program and his work and personal history....which is I assume what passes for "critical review" these days.

2. Nobody ever voted "to kill newborns". Abortion views are a private matter. But if you really insist on it....I suppose its much better to raise them and ship them off to Iraq so they can be tortured and killed and all so some very corrupted rich people can get even more rich.

I may have responded to this already. This is exactly what is meant by his being viewed as a messiah. Any attempt to address his history, experience, or plans is always characterized as a "harsh attack".

[mkemse]

The issue of seeing Obama as a messiah stems from the refusal to consider or allow any critical review of any part of his progroms, work history, or advisors. His stint in Congress was spent running for a promotion, his position in Il was spent having legislation handed to him, and largely voting "present". Oh Yes and voting to kill newborns.

Killing newborn is not right, but it is ok to send 18 year olds to war to be killed, what is the difference killing is killing

I believe thier is a there are 10 Commanments 1 of which is "Thall Shall Not Kill" is this mean exclusely for new borns?? if not, then again sending 18 years olds off to war to be killed is just as bad, killing is killing regardless of age

[DuncanONeil]

Soldiers in war are not sent to be killed. The newborn has no control of their life those that CHOOSE to join the military made an informed choice.

[mkemse]

How do you think Obama will be rated after he's out of office?
Somewhere in between 39%
Bottom 10 35%
Top 10 26%

Very Hard To say, he has a 4 year term and has only been in office for 6 weeks
Only time anfd Histiry will tell but one has to give him tim,e can't pass any judgmenet on any Presidents Performance after only 6 weeksi n office, but he has said some decions he makes will not be liked by many, other will
let's see where we are and what he has done in say Jan 2010

I may add, be it hypothetical or not, supoose after 8 years searching for him, Obamas Adminstration Captures Bin Laden?? His approval rating would go through the ceiling