« Last Night's Non-Answer Photo Op | Main | Lie to Me Wins the Night »

Report Cards

So, President Obama has completed his first 100 days in office, and the pre-completed report cards love notes from the media are in. Now that we've had a decent chance to see Obama's idea of leadership, it seems we can present a composite report card ourselves.

Here's how it works: the reader gets to vote A,B,C,D,F, or incomplete on grades in Economics, History, Defense, the Constitution, the Judiciary, and Leadership. The grades will be assigned to not only President Obama, but also in retrospect Presidents G.W. Bush and Wiliam Jefferson Clinton.

But that's not all.

Bias is an undeniable factor in how someone assesses grades, so readers will also grade other commentors bias on a scale of 0 to 5 for liberal or conservative tendencies (as in liberal 1 to 5, conservative 1 to 5, or 0 balance). The grades from that commenter on the presidents will therefore reflect on the polarity of responses, as well.

Since it's my article, I will go first:

B.H. Obama
Economics: F - he may not be a socialist, but his policies clearly are
History: F - rejecting what works in favor of what gets votes is the way of the fool
Defense: D - Obama is weaking America's resolve and ability
Constitution: D - fast and loose is not the presidential standard
Judiciary: incomplete
Leadership: F - the man is evasive and flees from accountability
Overall GPA - 2 points in 5 classes, 0.4 GPA

G.W. Bush
Economics: C - W responded well at times, not so much at others. He also gave Obama excuses for his own deficit scams
History: A - Bush knows history and it shows
Defense: A - A few flubs but a solid strategy and sound doctrine
Constitution: B - could have done more to protect rights
Judiciary: A - solid picks, especially at the fed judge level
Leadership: B - finished weak but on the whole a good fight
Overall GPA - 20 points in 6 classes, 3.3 GPA

W.J. Clinton
Economics: A - the man knew his numbers
History: B - a bit manipulative and short-sighted, but effective in terms of making himself look good
Defense: D - Clinton was anti-military, plain and simple
Constitution: F - as bad as Nixon in manipulating the founders' key document
Judiciary: F - poor choices and damaging to the country
Leadership: C - could be effective, usually passive however
Overall GPA - 10 points in 6 classes, 1.6 GPA


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (51)

You're expecting a reasonab... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

You're expecting a reasonable comparison between 100 days of Obama and 2 terms each Clinton and Bush? If this were you parsing a poll you'd go bananas.

I'll rate you a 5%+ for bias. And yeah, so am I.

It'd take some more researc... (Below threshold)

It'd take some more research but as Unrepentent mentioned, perhaps it's better to rate all three on their first 100 days of performance.

I tried to maintain my pers... (Below threshold)

I tried to maintain my personal goal of not jumping into the comment threads here, instead just focusing my energy on keeping up with the "We hate Obama as a matter of unwavering policy" crowd is carrying on about.

But this is just too rich to pass up...

GW Bush: "Constitution: B - could have done more to protect rights"

How can you POSSIBLY give someone a B on the Constitution then say that he could have done more to protect rights, the very focus OF the Constitution?? You remind me of the way Entertainment Weekly rates movies. ("We thought this had massive gaps in the plot, some of the worst directing of the year, and acting that reminded me of made for TV movies. B+!")

And honestly, did you really need to spend the time writing up a report card? Wouldn't you have saved time simply by posting an entry that said:

"Obama sucks, will always suck, and nothing he ever does or anything I ever learn will dissuade me from that idea. Oh and Bush rocks."

At least that would be honest....

Jake gets a +50% weight app... (Below threshold)

Jake gets a +50% weight applied for awesomeness, insight, and honesty.

You set up a potentially interesting thought experiment but then go on to grade Bush higher than Clinton in terms of leadership, which reminded me that a) Republican partisans like DJ--no conservative, he--fell off the proverbial turnip truck a long time ago, and also b) their opinion thankfully has no impact on the world outside of their own discursive bubble.

The predictable contingent ... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

The predictable contingent have arrived and spewn their collective spleens.

Any adults?

Oh, I'm sorry, DJ... I didn... (Below threshold)

Oh, I'm sorry, DJ... I didn't realize that disagreement with you auto-equated to immaturity.

Let me ask you... what do you want out of this this site? Open debate or parroting of your partisan opinions?

I'm fine either way, but I'd sure like to know the mission of the site.

DJ,My post was a s... (Below threshold)


My post was a suggestion for improvement on the execution of the idea, not a venting of any sort. (Then again I'm not sure if you meant me, I'm guessing you may have since my post was voted down.)

This just in from your man,... (Below threshold)
Larry Dickman:

This just in from your man, Michael Steele:

"Look, we can't go back out and start pointing fingers at the Democrats and saying "look at how bad they're performing, look at what they're doing with the economy" when we jumpstarted this thing, we were the ones who put $700 billion on the table and said "alright, let's start nationalizing the banking system." So now for us stand back and go "oh look, that's a bad thing to do" is disingenuous."

No wonder Alren bolted. Who's next? Word is, it's Dick Lugar.

This just in from Rush:

"Republican Lemmings, we've make it to the edge of the cliff. Meet me at the bottom."

Jake et al, no one makes yo... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Jake et al, no one makes you visit the site, read the articles, or comment on them. If you do not find the proposition viable, there is no need whatsoever for you to participate.

But instead, you toss off insults and pretend that proves your point. Sorry, but even my 3rd-grade daughter has out-grown that behavior. By definition, your conduct is immature and childish. It may be tactless for me to point it out bluntly, but you chose that behavior and so earned the response you got.

You say you want open debate? Sometimes that is the point, for here it's more sophisticated, an examination of the policies and directions of the current and two prior administrations. I even made a point of noting that we should observe the degree of bias in commenters, thereby - as I said - allowing us to note the polarization of opinion.

None of this is cheerleading or just partisan sniping. I never claimed to be objective, nor if you notice have I gone to extremes, but my opinion is my right: For you to mock me for posting - and explaining a bit - my grades without so much as presenting (or defending) your own opinion is hardly 'open debate' or any attempt at constructive discussion.

So what do you want? You want to fling feces and show that level of behavior, or do you want to start having an adult-level discussion? I stated opinions, kept free from puerile insults, and avoided all-A and all-F Pravda-fests. Let's see you manage as well, or is that beyond you?

you toss off insults and... (Below threshold)

you toss off insults and pretend that proves your point. Sorry, but even my 3rd-grade daughter has out-grown that behavior.

You could learn from her.

I agree with DJ grades for ... (Below threshold)

I agree with DJ grades for the most part. I thought about giving Bush a lower grade on Leadership since he spent too much time reaching across the aisle when at times he needed to take them on but relent to a B overall. I am torn between a B or C for Clinton on Economics since it was the Republicans that did most of the work there but he was smart enough to follow the poles and go along.

I notice the libs are acting as usual, just throwing insults and not really contributing to the discussion.

Proves my point. Not one o... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Proves my point. Not one of you lefties even makes the effort. Of course, it would be just about impossible to justify the grades the Left would toss out, so it's no shock your strategy remains 'fling feces and run'.

Grades are about spot on ac... (Below threshold)

Grades are about spot on accept for Judiciary appointees. We already know how that will go so F- THERE TOO.

These last 100 or so days a... (Below threshold)

These last 100 or so days actually make Me yearn for the Clinton years. At least He could speak, knew how many states there are in the U.S. and was mostly interested in screwing interns. not the whole Country.

B.H. Obama <b... (Below threshold)

B.H. Obama
Economics: F - Tried to buy his way out of a recession with a stimulus bill that will not be spent until the recession is over. More to come by the looks of it.
History: D - At almost every turn he seems to be both ignoring and misinterpreting it, accidentally or purposfully.
Defense: F - Cutting or scrapping defense programs is not good defense.
Constitution: C - I think he knows of the document, I'm just not sure he agrees with it.
Judiciary: incomplete
Leadership: C - I don't think he makes a good strong leader, but he obviously has something people like.

G.W. Bush
Economics: C - While we closed some gaps, we spent more than we needed to in some areas.
History: B - Not much to say on it.
Defense: A - He was mindful of our challenges and unafraid to face them.
Constitution: C - I think he stretched a little too far in a few areas out of propsed need.
Judiciary: B - No activist judges.
Leadership: B - I believe he is a good leader because he doesn't shift his principles with the direction of the wind. I feel that he could have been more charismatic, however.

(I wasn't involved in politics as much in Clinton's presidency, so I'm going to grade really on general emotion and memory here, without commentary on the grades.)

W.J. Clinton
Economics: B
History: C
Defense: D
Constitution: D
Judiciary: D
Leadership: B

Jake wrote:"Obama su... (Below threshold)

Jake wrote:
"Obama sucks, will always suck, and nothing he ever does or anything I ever learn will dissuade me from that idea. Oh and Bush rocks

He wrote this describing DJ's post. DJ called him immature,(which it is) and Jake takes offense. Priceless.

I agree with most of your grades DJ. As far as where I think Barry is heading, I agree, but at this point, he vacillates so much, no telling where he will wind up. His leadership skill will remain low. Anyone that works by polling data is a weak leader. ww

DJThis "adult" cal... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:


This "adult" called you out on the idea of trying to compare 100 days to 8 years. I noticed you called us some of us names and didn't have the sand to respond.

I move you from a 5+ to a 6+ with a F for execution, idea and response.

Reading comprehension is st... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Reading comprehension is still a problem for you, U.D. Your love of fiction is as strong as ever, though.

Only DJ could - or would - ... (Below threshold)

Only DJ could - or would - give Bush a C for the economy (wasting billions of dollars on Chrysler and Ford ought to have earned him an F). This illustrates why, as Jake so nicely put it, no one should take DJ seriously when it comes to evaluating Bush or any other President whom DJ wants to compare to Bush.

Tick, tick.... the clock starts on how long it takes DJ to call me stupid, a liar, a lead paint sniffer and all the other things he does when someone fails to worship Bush with the appropriate level of adoration.

u dem - This "adult" ca... (Below threshold)

u dem - This "adult" called you out on the idea of trying to compare 100 days to 8 years.

Where was it stated in the article Bush's grades were based on 8 years? It wasn't, go back to "adult" school.

Barack Hussein Obama

Economics: F - Assigned a tax cheat to the Treasury, expanding the Fed deficit beyond all imagination, signed a porked-up/earmarked-up budget bill then made the claim it was last years business.

History: F (minus) - During his dog & pony show he quoted Winston Churchill: "Churchill said 'we don't torture' when the entire, all the British people were being subjected to unimaginable risk and threat."

Later in life Churchill was responsible for this: "Beatings and abuse made Barack Obama's grandfather loathe the British."

Defense: C+ - His Rock Star tour to the EU to drum up support for Afghanistan was a complete bust, idea floated to make vets pay for health care via their own insurance did nothing but hurt morale, cutting missile defense when Iran and N. Korea remain a threat is nonsensical.

Constitution: D - As Sen. Byrd noted moving oversight of the Census into the WH could be a violation of the Constitution.

Judiciary: incomplete

Leadership: C - Great orator, beyond that, not much. At least not shown to be beyond it at this point.

I agree with most of your g... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

I agree with most of your grades DJ, with 3 exceptions:

1. I'd give Obama a D+ in defense for keeping a lot of what President Bush was doing intact (even though Obama would deny that publicly and the press is keeping it pretty much a secret for him).

2. I'd give President Bush a C in leadership--he should have stood his ground better against the constant misreporting and lies of the press. Sadly he was no Reagan.

3. I'd give Clinton a C- on the economy. There's no denying the economy was great in the 90's but a lot of that was due to (1)his predecessors laying the groundwork for a strong economy despite Clintons oppressive tax increases on everyone and (2) dumb luck with the explosion of the internet and dot coms during his watch plus all the new jobs the Y2K bug created. On top of all that Clinton laid the seeds for the current recession when he re-wrote the community reinvestment act (admittedly with the Republican congress's aquiescence). And Clinton inherited a healthy economy but left a pretty serious recession.

And again, the left resorts... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

And again, the left resorts to insults and lies when they can't manage a cogent response.

C'mon U.D., Jake, hyperbolist, Larry, mantis, steve, for all your whining you are the only ones unable to do anything but throw insults and spittle. The proposition is simple enough, grade Obama on his policies and actions and Bush and Clinton on theirs. No one is saying you have to agree, but you should be able to defend your position with a brief explanation. All you have done is some weak heckling of my grading and moan about the concept.

Your behavior proves my point, as I said. If you can discuss the matter as adults, you should at least try to do so. Conducting yourself as if you were a room of petulant 8-year olds do is only showing your limits of character and comprehension.

trying to include Clinton w... (Below threshold)

trying to include Clinton would be a bit unfair from me as I only became truly interested in politics during his second term. However, with the way too early verdict on Obama, as well as Bush's scores

B.H. Obama
Economics: F - His economic plan as well as his bailouts will stagnate the ecnoomy as well if not better than Jummy Carter managed.
History: F - He seems to happily ignore every lesson of history which migt prove that his hope and change program will be destructive.
Defense: F - Those who beat their swords into plowshares, will soon be plowing for those who did not.
Constitution: F - Not that congress is any better here, but Obama seems to enjoy mocking the spirit of the Constitution far too often
Judiciary: incomplete (he hasn't had a chance to do anything here so far.)
Leadership: D - He vacated a lot of policy making to congress and then allowed the EPA to establish rules without proper votes. He's also been far to easily swayed by public opinion. Frankly, government by angry mob is never good.

G.W. Bush
Economics: D - Spent too much, never attacked the entitlement crisis with any real passion. Was far to interested in helping his perceived "fatcat" friends.
History: C - He spent too much time worried about his foreign policy legacy, and ignored most lessons of history. In 10 years he will be seen as a failed president.
Defense: B - He did a bit too much grandstanding about it and took his eye off the ball more than once. People say he'll be remembered for preventing any additonal attacks, but he also allowed buth Afghanistan and Iraq to degenerate after the US entered because he was unwilling to expend politica capital forcefully.
Constitution: C - Giving him a C is generous, but other than a few minor bobbles, he never truly attacked the constitution like Obama is now. He also didn't act to help create new barriers against judicial and democratic attacks.
Judiciary: C+ - His final recover on the judiciary is good, but the Harriet Myers fiasco as well as the attacks against his Judiciary and AG appointments shows that he mishandled this situation too often.
Leadership: F - Bush allowed his entire presidency to be led astray far to often and his inability to stand up for himself in press conferences displayed a complete lack of leadership. If he had been a more dynamic and forceful leader he would not have left behind a shell of a party in the GOP.

To be honest I get a feeling that while I would be a bit harsh on Clinton, the baby Shrub is the worst president since Carter to have completed a term, and his father isn't much better. The US has been cursed with extremely ineffective presidents since Reagan left office.

Given that we were attacked... (Below threshold)

Given that we were attacked during Bush's term (albeit not in the first 100 days) and we haven't been attacked since Obama took over, it is definitely biased to give Bush an 'A' for Defense and Obama a 'D'.

You may not like the way Obama is going about things (your claim that he is weakening us is nothing but uninformed speculation on your part) but point to one specific instance where things have gotten worse with Obama than they were with Bush.

Korea: thumbed its nose at both, just as Iran has done. Russia: more of a problem during Bush's term than so far with Obama (Russia hasn't invaded any of its neighbors since January, have they?). Iraq: not much better, not much worse since Obama took over. Afghanistan and Pakistan: no worse now than was the case when Bush left. Allies: pretty much snubbed Bush across the board, just as they're doing with Obama. Whatever grade you give to one, give to the other.

DJ: criticizing your gradin... (Below threshold)

DJ: criticizing your grading standards is off limits? Did Kevin give you tenure?

Seriously Steve, are you co... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Seriously Steve, are you completely locked into the ad hominem attack, or do you really not understand the difference between that and legitimate debate?

Bear in mind, please, that if all you can manage is to attack what the authors here write, then you validate every post which does nothing but complain and offer no alternative. Seriously, I really think you can manage just a bit more objectivity ... if you really try just once in a while.

People keep giving Cliton a... (Below threshold)

People keep giving Cliton a passing grade on Leadership, when he failed more miserably then most any president in history in that department.

Fact: The first president in history where Boy Scouts and their parents requested that his name be REMOVED from the Eagle Scout certificates. This because, as a LEADER, he set sucha bad example for the movement.

If that doesn't qualify for an F-, I don't know what does.

Bush - I could have used someone not talking about rewriting the consitution to amnesty illegal immigrants - oh wait, that didn't work now did it? Still minus for that.

As for Barry, he is headed right down the list towards worst president of all time. Just stand back and watch.

Oh, and the comment above trying to blame Bush for the GM and Crysler bailouts? Check history, Crylser did get bailed out once before. Who was president back then? Nixon? And Crysler repaid those loans under Iacoca.

But now Barry wants to take over the car builders. Hmm, let's ask the USSR how that has worked out in the past......

DJ: I, and some of the othe... (Below threshold)

DJ: I, and some of the others, have written how we disagree with your grading and offered specifics. You ignore the comments and go straight into knee-jerk insult mode. Is there anybody who disagrees* with you who you haven't insulted?

* and I'm referring to real disagreements, not petty spats like whether Bush should have an 'A' or an 'A+' in defense.

Mycroft: it was Carter, not... (Below threshold)

Mycroft: it was Carter, not Nixon (link). are you suggesting it was okay for Bush to do so because it happened before?

and you don't have to look to Russia, look at United Airlines when it gave substantial equity and board seats (I think it was plural) to the employees only to fall into bankruptcy not too long thereafter.

So if the Sears Tower and E... (Below threshold)

So if the Sears Tower and Empire State Building are destroyed by terrorists, will you retroactively downgrade your opinion of Bush's handling of national defense, DJ? Or will that also be Clinton's fault?

The libs answer: sola... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

The libs answer: sola ad hominem!

accusing your critics of <i... (Below threshold)

accusing your critics of sola ad hominem instead refuting their disagreements with your grades? Priceless.

Me: Bush and Obama should have the same grade for Defense. DJ: sola ad hominem.

History: A - Bush knows ... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

History: A - Bush knows history and it shows.

It sure does just as 'Ignorance is bliss'.

A year after his "Axis of Evil" speech before the U.S. Congress, President Bush met with three Iraqi Americans, one of whom became postwar Iraq's first representative to the United States. The three described what they thought would be the political situation after the fall of Saddam Hussein. During their conversation with the President, Galbraith claims, it became apparent to them that Bush was unfamiliar with the distinction between Sunnis and Shiites.

Galbraith reports that the three of them spent some time explaining to Bush that there are two different sects in Islam--to which the President allegedly responded, "I thought the Iraqis were Muslims!" and this was after he had made the decision to invade Iraq and set up an American style satrap state there with little advance planning or interest in the difficulties we would face.

Bush, the frat boy President, was proud of his lack of reading and intellect and C average, would be disappointed at Drummond giving him an A in history, whose own view he summed up "in the long run, we are all dead".

"Many people who met him were astonished by what they described as his "lack of inquisitiveness" and his general "passivity", compared to say Obama, whom Drummond gives a F for history, probably for being prescient and realistic about unilateralism, the war its costs and consequences.

Because for Drummond and Bush everything is true.. but the facts.

Steve, let's look at the <b... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

Steve, let's look at the actual comments here and see who's tossing out insults:

Comment 3 - Jakes offers no grades, instead claims I am not honest;

Comment 4; hyperbolist offers no grades, instead says I "fell off the turnip truck";

Comment 9; I criticize the behavior as childish (which it is);

Comment 10; mantis offers no grades, but claims my daighter is more mature than I am;

Comment 17; Unrepentant Democrat falsely claims I called his side names, proving he missed what was really written. he also fails to offer any grades;

Comment 19; Steve sturm offers no grades at that time, instead falsely claims I will respond by insulting him;

Everyone else sees the trend. With the exception of Steve Sturm's grudging partial comments attacking Bush (and no real attention to the topic), no one on the left has even tried to defend Obama's policies and actions so far, or address the topic in substance. Instead, they have focused insults and attacks on me, all the while whining dishonestly about me somehow insulting them. The distinction between criticizing behavior and insulting the person is lost on then, as is the meaning of ad hominem, which is most often used to distract from a losing argument by attacking the person rather than the substance.

What's most ironic to me, is that if you ask around, I am more inclined to give props to honest and intelligent liberal commentary than most writers here. Ask Paul Hooson, for example. But hey, if all you have is bitterness and bile, well that just helps my argument, so it's no problem for me.

Why give them anything DJ?<... (Below threshold)

Why give them anything DJ?
They deserve nothing.
Feed them bitterness and bile.
It's what they spew.
Spew it back, they don't like it.
You know, they can dish it out, but they can't take it.
I may be here more, to give.
It's fun to give it back to them.
After 8 years of their guile and bile
Its good to turn this table.
A good debate? sure if they want.
Wanna spew?
Can do.

B.H. Obama Economics... (Below threshold)
retired military:

B.H. Obama
Economics: F -
History: F -
Defense: F+ -
Constitution: F-
Judiciary: - soon to be F
Leadership: F-

G.W. Bush
Economics: C -
History: A
Defense: A-
Constitution: C
Judiciary: A
Leadership: B-

W.J. Clinton
Economics: A-
History: C
Defense: F+
Constitution: F
Judiciary: F
Leadership: D

And I quote "... readers wi... (Below threshold)

And I quote "... readers will also grade other commentors bias..." Was I mistaken to have included you in the group whose bias readers got to judge?

And you're now criticizing #10 for responding in kind to your #9 and criticizing #17 for the same sin. If you want to keep the discussion civilized, you shouldn't stoop to the level you criticize others for being at.

As for the grades (with absolutely no bias at all):

Economics: All three get failing marks, Clinton and Bush for what they did and Obama for what he is trying to do. (clue: Presidents ought to stay out of the economy, they do more harm than good by meddling. p.s. DJ, how's that for a leftist?)

History: I don't care, an irrelevant standard to judge.

Defense: All three get 'D's, Clinton for not taking terrorism seriously, Bush for doing the same for 8 months and then for his idiotic plan to save the world by bringing democracy to the world, and Obama for what is likely (admittedly only my guess) for what will happen as a result of his policies.

Constitution: Bush and Clinton 'D's, they both read it as they wanted to in order to implement their policies, Obama an 'F', no explanation needed.

Judiciary: Clinton 'D', for stacking the courts with liberals, Bush a 'D', good marks for Alito and Roberts offset by his almost total lack of support for other nominees, Obama, a pre-emptive 'D', for the same reason as Clinton

Leadership: Clinton, a 'B', like him or not, he generally came across as in charge (he would have gotten an 'A' but for the Lewinsky affair, a good leader wouldn't have left himself exposed), Bush a 'D', he inspired no one and never came across as being informed, intelligent and engaged in any setting other than a Teleprompter-aided speech and he was AWOL on any number of issues (what substantive comments did he ever make on the economy during the last months?), Obama an 'A', as the public likes him and generally gives him and his policies high marks (a leader is judged in large part by the extent to which people rally behind him).

I'm judging Leadership on m... (Below threshold)

I'm judging Leadership on many facets. Leadership is no one thing right, it takes charisma, intelligence and principle to be a good leader among other things. Some might have one or the other in qualities but few people have all the cards in that deck. This was to explain my leadership grading.

DJ Drummond, It is difficul... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

DJ Drummond, It is difficult to talk about a report card about Presidents in a sound bite comment without revealing one's overall political thinking.

But for you to give Obama D's to F's seems very harsh, considering Bush's approval rating for the last year or so was in the 20's, one of the lowest in history, while Obama has one of the highest of early term Presidents in the 60's, especially when considering that we are in a deep recesion. Afterall it is fundamental to a politician and his party in a democracy that he remain in touch with his electorate.

But Obama is definitely not a socialist, far from it. He surrounds himself with too many rich Wall Street tycoons, even if Democract, for my liking. He is on the contrary propping up high capitalism. It is the bankers that are on bended knees, chanting systemic risk, holding up the US treasury to continue their exclusive and privileged way of life. If he let the banking sector fail, we would have the end of Wall Street, and then we could start employee cedit unions, coops or a few state owned and run banks. That might then be your fearful drift towards socialism or social democracy, or something as anathema as considering a single payer health system, that even Margaret Thatcher strongly supported.

Further, I don't know why you give Obama a F for history. Nixon had an historical summit with Mao, and Reagan arms treaty summits with some of the Soviet Union leaders and did extensive back door dealings with Iran, even sold them expensive weapons in exchange for freeing hostages. Were those Republican Presidents undermining American security?

Confrontation or the Bush doctrine or preemptive war has not worked (where has it worked- Iraq certainly isn't and won't be grateful?) and being the world's policeman is very costly to the American taxpayer and its image in Gitmo and Abu Grahib.

Surely the fact that the entire world, including conservative gorvernments in Canada, Germany and France who had delt with the Bush administration, at one stroke, were unanamious in welcoming new leadership/direction in the US, genuinely at the G20 summit, for instance, is a very good sign. The world is now so interdependent and flat that one country can no longer dominate and we need international agreements and co-existence.

Bush was starting to get the message, but it was too late, and he had Cheney the master of the old angry politics, as his spokesman, who would never change.

GW Bush was challenged when... (Below threshold)

GW Bush was challenged when the world trade centers came down and the financial district closed shop. The airlines were shut down for 3 plus days. Yet GW and his team rallied wallstreet and lead the economy to a great comback.

GW in 2005 wanted more oversight of Freddie and Fannie May, but the dems shut that down.

Gw in 2005 wanted to reform and fix Social Security but the dems shut it down stating there is no problem

GW never wavered in his desire to keep us safe. Not once. That is leadership with an A.

Early for Obama, but his releasing of the CIA memoes for political points lacked leadership, his "Apology" tour of Europe showed great weakness. Obama's pledging to cut earmarks yet signs a bill for of so much waste. Obama campaigned against the debt but trippled the debt before his first 100 days. An F on economy. ww

s strum - "and we haven... (Below threshold)

s strum - "and we haven't been attacked since Obama took over, it is definitely biased to give Bush an 'A' for Defense and Obama a 'D'. "

What "WE" doesn't include merchant seaman hijacked on the high seas?

A few shots to the head certainly cleared the problem temporarily but we haven't heard jack shit from the WH how to curb the problem and preventing it from happening in the future.

Marc: we haven't been attac... (Below threshold)

Marc: we haven't been attacked at home. Americans have been attacked overseas ever since I can remember, usually with little response by whomever was President at the time.

Bush was a great President ... (Below threshold)

Bush was a great President - except for being a murderer, liar, cheat and failure.

Except for those four things, HE WAS GREAT!!!

Don't bother responding. We own the microphone these days anyway and no one cares about your opinion.

On Defense, Drummond gives ... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

On Defense, Drummond gives Bush an A except for a few flubs as he calls it - would that be 9/11 and Iraq with Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary , and Obama a D with the same Secretary of Defense as Bush gets a A with. Of course Gates has a higher opinion of Obama than Bush, so it is wonder Drummond didn't give Gates or Obama an F now? Could it be Drummond is so hopelessly prejudiced that this whole exercise is futile.

By the way, to change the subject, curious as what Drummond would give Roger Clemens for his report card.. E as in Evasive now, since during Clemen's sworn testimony Drummond was a fairly robust defender of Clemens.

Barack:F,F,F,F,F,F... (Below threshold)



Bill: F,F,F,F,F,F, bonus category (inappropriate relations): A

GWB: Economics: C
History: C
Support of Israel: B
Judiciary: A
Defense: C (Needed to get the military out of Iraq after the capture of Saddam)

[ comment removed becaus... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

[ comment removed because it was a duplicate, also because the commenter continues to prove himself unable to understand basic concepts of rhetoric and social commerce - in other words the common liberal of the Obama era]

LOL- we're in Hitler's Germ... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

LOL- we're in Hitler's Germany. Heil Maggie!!!!!! You going to lead a movement to burn liberal books next?

UD, The editor of th... (Below threshold)

The editor of this thread deleted your
comments, nice of you to make assumptions with
out any proof.
Heil Unrepentant Democrat!

U.D. - "we're in Hitler'... (Below threshold)
DJ Drummond:

U.D. - "we're in Hitler's Germany"

Props for the accidental accuracy, sir. The National Socialist Workers Party is the translation of the party name for which Nazi was a convenient moniker. Therefore there is some basis for suggesting that the present political climate is akin to Germany 1936.

As for the deletion, you are as usual wrong on all counts:

- I did the deletion, not Maggie
- It was not for you being Jewish or Communist or Homosexual, the usual motives for which Nazis sent someone to the camps, but because you jumped the shark one time too many
- The Nazis murdered people and confiscated their property. Since the Internet was created a couple generations after World War 2, I feel safe in suggesting that the Nazis were not into cleaning up liberal whine-spittle on blogs. There is reason to believe, however, that they would suppress bloggers
- There is no constitutional right to spew in a blog. At some point even you will have to come to terms with consequences for stepping over the line too often
- Before you go into your 'help help I'm being repressed' schtick again, remember that it was only funny in Monty Python because of its inherent absurdity. When you do it you just sound droll and juvenile.

My bad - apologies to Maggi... (Below threshold)
Unrepentant Democrat:

My bad - apologies to Maggie. None owed to DJ.

Mycroft: it was Carter, not... (Below threshold)

Mycroft: it was Carter, not Nixon (link). are you suggesting it was okay for Bush to do so because it happened before?

and you don't have to look to Russia, look at United Airlines when it gave substantial equity and board seats (I think it was plural) to the employees only to fall into bankruptcy not too long thereafter.

29. Posted by steve sturm | April 30, 2009 5:06 PM | Score: -7 (7 votes cast)

I was trying to do it from memory, and I knew it was in that era. I accept your correction on Carter vs Nixon.

At the time the money was given, I was against the idea. I was also surprised when it worked, so go figure.

So, since it worked the first time, there is some justification for another go around with Crysler. Was I for the bailouts this time? No, not this time either.

You airline example is even a better example then mine, but they both work.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy