LBJ deepened the Vietnam quagmire and filled the pockets of the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about a decade before. Nixon refused to leave Vietnam for the longest time, and help increase our dependency on oil products with his oil company-friendly policies. The economy got increasingly worse through all of these administrations, through Ford and then on through Carter.

Then came Reagan. You’re saying he did nothing to improve the economy? That he couldn’t have done anything?

By the time we get to Bush, we’re sliding again. But people are much more aware that the national debt is becoming a problem. Clinton raised taxes on wealthiest Americans, but greatly reduced deficits, and paid down the debt. I believe this was a major factor in driving the Clinton economy. All through Bush 1, I remember very well stock markets falling over “investor concerns about the national debt.”

Then comes Bush. I think we’ll need another few years before we can write that history. But I disagree with you only in part. I don’t think the president or the government can MAKE the economy, but through sound policies, investors gain reassurance and are more likely to get money flowing.

LBJ deepened the Vietnam quagmire and filled the pockets of the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about a decade before. Nixon refused to leave Vietnam for the longest time, and help increase our dependency on oil products with his oil company-friendly policies. The economy got increasingly worse through all of these administrations, through Ford and then on through Carter.

Then came Reagan. You’re saying he did nothing to improve the economy? That he couldn’t have done anything?

By the time we get to Bush, we’re sliding again. But people are much more aware that the national debt is becoming a problem. Clinton raised taxes on wealthiest Americans, but greatly reduced deficits, and paid down the debt. I believe this was a major factor in driving the Clinton economy. All through Bush 1, I remember very well stock markets falling over “investor concerns about the national debt.”

Then comes Bush. I think we’ll need another few years before we can write that history. But I disagree with you only in part. I don’t think the president or the government can MAKE the economy, but through sound policies, investors gain reassurance and are more likely to get money flowing.

Not to be the consummate nay-sayer, but when Chris Matthews describes his job as a journalist to as “My Job Is To Make Obama Presidency A Success,” perhaps everyone has had a bit too much of partisan kool-aid.

Regardless, at least in terms of economics, most Presidents merely preside (get it?) over the economy, rather than influence. Though that’s not to say poor policies can’t ruin, but when the market does well, it often does well because of itself, not the government.

Not to be the consummate nay-sayer, but when Chris Matthews describes his job as a journalist to as “My Job Is To Make Obama Presidency A Success,” perhaps everyone has had a bit too much of partisan kool-aid.

Regardless, at least in terms of economics, most Presidents merely preside (get it?) over the economy, rather than influence. Though that’s not to say poor policies can’t ruin, but when the market does well, it often does well because of itself, not the government.

WHAM SARCASM SCUD MISSILE!

Aleric: Similar statements were made prior to Clinton’s presidency–one of the most popular presidents ever, who presided over eight years of growth and prosperity. I think that’s a more apt comparison–Clinton without the personal foibles. A disciplined White House. A president not afraid to be intellectual. Someone who can give the equivalent of the JFK “man on the moon” speech in regards to energy and finally get this country away from using oil–something that’s been long overdue. And, as I said before, a president who can serve as a role model.

Am I prepared to be disappointed? Sure. But for now I remain optimistic about the future of our country–something I haven’t experienced in over a decade.

WHAM SARCASM SCUD MISSILE!

Aleric: Similar statements were made prior to Clinton’s presidency–one of the most popular presidents ever, who presided over eight years of growth and prosperity. I think that’s a more apt comparison–Clinton without the personal foibles. A disciplined White House. A president not afraid to be intellectual. Someone who can give the equivalent of the JFK “man on the moon” speech in regards to energy and finally get this country away from using oil–something that’s been long overdue. And, as I said before, a president who can serve as a role model.

Am I prepared to be disappointed? Sure. But for now I remain optimistic about the future of our country–something I haven’t experienced in over a decade.

Though if 90% of people approved of Bush at some point, and now like 60% or more disapprove, that means that like 90% of the people who disapprove of Bush are flip-floppers. WHAM LOGIC BOMB.

Though if 90% of people approved of Bush at some point, and now like 60% or more disapprove, that means that like 90% of the people who disapprove of Bush are flip-floppers. WHAM LOGIC BOMB.

Ralph Nader and Ross Perot will have plenty of time over the next year to watch a new HBO documentary, etc., etc., etc.

Happy?

Ralph Nader and Ross Perot will have plenty of time over the next year to watch a new HBO documentary, etc., etc., etc.

Happy?