Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini
Funny how drone bombings, gitmo, unconstitutional appointments, and mountains of debt arent considered fringe or lunacy (which I believe is defined by doing the same thing over and over).
I suppose you objected to those things when W. did them? To be consistent, I mean.
I simply don't accept the false dichotomy that some subscribe to that you either have to love or hate a particular President. TJ mistakes giving Presidents due respect and fair minded consideration for being swayed by the cult of personality. The bully pulpit, if used to further the public good is a great thing; however, performance and having a plan to address problems weighs much more heavily for me.
It's more complicated than simple partisan and/or ideological politics. In terms of approval, on a scale of 1-10 (1 is lowest, 10 highest)....this is how I'd rate the most contemporary Presidents:
Bush HW 7
Bush W 5-
Obama 6 (so far)
You see, my ratings have to do with whether or not the President has a plan to, and while serving executes policies that....effectively address the major issues of the day. To rank them, it would look like this:
1. Reagan (R)
2. Clinton (D)
3. Bush I (R)
4. Obama (D)
5. Ford (R)
6. Bush II (R)
7. Carter (D)
People like BEP, TJ, and other whack jobs mistake ideology for effective governance. Ideologues insist on their own way, a my-way-or-the-highway approach to politcs that is inconsistent with effective governance in a representative government such as ours--especially when it's coupled with a campaign finance structure that allows for far too much power to be concentrated in the hands of an arrogant and self-serving elite who don't give a shit about anyone but themselves.