Skip to main content

Poll - the public now approves of George W. Bush, sure, when he's out of office...

A big story is being made about a new Gallup poll which shows that more people now have a favorable view (49%) than an unfavorable view (46%) of former President George W. Bush. It's the first time since 2005 that this has occurred. In my opinion, this is about as big of a story as the fact I wrote with a pen at one point today.

First thing's first, Gallup has about as solid a reputation over the past year as Mitt Romney does of smooth-talking women.

Secondly, toward the end of his presidency, Gallup had then President Bush at 32% approval. Other polls had him even lower than that.

Lastly, Bush has been out of office now for 4.5 years. Given the fact less than one-third of the people in this country approved of the job he was doing as president toward the very end of his tenure, I'm sure there are a great number of people, myself included, whom have a much more favorable view of him out of the Oval Office than in it.

How much easier is it to compliment a person who used to drive you crazy at work when they're working elsewhere?

Talking about someone who drives you crazy at work: "I hate him! He screws everything up! The rest of us have to do our own jobs and find a way to do his also! He's driving me crazy!"

Talking about someone who used to drive you crazy at work, but works elsewhere now: "Yeah, I agree. He was a really nice guy. I kind of miss him sometimes. Oh well. I hope things are going well for him."

It's not like this country had a sudden epiphany and forgot about: 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, NSA, the wars in the Middle East, the lies leading us to wars in the Middle East, the Great Recession, going from a surplus to a huge debt, etc. No, it's nothing like that. Many people have simply forgiven the former president of his numerous mistakes and decided they like him much more as a painter of animals and himself than as the President of the United States.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/george-w-bush-rating_n_3423982.html?utm_hp_ref=politics&icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl2|sec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D327462

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"