The first point is that the 'article' was hardly turned into a 'Bush bash fest'. In point of fact reply #1 started out in the typical JU manner of 'bashing' Obama and all things Democrat with the bald faced assertion that all top democrats are assholes that are somehow responsible for this 'bad economy' without a single shred of evidence to back up these assertions.

My response simply indicated that if you insist on contradicting the obvious intent of the OP which was to focus on the people actually affected by said bad economy as opposed to getting into the blame game then you should at least look a little further back than 2 months as to cause.

The second point is that I am not in any way 'defending' Obama. My point of posting the graph of National Debt as it correlates to presidential tenure was not only to point out how poorly our debt has fared under Republican leadership but to hold up the standard by which I measure *all* presidents, Obama included.

I can't predict the results of the Obama presidency on the basis of the first 60 days and neither can anyone else. At this point all that anyone can say is what they *think* those results will be and that leaves room for significant argument and legitimate difference of opinion. In 4 (or perhaps 8) years we'll have a much better basis to make an informed opinion although I do suspect that there will be significant room left for argument even then.

The other point that was made, that the president has absolutely nothing to do with how money is spent in this country, is absolutely ludicrous. I will grant that congress has a significant effect as well but I didn’t make up the chart that I presented, it’s easily found by even those with weak search skills, however I couldn’t find any similar breakdown of national debt as it correlates to congressional majority. That’s not to say that one doesn’t exist or that some folks here haven’t made up their own chart but I do find it interesting that no one bothered to post such a chart after making such a fuss over it.

The bottom line is that even though I will grant that there may be useful information in a graph of debt with respect to congressional majority there still is significant meaning in the graph that I posted and in 4 (or 8) years we’ll see how well Obama has fared and that will determine whether or not I’ll be willing to ‘defend’ him. Until then I have a ‘wait and see’ attitude.

[sarcasm]Maybe communism / monarchy isn't the problem at all. Maybe the fault lies with all of us, with our culture and apathy.[/sarcasm]

Yea... see, human nature, kinda a fixed thing. Blaming everyone because faulty and UNFAIR economic principles like communism bring economic ruin is downright stupid.

Mr. Bush 'inherited' a few things, too, but I don't recall any slack being cut.  People stopped demagoguing for a little while after 9/11, but his critics still call the recession he inherited after the dot-com bubble burst (on Clinton's watch) the 'Bush Recession'.  What goes around comes around.  If people insist on holding a single individual responsible for the state of the economy at any given point in time, when it is Congress which writes the laws and appropriates funds, so be it.

You are very quick to leap, mumble.  It was a play on words, hardly a 'bald-faced assertion.'  Get a sense of humor.

Charles, if you think children don't suffer from circumstance or their parents' poor choices you are crazy.  Adults can suck it up and deal.  Children do not deserve to. 

And FTR, Donna is a GIVER.  You are a TAKER.  I am shocked that you would try to condescend to her regarding this.

The instant his name is mentioned it's Bush bashing. In reality I gave him the benefit of the doubt for pretty much his entire first term. I certainly didn't vote for him but he was the duly elected president even though it did require the intervention of his father's supreme court to ensure it. But we've had a number of presidents that I didn't vote for that I still considered to be 'my' president. Heck, I even considered Nixon to be 'my' president. It wasn't until I became convinced that Bush had 'bald faced lied' to the American people to get us involved in an unnecessary war that I no longer considered him to be 'my' president.

The right holds Clinton in pretty much the same light as the rest of the country holds Bush. Clinton also lied to the American people however in his case it was over a simple matter of getting a hummer in the oval office, in Bush's case it was a matter of American soldiers losing their lives because of his lie.

You say I need to get a sense of humor, I say you need to get a life.

TW I think I know were Charles is coming from. I didn't realize how little money my parents had until I was much older, but regardless I had a great childhood. Ignorance is bliss and children are resilient. I don't think he was suggesting children deserve to suffer.

Mumble, your condescending BS knows no bounds.  And you still need to go buy a sense of humor somewhere.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm

[quote]Actually the "dot com" recession did not start until March 2001 which was clearly within Bush's first term which gives Bush the distinction of having two recessions during his tenure as president and unlike you I at least offer some evidence to back up my claims. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_08/b3871044.htm[/quote]

I am far from being a supporter of Bush's policies or successes of his administration, but the "Dot com" recession was being prepared during Clinton's mandate.

However, Clinton had left to Bush a thriving and strong budget to deal with the economical trouble ahead, and Bush managed to salvage everything. However, everything is a wreak now.

Apparently, anything bad that happens during the first 100 days of a new administration (certainly within the first 60) is 'inherited' - I'm just using the current standard.

Charles you need to understand children more if this is how you think!  Try going to talk to some children whose lives have been affected by the changes in their parents circumstances.  You live in a different world! I'm not just talking material things here.  This is more important to  you I guess so you see nothing else.

Thx Tex. This is what Charles does best,  I write an article, he finds everyway to make me look bad.  Even when I go on his threads to make comments. He gets some weird pleasure out of that I think!

But none of this relates to the point of the OP and I apologize for my part in derailing the thread.

Charles, for your information: http://neighbors.denverpost.com/viewtopic.php?p=720155

http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.asp?S=10045094

And do try to get a hold of this past Friday's 20/20. They did a program on how the economy is affecting children in our country.  I just like to "make mountains out of molehills".

Which two consecutive quarters was there in 2007 with negative growth in the GDP which would satisfy the definition of recession? (no need to answer, I know)

Now if we are going by bad feelings to define recession then I'd have to say things stated turning for the worse when Rep. lost control in 2006 and it got worse in 2008 since they have been in the majority. You milage may vary.

US GDP 1990 - 2008

Wikipedia as a credible source.... only if you need something to support your argument.

Come on FS it's practically child abuse if you take away a kids Play Station and kids without the latest sneakers are "dis-advantaged". There are probably billions of people in the world that wish they could be a poor person in the US. That don't make it right, but it's the truth.

BTW I like your optimism, keep it up! You provide the sunshine, I (and a few others) will provide the rain.

Where did this idea come from that wikipedia is not credible? Sometimes it gives pointless information, but I very rarely come accross something downright wrong.

Children suffer, but not the way you portray it. As I said, most kids are oblivious to what goes on in the world around them. My kids have no clue of the hard times we have been thru, as far as they are concerned they have lived a pretty decent life, because I have made sure they don't suffer the hardship I have had to endure to keep this family from ending up in the streets. Children may not deserve to go thru hard times but you need to wake up and realise that hardship is what makes a person stronger and keeping your kid in a bubble will deprive him of the education to learn to deal with the dificulties he will face as an adult. Your problem is you are a materialistic person who thinks people can't live without cars, TVs, video games and prime rib. Go live in my town in Puerto Rico for a few months and then come back to me and tell me if you think those kids in my town are suffering or are they simply living a basic life based on waht they have at the moment?

I am a taker? Hmmm, so explain to me what do I take?

Thank you Nitro, I admit I don't always express myself in a way that everyone can understand, but you pretty much caught my point.

Considering I have been a father of 2 for 10 years and have been an uncle of 7 for 18 years and was a child myself once with vivid memories of my childhood, I think I have plenty of understanding of children. I know more about children than you can ever imagine, asking children anything is like asking someone to admit they are wrong, you won't get a straight answer. You know what my 5 year old told my wife he would do if she had another baby and it was a girl? He said he would dump her in the garbage cause he wants a baby brother. Do you think I should take this 5 year old serious? This is not the first time I have heard comments like this from children, a common thing for children to say things that scare the hell out of ya but in reality it's simply ignorance and a misunderstanding of their choice of words.

You don't know what life I have lived. Once upon a time I had it all, as a child I had any toy I wanted and to me that meant having it all even though my parents were not rich, they just made good money and my father was good at managing it. As I grew older all that changed and I had to be happy with the cheap toys I got and you know what? I was. It is now that I am older that I am more ambitious and want more than I have, but I never suffered as a child except when my parents fought and eventually seperated. That situation, however, made me more of a man that I even was as I had to be the strong one and stand up to my dad and his stupid attitude and I had to get my mom away from him.

My child hood made me a better man. I may not be rich and I may not be good at managing my money. But those hard times tought me a lot and I am making sure my kids don't have to suffer the things I did suffer and that material stuff is just that. The only suffering my kids currently go thru is not always getting what they want but they eventually learn to deal with it and move on.

Forever, I have nothing against you. I think you are a kind and caring person with a big heart. We simply disagree on a lot of things and I like expressing my oppinions and defending them. I don't expect any nice comments from Tex since she has had a dislike for me since the first days I came to JU years ago. Her beef with my comment about calling our soldiers "our boys" (a comment made by many before and after me in many places) has had her panties in a bunch ever since. Tex is a nice person to but as oppose to having a difference of opinion with me, her comments are usually fueled by her dislike of me and I don't always pay attention to what she says. Oddly enough the avatars you both have are somewhat similar and had not noticed I replied to her comment and I thouht it was you even though the second line confused me, I though you were talking about yourself in 3rd person.

If I offended you in any way I apologize. I do get a kick out of debating, but not of making you look bad.

As Weird as this may sound, you are one of my favorite bloggers on JU. I like most of your articles.

Well if you examined the links, the chart from the US Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Wikipedia (which displays this blurb at the top of the article "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (March 2009)"), then you'll have a good example for future reference.

I'm not putting the site down, it has it's place. But it shouldn't be regarded as the final word. Opinions are as rife as facts there. In fact the college I attended dis-allowed Wikipedia research references due to "reliability" issues. It was a good policy as it helps thwart the "I read it on the internet so it must be true" mentality. People tend to take what sound plausible, logical, or in line with their beliefs and take it as the truth.

LOL, how would you know if I am materialistic or not?  That's funny.

Does a child notice if his house is being foreclosed on and he has to move in with grandma and grandpa?  Does a child notice if she has to eat foodbank foods instead of foods that were intentionally purchased because the family likes them?  Does the child notice if he has to wear high-water pants that he's outgrown because there's no spare cash to replace them?  Does a child notice mommy and daddy fighting over money?  Does a child notice the stress, the yelling, the crying in the house?  Does a child notice the car being repossessed?  Does the child notice the water being cut off? 

Children won't die being subjected to loss, poverty, and financial ruin but does it hurt them?  YES.  YES it does.  Children are capable of feeling cold when there's no power and hungry when there's no food.  They are capable of feeling scared when the atmosphere in the house is tense and angry.  They are also capable of feeling humiliated. 

It is so strange to me that anyone would argue that poverty and/or financial ruin don't affect a child.  As if children are subhuman and don't experience things the way adults do. 

And Charles, I don't actually dislike you as a person.  Surprise, surprise, huh.

Just in case, I didn't notice I was replying to you. I thought I was replying to forever. Had not seen you for a while and did not expect your comment, especially since both your avatars are somewhat similar.

Notice? Yes. Suffer? Maybe a little, but you talk as if every person who lost their jobs and or homes are somehow on the streets right now. Did you know that reports of children being homeless include children wwho live their their aunt/uncles and grandparents? I seriously doubt that all of the millions of people who lost their jobs in the recent year are homeless, out in the streets, with children, no food, no nothing. A few, maybe but lets not get carried away here.

It does hurt, but again, children are resilient. This economy is bad, but you people talk as if 50% plus of the population has gone to ruins and are now living in the streets. I don't know about you but I have not seen a rise in peopel standing in corners asking for money, I have not seen stories showing how homeless shelters have run out of space, I have not seen stories of the millions of children sleeping in cardboard boxes due to the economic issues we have today. If they are then shame on the Media for ignoring it, shame on us for allowing is and shame on the Govt for creating it.

I have witness first hand what it's like to not have food, not to have electricity and running water. Being close to ending up in the streets. I know what it's like to have to wear the same close year after year. I did it as a child, I have done it as an adult. I have seen how other families suffer the same problems, but in the end the children still smilled, they still acted like children, they seemed oblivious to the lifestyles they lived. I did as a child, so do my kids. Why? Because one learned to accept things the way they are and anything better becomes a gift. Children should never have to suffer, but then what is suffering to you? A child who doesn't get a Wii for Christmas? A child he wears the same shoes the following school year? A child who eats ramen everyday for dinner? Suffering is such a subjective word. Children in Africa suffer, the poorest people in this country live like kings compared to them.

We see things very differently Tex, one thing we have in common, we both want the best for all children. The great thing about this country is that we all have a chance to get things done our way. We may disagree on the methods, but the end results we seek are the same.

Past comments pointing to the opposite, but if I am wrong then I apologize for assuming.

but even the best is very subjective.  Some may think their children are doing without because they don't have a cell, an ipod, a Wii and every other thing that comes down the pike. 

Being poor isn't the worst thing.  Most of us grew up poor and made something of ourselves.  Our world today is much diff than it was 20-30 years ago when we were growing up.  The materialistic society we're in today is not necessarily a good thing.   Sometimes being rich can be a handicap as well.  It's greatly overrated for one thing.   Most of the kids I know that grew up with everything didn't fare so well into adulthood.  Ya, they had stuff and better opportunities but grew up to be complete losers with no ambition. 

Then I've seen, and there are countless stories to prove this, those coming out of poverty went on to do great things.  They learned to work hard and appreciated everything they got with their own hands. 

My husband had to put cardboard in his shoes because the soles would wear out. He went to bed hungry sometimes because they only had enough for one serving each to go around.  His glasses had tape on them because he was athletic and broke them frequently.   They had next to no extra money for anything.  Yet he grew up to be the hardest worker I've ever met.  When he was in H.S. he was the sole support for his family of 8 giving his mother all his grocery store clerking money until his father got on his feet.  The question for them was to either pay the mortgage or the light bill. 

When he went to school, he hitchhiked there on many occasions  because his mother had no car. 

His younger brothers and sisters fared much better because his father had a good job by then.  They have no appreciation for what their older siblings (three) went thru.  The younger three had a much diff life and much diff outcome but not necessarily did they turn out better than the three who had nothing.