The MSM doesn't mention that the congress's approval rating is 17%.

One could I suppose say that Bush was an underachiever, compared to Miss Nancy and her brood. AFter all, he's been in office nearly eight years and she and her sorry lot not quite two, and they're five points below him.

me thinks, the story was about W and not the congress.. underachiever what an understatement.

History will be kind to George W. Bush.

It won't be unkind to Nancy Pelosi or this Congress...it just won't even bother to deal with them.

Only the most partisan believe that history will be kind to Bush. The icing on the cake for his administration is the passing of this disastrous bailout that will haunt this country for the next decade. I also find it interesting that many are unable to discuss the short comings of Bush, without mentioning Pelosi and company. Bush's lackluster record stands by itself. His major accomplishments will be the appointing of two worthy justices and that is about it. One can moan and groan about Obama, but the outcome of this election will be a direct result of the past 8 years of a failed administration.

Of course Bush would get a cool reception in Midland. What would one expect? There has been a lot of water under the bridge.

Over in Odessa, the Presidential Museum had to erect a fence around the Bush House exhibit to keep citizens from burning it - again.

How suave and debonair, how trendy and elite, yet also original and unique you must feel to find another chance to bash Bush. I'll admit I am not wild or happy about the bail out or several other social issues he tried to effect. Standing firm on the wars, and the tax cuts balance out the stupid populist stuff. Also, I think it is appropriate to mention congress, because half his negative press is blame he absorbs for a supposedly conservative congress spending our money like drunken Democrats. Harry and Nancy are just plain obstructionist and pathetic.

W may not be Reagan, but I would not give him a failing grade either.

In Germany today, Adolf Hitler has a higher approval rating than George W. Bush has in the United States.

Show me .

That first appeared in Der Speigel several months ago and has since was picked up by the various wire services.

There are no similarities between these events other than that they involved Bush and Midland.

The event in January 2001 was a planned, advertised, public event at a set place at a set time.

October 2008 is a motorcade, at an unknown time, along an unannounced route, to a private party.

I actually witnessed the motorcade, but not because I intended to, it just passed by my house around 1:00 while I was out looking at the lawn trying to decide if I should mow this weekend. I suppose that makes me part of the "smattering of small crowds".

The visit looked to me like it got plenty of local publicity. All the televisions and newspapers promoted it.

Turnout at the party was termed "not what we had hoped for".

Anonymous , If you're getting your information from "Der Speigel" to make informed decisions , may I recommend a more up-to-date source ?

Weekly World News .

Bat Boy et al .

Der Speigel's approval rating of George Bush was stated at 4% and was only mentioned in an article trying to tie OUR president to the tsunamis that occurred in Asia this spring and summer !

(I am supposing our weather machines have been taken over by Carl Rove and Bat Boy under the orders of George Bush to instill terror in the hearts of Germans..and anyway..When has this rag EVER given our president a decent break ?)

http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/2004/12/index.html

No, Der Speigel did not even mention President Bush. It only gave the approval rating of Adolf Hitler in today's environment among the German population. That figure was compared to other world leaders, past and present, in their respective countries by the Associated Press.

As I recall, Hitler was 31 percent in Germany, and Bush was in the mid 20's in United States.

In reading foreign newspapers and magazines, Der Speigal is the most influential in Europe with over 1.5 million paid subscriptions. It is also the most widely cited magazine in the world.

I am paid to do research. I do not make decisions or form opinions. I just write reports on what others are publishing.

If you merely rely on using Google from you home computer, you are missing a lot.

If you read or listen to only the media you personally like, you are only going to get part of the story.

If you actually read and know much about it off the top of your head, you would surely know that it is spelled Spiegel, not Speigel. The order of the e and i when pared in Deutsch changes the pronunciation of the word. Nobody in the world would know what you were quoting if you actually pronounced it as "Der SpeIgel".

It should be noted that most European magazines, even some of the conservative English rags, had ZERO love for George W. Bush long before Iraq, Afghanistan or 9/11. The European vilification of GWB started in January 2001, the American soon started, and I am convinced that it has made things more difficult for the administration and the nation at large.

Thanks Bob , should'a noticed that when I was checking out the links .

Anonymous, can you really be so dense as to present this "statistic" as an indictment of Bush without appreciating that it can ONLY be seen as an indictment of a German nation more than 30% of whose citizens have a favorable view of ADOLF HITLER???? The statistic itself may not be ironic, but your citing it sure is.

The media in this country is just pitiful. There is no respect for objectivity at all anymore.

Even the mighty Ospurt endorsed a "negative piece" about McCain when he wouldn't come to Midland.

Now, I admit that McCain deserved a shellacking after that. But, the rebuke he received in our local paper is nothing compared with the thrashing he is about to take at the hands of B.H.O.

Maybe the better comparison, with respect to approval ratings, is to look up the numbers on Michael Jackson, and compare them to Cheney's.

Bob, I did call my friend and told him about his spelling mistake, just in case he misses this blog today.

You do make a good point about GWB's rock bottom popularity in Europe making things more difficult for the administration.

I would like to see McCain speak more to his plan of changing our image in Europe. Under his new leadership we really need back away from the Bush Doctrine. That would do wonders in itself.

Obama and McCain each would encounter an image of the US that Europe projects on us because it wants that image. It is subject to the Continental mood.
In 2000 Europe was generally miffed at the US because of Clinton not agreeing to Kyoto. And there was the long running use of the USA as a scapegoat for European political and economic failures. So they started despising Bush from the get go, but then they got carried away.

Euro media is still different than our own, much more partisan, though openly, unashamed and activist.