<p>Anyone watch it? I thought it was done quite well.</p>
<p>I sat in front of the TV like a kid watching the magic show.</p>
<p>Seriously, even though i don’t particularly agree with his policies, I thought it was a very well-written and dignified speech.</p>
<p>Agreed. I wish he had communicated this way more often during the last 8 years.</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - President Bush Makes Farewell Address to the Nation PT1](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg8hgr_h11M]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg8hgr_h11M)
[YouTube</a> - President Bush Makes Farewell Address to the Nation PT2](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8OtZ9nhNL8]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8OtZ9nhNL8)</p>
<p>I didn’t really agree with Bush too often on policies, but he is a nice guy and I do like his sense of humor.</p>
<p>Poor guy. It’s odd how I haven’t seen him on t.v. for a year.</p>
<p>^ do you ever watch the news?</p>
<p>lol…of course i do.maybe i should just rephrase that.</p>
<p>I agree with hawaiiboy, I usually do not agree with Bush’s policy but I do like his character. He served the toughest job in america, the president. When he was talking about avoiding isolationism, i was thinking of George Washington, when he encouraged isolationism and avoid foreign allies. </p>
<p>George Bush left the presidency with grace and honor. Bush may be considered a bad or horrible president to many people, but he is MY president. I pretty much grew up with Bush in the presidency.</p>
<p>All I can say is Thank You Mr. President for serving this wonderful country in good and bad times.</p>
<p>Good character? Bush mocked unemployed Americans recently, saying that he would never know how it feels and can’t do much for them…</p>
<p>^ I think its pretty much the truth… </p>
<p>He’ll never know how they feel, being as he is… and a president can’t do much to change the way the economic winds blow… </p>
<p>Obama’s going to have a tough job… the people have to realize that a president is not a miracle worker…</p>
<p>I thought it was extremely decent, which is a step up from most of the speeches he gives. It won’t stand out like Eisenhower’s speech, or any of the other great farewell addresses, but at least he didn’t make a fool of himself. Did anyone else get the impression that he was trying to defend himself and his policies the entire time?</p>
<p>Nothing Bush can say or do will erase what he’s done the past 8 years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Definitely. Obama admits that things will get worse before they get better. People can’t have high hopes and expect a quick cure to decades of problems.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t mean to offend, but this is why a President can never be unsuccessful. The automatic apotheosis of the President is a very real phenomenon.</p>
<p>As an aside, I do agree that Presidents generally don’t affect the economy much, but there is one notable exception. Wars cause recessions.</p>
<p>
I never considered myself particularly great with economics, but I did study it last year, and increased government spending (in this case, war) increase the GDP and so by definition take countries out of recession rather than put them in one. I think that the economic success immediately after WWI and during/after WWII demonstrate this. It’s just a theory, and I do agree that having a steadily increasing deficit every year doesn’t help matters.</p>
<p>^That’s a different kind of war. This war hasn’t increased production or spending nearly as drastically as those wars, and it has p*ssed off the international community, who we need to be happy to be ultimately sucessful in the age of globalization.</p>
<p>However, the war didn’t cause this recession. Dumb, cocky lending practices did, and those practices should have been stopped by the past administration or the one before. I’m not saying it’s all Bush’s fault, but he surrounded himself with a group of individuals who put corporate interests in front of individual (as in the public) interests. Which dates WAY back and is very, very bad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s during the war. After the war is another story. There was a recession from 1918-1921, and there was also one in the early 50’s after the Korean War.</p>
<p>The fact of the matter is that our country is worse off coming out of Bush’s presidency than it was going in…unemployment is rising (an extremely high unemployment rate will be the crushing blow of this recession), the economy is tanking, the government budget is running massive deficits, and entire industries are collapsing. Good bye Mr. Bush and good riddens.</p>
<p>^You obviously don’t know about the business cycle then. The economy stays in a tight pattern of peak, recession, trough, expansion, peak, etc. regardless of what a President does. The Congress would have to vote on several major overhauls before that pattern is disrupted. Hence why Clinton came out looking so good: Reagan’s unemployment reforms started booming at the end of his presidency, so of course Clinton took full credit for it. Towards the end of Clinton’s presidency the economy hit a peak, and stayed on a steady recession throughout the Bush presidency.</p>
<p>According to the data at the front and back of most Economics textbooks, the economy still has some recession left. Unless Obama REALLY screws up though, he’ll be in another expansion -> peak era. How convenient.</p>
<p>Btw, in terms of economics a surplus is just as bad as a deficit. While a deficit signifies a country overusing its resources, a surplus means the country isn’t making full use of its resources. It’s a delicate balance that is nearly impossible to maintain.</p>
<p>Of course, spending a significant chunk of the federal budget on interest payments isn’t a particularly good use of resources either.</p>