A few disjointed thoughts that came to me while reading this article - I don't think that Bush was a bad guy. Especially at the beginning and end of this official presidency, I look back and see a guy who was intent on working on maintaining (at the beginning) and improving (at the end) the domesitc economy. When I think about the middle, I see Bush being shoved aside by his VP and the administration being taken over by a certain cohort. But, before 11 SEP 01 he was the face and had the momentum and in the last year, he just blew his staff off. He just wanted to be a caretaker president and keep the economy humming. I don't envy Obama's situation. He is getting caught up even more so between the rock of massive unemployment and the hard place of justifiying spending on other programs when so many are out of work. I am no stranger to criticism of his policies, and I thought both his and Bush's stimulus plans were poorly thought out, but seeing numbers like this says to me that attacking him is like attacking the boy with his finger in the dike. He may not be stopping much, but he's doing what he can. There are several other fronts where I think he is letting himself get distracted, but on the economy and employment, I don't think anybody would stand by idly while these kinds of numbers blossomed. I fear for the US. It has been some time since I finished my degree, but I remember a thing or two about disaffected participants in society hand how they are a prime breeding ground for internal strife. I remember reviewing population and employment rates and seeing what I argued was not just correlation, but causation, among the rates of unemployed and unmarried young men in the middle east and a rise in both extremist suooprt as well as a willingness to engage in violence. I remember applying that analysis to plot movement within China. I wonder if that same theory could be applied here. And what does that mean for us?