They're both suckers...

obama is better.
as simple as that

To use the internet meme "Not sure if serious.:

Considering at least half of what your wrote... isn't true.

I think Hilary would of did the best job out of the four.

I mean, i get overstimating Bush's mistakes if you don't like him, but i don't get the exaggerating of what Obama did to the positive, that makes it sound like you like Bush and are sarcastically mocking obama supporters.

Right, and that i suppose is the brilliance of the ACA, because people like the "no denial based on pre-existing conditions" thing, even if they dislike other points, but the mandate is required to make that work without having a single-payer overhaul. So if the Republicans advance on the mandate, it will be easy to cast them as going back to a system that would deny millions with pre-existing conditions healthcare, which they can't get caught doing.

Essentially, the only way forward from this is to move closer to single-payer.

Oh my. I don't think people actually believe this, right?

I can tell one thing, you don't live in and around the Gulf and you certainly don't live in Louisiana.

Both Iraq and Libya involved regime change.  In this regard, Libya turned out much better than the Iraqi War.

Regardless of Bush's policies, political philosophy, and so forth which I disagree with a great portion of. I believe that he should have been impeached based of the violations and abuse of executive power he imposed on our government. I am still waiting for the supreme court case against Bush over the write ins he did during his presidency. Similar to when Bill Clinton was taken to the Supreme Court over line item vetos, George W. Bush wrote in sentences onto bills before signing them into law. It doesn't take an imagination that this process is equivalent to creating law and can be used to nullify laws as well. Our executive branch creating law. This is far worse than a line item veto and still has to be address by our judiciary. The specific law that Bush wrote in on that will probably be the one to bring this to court, unless something else has arrived over the years, is the bill that banned the use of torture by the United States where Bush wrote in a line that said "except in the interest of national defense" effectively reversing the legislative branch's power. Mixed with the patriot act there is no potential safety against being tortured by the United States government.

Bush should have been impeached and removed from office along with the unconstitutional decree of write ins. Bush wasn't the first president to do write ins, if I remember correctly the total number of write ins before bush were 40-60 about, Bush has to the last of my knowledge wrote in over 300 times.

I was trying to end up comparing the two, trying to see if there is ANY case that can be made by anyone that GW Bush was better than Obama in any way, and can argue that Obama has been worse of a president.  I tried to compare apples to apples, as much as possible.  I addressed issues that might be brought up.  So, the idea was overall, and individual areas.  Apparently the only are really anyone can debate would be over the deficit, and that is debated because there debate centers on the 2009's budget and who is responsible for it.  If you put it under GW Bush, then Obama hasn't run up the deficit more than Bush.  If you place it under Obama, then Obama has created a larger debt.

Go back, and you will see threads on here, and people have actually said Obama is THE WORST PRESIDENT EVER.

Using rounded, American deaths in Libya is around zero.  It also finished up fast also, and was more like Kosvo.