Does it strike you well-informed readers as odd that 68% of Americans blame George W. Bush fo the economy? After all, the 2008 economic meltdown happened with only a few short months of the Bush presidency left, but has been lovingly sustained by Barack Obama for the last three-and-a-half years. Why aren’t Americans blaming him?

Oh, but they are. The problem is the question itself.

Americans are hearing “Which President was in charge when things fell apart?” After all, the meek and conciliatory George W. Bush, ever-mistaken that throwing bones to liberal politicians will result in popularity, certainly should have seen this coming. There was, arguably, much he could have done to stop the severity of the meltdown. He could have pushed even harder for Freddie and Fannie to be stopped; at the least, he could have been better at selling us on the necessity of bailouts.

So when Americans are asked who is to blame, George Bush or Barack Obama, they might be treating it as a history question.

A more enlightening question: would you say that George Bush or Barack Obama did a better job understanding and managing the economy?

Bet you get a different point spread.

The Czar of Muscovy

Божію Поспѣшествующею Милостію Мы, Дима Грозный Императоръ и Самодержецъ Всероссiйскiй, цѣсарь Московскiй. The Czar was born in the steppes of Russia in 1267, and was cheated out of total control of all Russia upon the death of Boris Mikhailovich, who replaced Alexander Yaroslav Nevsky in 1263. However, in 1283, our Czar was passed over due to a clerical error and the rule of all Russia went to his second cousin Daniil (Даниил Александрович), whom Czar still resents. As a half-hearted apology, the Czar was awarded control over Muscovy, inconveniently located 5,000 miles away just outside Chicago. He now spends his time seething about this and writing about other stuff that bothers him.