November 10th, 2010
04:18 PM ET

Two years later, do you ever miss Pres. Bush?


George W. Bush waves while signing copies of his new memoir, 'Decision Points' at a Borders Books in Dallas. (PHOTO CREDIT: Tom Pennington/GETTY IMAGES)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

George Bush is out hawking a new book, and suddenly the former president is popping up all over the place, from broadcast news interviews to Oprah's couch.

Two years later, it seems worth comparing the former occupant of the Oval Office to the current one.

Howard Kurtz writes in his Daily Beast column that the contrast between presidents Bush and Obama in recent appearances could hardly be sharper. Kurtz calls it the Decider versus the Agonizer.

Bush, as always, talks in those short, declarative sentences and appears sure of himself - even on weighty issues like waterboarding, Saddam and WMDs. On the other hand, Kurtz writes that President Obama's "finely rendered prose" and meandering around any topic makes him sound like a think tank analyst.

Kurtz points out that Bush doesn't have nearly as much on the line here, except maybe some image rehab. He compares the man who approved torture to the man who tortures himself.

After eight years of President Bush, it felt like most of the country couldn't wait to be rid of him. "Bring 'em on," "Wanted dead or alive," and "I'm the decider," had gotten on everyone's nerves. Much of America welcomed the more intellectual and eloquent Barack Obama with open arms. But the new love affair is shaping up as a bit of a one night stand.

Forty-five percent of those surveyed in a recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll say Bush was a better president, compared to 47 percent who feel that way about President Obama.

A year ago, only 34 percent thought Bush had been a better president, compared to 57 percent for Mr. Obama.

At this point, the trend is not President Obama's friend.

Here’s my question to you: Two years later, do you ever miss President Bush?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


November 10th, 2010
04:15 PM ET

Why is number of childless women at all-time high?

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

The number of American women without children is at an all-time high.
[cnn-photo-caption image=http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/11/10/art.pregnancy.test.jpg caption=""]
A recent report by the Pew Research center shows one in five women between the ages of 40 and 44 were childless in 2008 - that's an 80 percent increase from the 1970s.

This is a phenomenon that's being seen across all racial and ethnic groups, and most education levels. White women are the most likely not to have children; but childless rates are growing more quickly for blacks, Hispanics and Asians over the last decade.

Researchers say part of the reason behind all this is people are waiting longer to get married and have kids.

Experts tell AOL Health that people are freer and enjoying their lives more - doing things like traveling, shopping and eating out. All of which are much easier to do without a baby in the picture.

They also say many women are delaying getting pregnant because they can't find someone they want to have a child with - they're either very picky or very educated.

Also in the last 30 years, contraception has gotten better and there are improved job opportunities for women. Research shows there's less pressure from society now to be a mom, and the decision to have a child is seen as an individual choice.

And don't forget about money. Especially in tough economic times like these and with high unemployment, many people may feel they're not in the financial position to have children.

Here’s my question to you: Why is the number of childless women at an all-time high?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?


Filed under: Children