So you admit that Dubya was one giant mistake?

Is Obama repeating Bush's mistakes? Yes, he can

This headline brought to you from the title writer for "I am America and So Can You."

FTA:

In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise, but it was the least important.

Dignity? In Bush's White House? I think not you delusional hack.

Sure, everyone is an armchair President

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, famously said in November. "This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."



Indeed, Mr. Emanuel. Indeed.

(In all fairness, I think Bush and Congress ran over us after 9/11, too, albeit in a far different fashion.)

The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

I thought one of them was black too, I forget which one.

nekom: 40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

I thought one of them was black too, I forget which one.

No, no, no, that was Bill Clinton.

Everybody knows Bush didn't make any mistakes. Except for trading Sammy Sosa. And he's apologized for that one.

40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

And one can read (a teleprompter).

nekom: 40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

I thought one of them was black too, I forget which one.

It's twoo ! It's twoo !

Nabb1: "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste," Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, famously said in November. "This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before."



Indeed, Mr. Emanuel. Indeed.

(In all fairness, I think Bush and Congress ran over us after 9/11, too, albeit in a far different fashion.)

You just had to go all Reichstag on us, didn't you?

Also every time Obama has a pause midthought while talking he makes that Predator sound.

40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

Which is, of course, why Bush's supporters have so vitriolically and vehemently denounced and worked against Obama's campaign, election and work thus far.

the_be_sharps: 40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary.

And one can read (a teleprompter).

Oh, a lot more than one.

40below: The only difference between Bush and Obama is that Obama has a bigger vocabulary functioning cerebral cortex.

Changed that for you.

coyote71: You just had to go all Reichstag on us, didn't you?

Well, old Rahmbo served up a hanging slider and left it over the fat part of the plate...

Besides, DC has now gone all Reichstag on us twice in one decade. The first time, they gutted the Bill of Rights, and this time they are looting the public treasury (except all that was left there was a note from Dubya that said "IOU a gajillion dollars. LOL")

the article was an interesting comparison to the "stiuation" each prez came into office with, and how both have pot holes ahead that both will probably step in (or have stepped in).

that is all- not a Obama is crap! article.

/what am I thinking, this Fark, this thread will explode with attackers and defenders. LOL

newaddict: /what am I thinking, this Fark, this thread will explode with attackers and defenders. LOL

I RTFA, and it was pretty evenhanded, but I think I've come to expect that 90% of the posters in a green lit politics article thread around here treat the headline as a speed bump on the road to a poo flinging contest and don't even bother to read the article.

LegacyDL: Also every time Obama has a pause midthought while talking he makes that Predator sound.

lutz

So Obama is opening more secret prisons, taken more vacation time than any previous president, started an needless war with a brown nation, and removed more rights from the constitution?

Another accidental polarizer, another crisis-exploiting presidency, another well-intentioned overreach -- all, perhaps, to be followed by another public backlash as the promise of consensus is broken and the center once again proves elusive: These are the last things the country needs. The hardest part of being an ambitious president at a moment of crisis and opportunity is contriving not to overshoot. After 2002, Bush never rose to the challenge of moderation. Can Obama?

If only the question didn't need asking.

That was interesting to read, but the comparison is stretchier than a fat chick's bike shorts.

Nabb1: newaddict: /what am I thinking, this Fark, this thread will explode with attackers and defenders. LOL

I RTFA, and it was pretty evenhanded, but I think I've come to expect that 90% of the posters in a green lit politics article thread around here treat the headline as a speed bump on the road to a poo flinging contest and don't even bother to read the article.

Well... it doesn't help when Subby already tossed a steaming pile with the headline.

absoluteparanoia: So Obama is opening more secret prisons, taken more vacation time than any previous president, started an needless war with a brown nation, and removed more rights from the constitution?

two posts and my wild defender, waiting on a attacker.......

newaddict: the article was an interesting comparison to the "stiuation" each prez came into office with, and how both have pot holes ahead that both will probably step in (or have stepped in).

that is all- not a Obama is crap! article.

/what am I thinking, this Fark, this thread will explode with attackers and defenders. LOL

I got a little sidetracked when the author said that Bush kept his promise of "restoring dignity to the White House."

How? By not having sex with interns? By making sure that all men that step into the Oval Office are wearing a jacket and tie? Are those his litmus tests for a dignified office?

Lando Lincoln: How? By not having sex with interns? By making sure that all men that step into the Oval Office are wearing a jacket and tie? Are those his litmus tests for a dignified office?

He restored dignity to the Oval Office by leaving it on vacation for extended periods of time.

FTA: In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise

I stopped reading right there.

Lando Lincoln: By making sure that all men that step into the Oval Office are wearing a jacket and tie?

And wasn't there a pic of him jacketless in the OO?

OMG TELEPROMPTER MEGADITTOS!

Keep shooting GOP, you'll hit something eventually. Maybe it won't be your foot this time.

Repeating past mistakes...isn't that the definition of being conservative?

/As opposed to making new ones, which is a liberal

Code_Archeologist: Well... it doesn't help when Subby already tossed a steaming pile with the headline.

True. Upon second glance, that is a bit much. It sort of lost it's effect on me after reading the article.

In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise,

Yeah. I stopped right there too.

And it was hard for me to continue past
Ross Douthat of The Atlantic asked that question in a smart Wall Street Journal article

FTFA In 2002, Bush and his party seemed right for their moment. The other party appeared to be not just out of power but out of touch. September 11 had changed everything, and the Democrats didn't "get it."

Amid today's economic crisis, the roles are reversed. Obama and his party seem right for their moment. It is the Republicans who seem beached by history, trapped by an irrelevant ideology in a new era.

Let me get this right. Today's lesson is: 9/11 is to Republicans what Bush is to Democrats the rest of the free world.

Sounds about right to me. Bush is far worse then 9/11.

kronicfeld: Is Obama repeating Bush's mistakes? Yes, he can

This headline brought to you from the title writer for "I am America and So Can You."

I'm glad you quoted it before the mods changed it.

I wish someone had snapped a picture and posted it in the thread.

Oh hi. This looks like a fun thread.

Status quObama

That article wasn't wharrgarbl. I don't know how to react.

Democrats hope that it's 1981.

Reagan was shot.

Republicans hope that it's 1993

Waco, Texas

Headso: Status quObama

Obama has changed this country more than any President in our lifetime. I have trillions of reasons to prove it.

Rann Xerox: FTA: In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise

I stopped reading right there.

That is what everybody does with these articles and it takes 150 posts for someone to correct an entire sub discussion that is incorrect.

/thick skin handles snark
//runs

benlonghair: Oh hi. This looks like a fun thread.

Welcome! I brought the party hats.

"Yes we can" wasn't Obama's schtick... I thought that was Mass. Gov. "Free 'em all" Deval Patrick?

more wharrgarbl please
and boobies
and graphs and charts

AdolfOliverPanties: In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise,

Yeah. I stopped right there too.

And it was hard for me to continue past
Ross Douthat of The Atlantic asked that question in a smart Wall Street Journal article

For a party of ideas, the left sure seems to dislike reading anything past what they disagree with. Even if an article is fairly even handed they seem to stop when they reach a sentence they don't agree with. Go figure.

Rann Xerox: FTA: In 2000, Bush defined his candidacy with three overarching promises: to restore dignity to the Oval Office, to be a compassionate (that is, centrist) conservative, and to be a uniter, not a divider. He kept the first promise

I stopped reading right there.

They simply meant he didn't get sucked off by a fat chick.

Anyway, it's an interesting article, and perfectly encapsulates my problem with Obama so far. He used fear of the financial crisis to quickly push through legistlation without any chance for discussion. He's like Bush in that way at least.

In his determination to be not just a policy-changer but a game-changer, Bush polarized.

No. He polarized by name calling, throwing hissy fits, and being clueless instead of leading.

Article sux -- it fails to challenge it's own assumptions and the political wisdom of the last 30 years.

Another self important 'insider'.

vernonFL: Democrats hope that it's 1981.

Reagan was shot.

Republicans hope that it's 1993

Waco, Texas

I wouldn't mind it if it was 1993. The rest of the decade was a time of peace and prosperity. I'd trade a Democratic congress for that.

The day that we stop looking at politics as a sporting event will be a great day for this country.

FTA:

Democrats hope that it's 1981. A new president with a new mandate proposes a bold program that restores economic growth, rebuilds the country's confidence, and seizes the mantle of prosperity for his party.

Democrats hope that Obama's plan works, not because it'll be great for the country and its people, but instead because it'll help them hold on to power for another decade or so.

Republicans hope that it's 1993. A politically talented but inexperienced Democratic president abandons the center, overreaches with a health care bill, and revives Republicans' prospects.

Republicans hope that Obama fails and people suffer because it'll mean they can get power back for another decade or so.

Seriously, fark both sides. This isn't a farking game.

Anti_illuminati: Welcome! I brought the party hats.

I'll get the popcorn.