Obama Actions Support Bush Legacy

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

....Obama is smart, but a wimp. He doesn't have the chops to stand up to the giant political machine he now finds himself entangled in. Even if Obama followed through on all his campaign promises it still wouldn't have been enough change IMO. He's still 5000x more capable a President than Bush though, but that's not saying much.

He will need to be smart and more capable than Bush, because President Obama knows that a successful terrorist attack on the US after implementing his "reforms" will put him and his administration on the defensive.

Maybe he feels lucky....

KrustyKidd · May 25, 2009

He will need to be smart and more capable than Bush, because President Obama knows that a successful terrorist attack on the US after implementing his "reforms" will put him and his administration on the defensive.
Maybe he feels lucky....

That would be a severe right wing back lash, something that even I, a right wing type would not wish to see.

WIP · May 25, 2009

One thing though, he doesn't have the experience of a George W, and is making gaff after gaff.

What was George's experience, aside from failing at every business venture that his old man set him up with, and being a sock puppet for Dick Cheney?

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

What was George's experience, aside from failing at every business venture that his old man set him up with, and being a sock puppet for Dick Cheney?

President Bush was a successful candidate and governor for the State of Texas. Perhaps you missed that.

Edited May 25, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

WIP · May 25, 2009

Obama is a big disappointment so far. I never believed he was the the change he advertised, but some of the things he has done (or not done) as BC has listed are just backwards. He has broken many campaign promises already. He probably will close Gitmo, but if the same torture is going on in other U.S. prisons around the globe then it's simply a symbolic gesture.
Obama is smart, but a wimp. He doesn't have the chops to stand up to the giant political machine he now finds himself entangled in. Even if Obama followed through on all his campaign promises it still wouldn't have been enough change IMO. He's still 5000x more capable a President than Bush though, but that's not saying much.

Many of us looking on the U.S. from outside were hoping that Obama would be the new FDR. Instead, he is turning into the new LBJ; and like Lyndon Johnson, his potential downfall will not be caused by conservatives and rightwing opposition; it will happen because the civil libertarians and the left in general do not share the authoritarian ethos of the conservatives, and their primary loyalty is to issues, not personalities!

Many will withdraw support if he doesn't find a way out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and even more crucial - backing down on his campaign pledge of "making government accountable." Suppressing torture photos, refusing to investigate charges against key Bush Administration officials, and worst of all - keeping alive the concept of "Preventative Detention," or holding people in prison indefinitely because they either cannot be convicted because of torture, or fear that they'll commit terrorist attacks after they are released. Why have this option just for terrorism? Why wasn't O.J. put in preventative detention after the L.A. D.A.'s office botched the criminal trial against O.J. Simpson? But, that's another issue.

Republican leaders take their base for granted all time, like Dubya did - starting new spending programs to build the "Permanent Republican Majority" and the right had little or nothing to say about his failures until they lost the fall election. That's because conservatives work on the authoritarian principle that demands loyalty to the leadership; liberals are anti-authoritarian, and a Democrat who take them for granted will suffer the same fate of LBJ -- especially if he can't end the war!

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

Many of us looking on the U.S. from outside were hoping that Obama would be the new FDR.

Why? Perhaps you don't know many of the things that FDR did. It wasn't pretty.....

Many will withdraw support if he doesn't find a way out of Iraq and Afghanistan, and even more crucial - backing down on his campaign pledge of "making government accountable." Suppressing torture photos, refusing to investigate charges against key Bush Administration officials, and worst of all - keeping alive the concept of "Preventative Detention," or holding people in prison indefinitely because they either cannot be convicted because of torture,

He doesn't need their partisan support anymore...he is the president.

WIP · May 25, 2009

President Bush was a successful candidate and governor for the State of Texas. Perhaps you missed that.

Jim Hightower on Bush: "he was born on third base, and thinks he hit a triple!"

George Bush killed that old line about governors having the executive experience to make great presidents! So what was the story down there in cowboyland, was Karl Rove and assorted flunkies doing his work for him on that job also? The only thing of note that I can find on his gubernatorial record is that he executed more people (152) than any other governor. That doesn't tell much about how he handled issues that affect daily life.

I'd also like to know what the economic growth rate was during the Bush years, since any idiot can be successful if he's presiding over an economic boom (like being Premier of Alberta until recently), but becomes the source of blame if he can't turn the economy around...Schwarzenegger may have been a great governor, but he had the misfortune of taking over a sinking ship for example.

WIP · May 25, 2009

Why? Perhaps you don't know many of the things that FDR did. It wasn't pretty.....

Of course not. But like him or hate him, Roosevelt was one of the few politicians who would push reforms he felt were badly needed, even if he had advisers and fellow party members trying to talk him out of it.

He doesn't need their partisan support anymore...he is the president.

It's not a lifetime appointment. And a drop in poll numbers will make it harder to get his agenda through Congress.....just like it was for Bush in his 2nd term.

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

Jim Hightower on Bush: "he was born on third base, and thinks he hit a triple!"

As were many US presidents. So what?

George Bush killed that old line about governors having the executive experience to make great presidents! So what was the story down there in cowboyland, was Karl Rove and assorted flunkies doing his work for him on that job also? The only thing of note that I can find on his gubernatorial record is that he executed more people (152) than any other governor. That doesn't tell much about how he handled issues that affect daily life.

Then it is obvious you don't know much about Texas voters either. That's OK...how could you?

I'd also like to know what the economic growth rate was during the Bush years, since any idiot can be successful if he's presiding over an economic boom (like being Premier of Alberta until recently), but becomes the source of blame if he can't turn the economy around...Schwarzenegger may have been a great governor, but he had the misfortune of taking over a sinking ship for example.

If it was good enough for President Clinton, then it was good enough for Governor Bush.

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

Of course not. But like him or hate him, Roosevelt was one of the few politicians who would push reforms he felt were badly needed, even if he had advisers and fellow party members trying to talk him out of it.

Yea, the interned citizens were sure glad FDR stuck to his "reforms". Still, why do you care either way?

It's not a lifetime appointment. And a drop in poll numbers will make it harder to get his agenda through Congress.....just like it was for Bush in his 2nd term.

Bush got what he needed and a lot of what he wanted. Obama will be lucky just to do that well.

Edited May 25, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

WIP · May 25, 2009

Yea, the interned citizens were sure glad FDR stuck to his "reforms".

Ah yes, the Japanese Internment was a good lesson for people who have elevated terrorists to super-human abilities, to consider before they start shredding basic human rights.

Still, why do you care either way?

How things go in the U.S. will determine how things are in Canada over the near future. And besides that, I have a feeling that I can't prove, that we are at a pivotal point in U.S. history. If he fails to wind down the wars and causes a debt spiral that devalues the U.S. dollar, leading to inflation and a further collapse in the economy. It would be similar to the Weimar Republic.....and you recall who was voted in to fix that mess, right?

bush_cheney2004 · May 25, 2009

Ah yes, the Japanese Internment was a good lesson for people who have elevated terrorists to super-human abilities, to consider before they start shredding basic human rights.

"Basic human rights"? According to who...you? FDR....Lincoln....Jackson....did that and a lot more. And so will the next president faced with such a threat, real or imagined. Either way, they won't give much thought to people "looking on" from across a border....they can't vote.

How things go in the U.S. will determine how things are in Canada over the near future. And besides that, I have a feeling that I can't prove, that we are at a pivotal point in U.S. history. If he fails to wind down the wars and causes a debt spiral that devalues the U.S. dollar, leading to inflation and a further collapse in the economy. It would be similar to the Weimar Republic.....and you recall who was voted in to fix that mess, right?

Really? Gee, how things go in Canada do not worry me in the least. All points are pivotal in US history is you live and die by what happens there.

BubberMiley · May 26, 2009

"Gee, how things go in Canada do not worry me in the least.

That's an outright lie. No one would spend 18 hours a day at this site, seven days a week, if they didn't care deeply about Canada. :lol:

bush_cheney2004 · May 26, 2009

That's an outright lie. No one would spend 18 hours a day at this site, seven days a week, if they didn't care deeply about Canada.

You are confused.....amusement does not equate to "concern". I am the shark.....not the remora.

Oleg Bach · May 26, 2009

You are confused.....amusement does not equate to "concern". I am the shark.....not the remora.

And I am the boat man proding at the sharks with my paddle to amuse myself. People are here because they actually care about people - not nations - not politics - We all realize that politicans are not the swiftest people on earth. So the layman - who is grounded in reality with no wants or aspirations can some times grant good cousel to those that are almost unconsolable - the dumbies that love the lime light more than anything - who want to feel important - who want to be stars - the Polititicians! :lol:

Guthrie · June 9, 2009

Obama and Clinton only look like Republicans because the Republicans they face(d) look so much like Nazis --- given the choice, I would vote Republican every time

Oleg Bach · June 9, 2009

Obama and Clinton only look like Republicans because the Republicans they face(d) look so much like Nazis --- given the choice, I would vote Republican every time

I said this here months ago - There is a one party sytem in Canada and in America - and by definition it is National Socialism - where you have a rich elite - and an equally poor populace...It can only be called Facism - because there really is no opposing party - look at our right left and so-called center - ALL have members that behave exactly alike - have the same personas - the same lack of ethics - the same self serving mentality - who shove forward the myth that they are in public service - but only serve themselves. It is evident that Facism is highly successful in Europe and here...and any system of government that stifles discourse and hampers the intelligent is bound to rot - and it is rotting - economically - spiritually and politically - the proof can be seen of what I have just said - we just saw a whole long sequence of events that show - Facism - and nothing else - Hitlers dream came true - just a bit late.

Guthrie · June 9, 2009

I said this here months ago - There is a one party sytem in Canada and in America - and by definition it is National Socialism - where you have a rich elite - and an equally poor populace...It can only be called Facism - because there really is no opposing party - look at our right left and so-called center - ALL have members that behave exactly alike - have the same personas - the same lack of ethics - the same self serving mentality - who shove forward the myth that they are in public service - but only serve themselves. It is evident that Facism is highly successful in Europe and here...and any system of government that stifles discourse and hampers the intelligent is bound to rot - and it is rotting - economically - spiritually and politically - the proof can be seen of what I have just said - we just saw a whole long sequence of events that show - Facism - and nothing else - Hitlers dream came true - just a bit late.

certainly, many national govts have become oligarchies in which corporate interests hold sway above all others

Oleg Bach · June 9, 2009

certainly, many national govts have become oligarchies in which corporate interests hold sway above all others

It's not going to make the best social and ecomomic environ. Historically the best do not rise up to the top...and if you remember the old term - aristocrat - it meant "best to rule" This oligarchy that you mention imagine themselves as aristocrats - but they are usually merchant class - and they make a habit of killing intelligensia - because they know who the real aristocrats are...and they are an embarassment and stumbling block to them. Too bad - that the common person only gives crediblity to the rich and not the noble.

Guthrie · June 9, 2009

It's not going to make the best social and ecomomic environ. Historically the best do not rise up to the top...and if you remember the old term - aristocrat - it meant "best to rule" This oligarchy that you mention imagine themselves as aristocrats - but they are usually merchant class - and they make a habit of killing intelligensia - because they know who the real aristocrats are...and they are an embarassment and stumbling block to them. Too bad - that the common person only gives crediblity to the rich and not the noble.

Spot on!! yes, I like that -- guys like Bush and Cheney consider themselves aristocrats - authorised to murder and torture by the, 'divine right of kings' --- I remember even as far back as Reagan admin - Ron was proud of his rag-tag blood connection to the Queen of England --- as an American, I am only proud we kicked English royalty all but out of this continent

GostHacked · June 9, 2009

I am surprised that people are surprised by this at all.

Guthrie · June 10, 2009

I am surprised that people are surprised by this at all.

yes, I see your point

sharkman · June 10, 2009

I am surprised that people are surprised by this at all.

Surprised that Obama's actions support the Bush legacy? I am surprised because of Obama's Team Change campaign. Of course, in some ways he's way different, as is his approach to spending money. And Bush was no slouch in that department.

bush_cheney2004 · June 10, 2009

Surprised that Obama's actions support the Bush legacy? I am surprised because of Obama's Team Change campaign. Of course, in some ways he's way different, as is his approach to spending money. And Bush was no slouch in that department.

Agreed...when it comes to spending, Obama is like Bush on steroids. And he is just getting warmed up.

Topaz · June 10, 2009

This doesn't surprise me, because I believe he isn't the one calling the shots. Remember when he and Hillary missed the plane and the plane had all the reporters on it during his campaign? He had a meeting with the people from Bilderberg Group and it was this first meeting but not for Hillary. I know most of you don't or won't believe this and thats find but keep the toaster in the cupboard, along with the tinfoil!