Is Obama the Republicans' Bush? Deliberately?

[Sam_Stone]

@mswas

I disagree. “Lost without his teleprompter.”, “Empty Suit”, “Affirmative Action Hire”, “Economically Illiterate”. I have heard all of those insults from many different people.

I’ve heard the ‘economically illiterate’ cricitism a lot, and I agree with it. That does not equate to ‘stupid’, though. ‘Lost without his teleprompter’ would equate to, “In over his head”. Again, not ‘stupid’.

As for the ‘Affirmative Action Hire’, I haven’t heard that one. But then, I don’t hang around on the right-wing blogs much, except for the ones run by serious people like professors and business types. Mostly economics blogs. I haven’t set foot on Free Republic in probably two years - I can’t stand the place. I don’t go near the militia types or the white supremacists or any of the other fringe elements. So I’m not hearing the really vile stuff. I mostly cruise through sites like CATO, National Review, Reason, and then the main periodicals like the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, The Economist, etc.

“He’s never held a real job.”, “He didn’t publish at the Harvard Review, therefore he was just an affirmative action hire.”, “He hasn’t done anything with his life.”, “His record as a legislator is sparse.”

Those are pretty much the same as calling him a failure in life.

No they aren’t. They’re saying he’s lived a life that doesn’t qualify him to be President. I don’t know anyone who thinks he’s a ‘failure’. The guy rose from nothing to President by age 47. Anyone who thinks he’s a failure in life is a moron.

Yes, I have often heard the Saul Alinsky one, and the one’s about him being stupid from the same people. What unite the anti-Obama narrative to the anti-W narrative is that you can hear the same person cite his Machiavellian diabolism and his utter stupidity at different times. Both Presidents have that paradoxical narrative.

I’m just not hearing the ‘utter stupidity’ bit. If anything, the people who think he’s a Saul Alinksky type radical think he’s very smart. Smart enough to pull a fast one on his supporters and sneak his program in under the radar. Yes, they think he’s ignorant about economics, but that’s not anywhere near the same thing.

[Sinaijon]

@elucidator

Would you mind terribly if I forward this to my Mom?

Can’t you just yell for her upstairs? “Hey Ma!!” <pounds the basement ceiling with a broom…>

[The_Second_Stone]

The right has been doing this stupid/incompetent/treasonous thing against various Democrats for as long as I can remember. For what it is worth, the left does the same against Republicans, often substituting “criminal” for “treasonous”. FWIW, as a lefty, I think that stupid, incompetent and criminal are typical characteristics of Nixon, Reagan and Bush II, except that Nixon pretty clearly wasn’t stupid IMHO. And I disagree with the right’s characterization of the left, even though I generally apply it to the right. I suppose the righties are sincere too, but calling Obama “stupid” in the wake of little Georgie reminds me that I do not think that word means what they think it means.

[elucidator]

@Sinaijon

Can’t you just yell for her upstairs? “Hey Ma!!” <pounds the basement ceiling with a broom…>

Certainly a thought, but unless she makes parole this time, its rather a moot point…

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Sam_Stone

Here’s a CBS News article that quotes from “Dreams From My Father”:

That doesn’t sound like a guy who smoked a joint once or twice. He also said in the book that he would have tried heroin, except that he didn’t like the dealer who sold it.

Here’s the entire passage, untruncated (have you actually read the book or are you getting your info from rightie blogs)?

"I had learned not to care. I blew a few smoke rings, remembering those years. Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though—Mickey, my potentional intiator had been just a little too eager for me to go through with that. Said he could do it blindfolded, but he was shaking like a faulty engine when he said it. Maybe he was just cold; we were standing in a meat freezer in the back of the deli where he worked, and it couldn’t have been more than twenty degrees in there. But he didn’t look like he was sweating, his face shiny and tight. He had pulled out the needle and the tubing, and I’d looked at him standing there, surrounded by big slabs of salami and roast beef, and right then an image popped into my head of an air bubble, shiny and round like a pearl, rolling quietly through a vein and stopping my heart… Junkie. Pothead. That’s where I’d be headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man.

He didn’t say he he refrained from trying smack just because he didn’t like the dealer, but because he was afraid it would kill him, and because he didn’t want to become a junkie. The important thing. of course, is that he didn’t try it. For God’s sake, how grasping do you have to be to try to insinuate that his reasons for NOT trying heroin aren’t noble enough?

He also said this:

Are you kidding me? He was making a joke.

The picture I get is of a young kid who hung with a bad crowd and did a lot of drugs - mostly smoking pot, but harder drugs as well. But certainly the cites back up my claim that he used them ‘frequently’. That’s an exact quote from him.

You are welcome to imagine things any way you want, but that’s not the picture I get. I see a kid growing up in Hawaii who smoked a little weed as a teenager just like everybody else, but then grew out of it after he went to college. It’s trivial. My history is more extensive than his, and I wasn’t all that hardcore.

But please don’t get me wrong. I’m not holding this against him.

Well isn’t that tolerant of you. We don’t care if you “hold it against him.” That’s not the issue. The issue is that you’re trying to exaggerate a little innocent, youthful toking into an “extensive” drug history. That’s a load.

[elucidator]

Well, to be fair, Dio, he left enough “wiggle room” for a belly-dancing hippo.

[mswas]

I have a done what in technical parlance is known as a ‘metric fuckton’ of various drugs. I tried Heroin even, but not with a needle, that was too much commitment to a high for me. That being said, it is always odd to me when people see having smoked pot or taken a bump of coke every once in a while as evidence of anything. I did plenty of hallucinogens and I can see the relevance of those because it does have permanent consequences on your brain. In the case of the others when done in moderation occasionally it’s no different from having a beer. To me what Obama claims to have done warrants no more than a shrug. It tells me he liked to party when he was younger, just like the two Presidents directly preceding him.

[Sam_Stone]

@Diogenes the Cynic

Here’s the entire passage, untruncated (have you actually read the book or are you getting your info from rightie blogs)?

Um, I linked to my source. Unless CBS News is now a ‘Righty Blog’, you can clearly see I didn’t.

I’m baffled by your criticism. I don’t see at all where you can draw the conclusion that ‘he smoked a little weed like everyone else’ and that’s about it. He also said he did coke when he could afford it - that right there puts him in a little different class of drug user. I knew lots of people who ‘smoked a little weed’, and most of them wouldn’t have gone near cocaine. Obama himself says that he smoked ‘frequently’, and even in your full quote it’s clear that he backed away from heroin because he saw himself heading down a path towards being a junkie and a pothead.

That’s simply not the picture of a guy who smoke a little reefer on a few occasions at a party or two, which seems to be the sort of use you are claiming.

No one here is using is past drug history against him - why are you trying to minimize it? Obama himself seems comfortable enough with it.

I think I’ve got a pretty good handle on what kiind of drug user Obama was. He sounds like the guys I used to hang out with. Pot was smoked regularly - as often as you could get it, really. After school, sometimes IN school, hanging out at a buddy’s place listening to music, at every party… This was the 1970’s - half the kids I knew who had pot snuck it from their parents’ stashes. Teachers would find a reefer and confiscate it and nothing else would happen - the teacher probably smoked it later.

Coke was a bigger deal, but some kids tried it. Mostly, it was too expensive for my crowd, and it had that stigma of ‘hard drug’ that kept the more casual users away from it. You saw it occasionally at a party, but none of the people in my social circle did it.

Heroin, on the other hand, was hard core. You knew people died from it. It involved injecting yourself with needles. The first time I even saw someone use heroin was at a party when I was in my 20s. I was there on the invitation of someone else, and was shocked as hell when a guy overdosed right in front of me. By that time, it was the mid 80’s, and drug use was way down.

So I get where Obama’s coming from. He was a guy who smoked pot fairly regularly - that’s what he and his friends did when they were bored, probably. Coke was a rare thing, but he did it a few times. And heroin scared him, but he came right up to the precipice and backed away.

In a way, you’re right that he did it like ‘most everyone else’ - especially in his age and class cohort. But doing it ‘like everyone else’ meant it WAS fairly frequent. Same with drinking. It was a different time.

[Sam_Stone]

@mswas

I have a done what in technical parlance is known as a ‘metric fuckton’ of various drugs. I tried Heroin even, but not with a needle, that was too much commitment to a high for me. That being said, it is always odd to me when people see having smoked pot or taken a bump of coke every once in a while as evidence of anything. I did plenty of hallucinogens and I can see the relevance of those because it does have permanent consequences on your brain. In the case of the others when done in moderation occasionally it’s no different from having a beer. To me what Obama claims to have done warrants no more than a shrug. It tells me he liked to party when he was younger, just like the two Presidents directly preceding him.

Yeah, pretty much. Again, this is a non-issue. I don’t see anyone on the right going after him for it, and I certainly don’t think it was a big deal. I’m confused why Diogenes is trying to downplay it, because no one really cares.

[Ocean_Annie]

The right wing hates Obama and has been out to destroy him from the moment he took the oath of office. Sometimes I think the U.S. populace lives in two different realities defined by ideology. It is hard to understand how anyone doesn’t see the orchestrated media assault on Obama and refuses to admit that the U.S. media functions to protect the interests of wealth and power.

Comparing Obama to Bush originated in right wing media. It is a way to disown Bush as a Republican and attribute his policies to the man who poses the greatest threat to them because the reality is that the wealthy and powerful want to continue Bush’s policies despite the spin and confusion.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Sam_Stone

I’m baffled by your criticism. I don’t see at all where you can draw the conclusion that ‘he smoked a little weed like everyone else’ and that’s about it. He also said he did coke when he could afford it - that right there puts him in a little different class of drug user. I knew lots of people who ‘smoked a little weed’, and most of them wouldn’t have gone near cocaine.

Trying cocaine a few times just doesn’t amount to anything worth noting in my book, and he was a teenager at a time, in the 70’s, when cocaine was more socially acceptable than it is now. The dangers weren’t as popularly known. It wasn’t seen as quite as big a deal. Moreover, investigative journalists who talked to his friends from that period can’t find anyone who says they ever remember seeing him do coke even once. They say that even his pot use was infrequent. The NY Times ran a story saying that that Obama had exaggerated his drug history for his book.

Obama himself says that he smoked ‘frequently’,

He said he inhaled frequently, whenever he did smoke. It was a joking answer to a question alluding to Clinton saying he didn’t inhale when he smokee pot.

and even in your full quote it’s clear that he backed away from heroin because he saw himself heading down a path towards being a junkie and a pothead.

You said he WOULD have done it if he hadn’t disliked the guy who offered it to him (who he doesn’t say was a dealer, by the way). There is no indication in that passage that he was willing to do it. He didn’t do it, basically, because he thought it was too heavy and dangerous a drug. What other reason does he need?

That’s simply not the picture of a guy who smoke a little reefer on a few occasions at a party or two, which seems to be the sort of use you are claiming.

That’s the picture I get, and that’s very much the picture those who knew him at the time give.

No one here is using is past drug history against him - why are you trying to minimize it? Obama himself seems comfortable enough with it.

The issue is that you’re trying to exaggerate it in order to imply that there’s any kind of comparison to Bush, whichj there isn’t.

I think I’ve got a pretty good handle on what kiind of drug user Obama was. He sounds like the guys I used to hang out with. Pot was smoked regularly - as often as you could get it, really. After school, sometimes IN school, hanging out at a buddy’s place listening to music, at every party… This was the 1970’s - half the kids I knew who had pot snuck it from their parents’ stashes. Teachers would find a reefer and confiscate it and nothing else would happen - the teacher probably smoked it later.

Coke was a bigger deal, but some kids tried it. Mostly, it was too expensive for my crowd, and it had that stigma of ‘hard drug’ that kept the more casual users away from it. You saw it occasionally at a party, but none of the people in my social circle did it.

Heroin, on the other hand, was hard core. You knew people died from it. It involved injecting yourself with needles. The first time I even saw someone use heroin was at a party when I was in my 20s. I was there on the invitation of someone else, and was shocked as hell when a guy overdosed right in front of me. By that time, it was the mid 80’s, and drug use was way down.

So I get where Obama’s coming from. He was a guy who smoked pot fairly regularly - that’s what he and his friends did when they were bored, probably. Coke was a rare thing, but he did it a few times. And heroin scared him, but he came right up to the precipice and backed away.

In a way, you’re right that he did it like ‘most everyone else’ - especially in his age and class cohort. But doing it ‘like everyone else’ meant it WAS fairly frequent. Same with drinking. It was a different time.

This is about what I see, but I don’t see that as amounting to an “extensive history,” especially since he stopped before he was even into his 20’s.

[Sam_Stone]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

This is about what I see, but I don’t see that as amounting to an “extensive history,” especially since he stopped before he was even into his 20’s.

Okay, so we’re in agreement as to what his drug use probably amounted to, and we’re in agreement that it was no big deal. Why are we arguing again? The use of the term ‘extensive history’? Okay, I’d be happy to change that. I didn’t have quite the meaning intended that you think I did. I merely meant it in opposition to, “I tried it once or twice”. It was a fairly large part of his teen experience, just as it was for a lot of teens in that era - especially the ones that didn’t grow up with silver spoons in their mouths.

I have to admit that some of my best memories of my teen years involved a regular routine consisting of a bit of smoke and some late night guitar jam sessions. I’d be comfortable if that was called an ‘extensive history’, in relation to those years, but then I don’t think it’s a big deal one way or the other, so I don’t really care what anyone calls it.

I suggest we just drop the matter. I think you’re digging for a sign of some hatred or criticism on my part that just isn’t there.

[SteveG1]

@Merijeek

Eh, everyone knows that Real American Heroes abuse substances and then DON’T admit it. Like Bill Clinton. And Dubya.

-Joe

Ahh, the old “I never inhaled” defense

[Quartz]

@Ocean_Annie

The right wing hates Obama and has been out to destroy him from the moment he took the oath of office.

And the left wing hated Bush and was out to destroy him from the moment he took the oath of office too. Similarly for Clinton, too. It’s the American Way of politics. I don’t like it either.

[elucidator]

He was misunderstood. Remember that conciliatory speech he gave after, about how he lost the popular vote and snuck in on a technicality, and how he knew he didn’t have any kind of madate?

If you don’t remember it, I’ll understand, because neither do I.

[Shodan]

@Ocean_Annie

It is hard to understand how anyone doesn’t see the orchestrated media assault on Obama and refuses to admit that the U.S. media functions to protect the interests of wealth and power.

One might almost think that a multi-millionaire, former Senator and President could be considered wealthy and powerful. But maybe that’s just me.

Comparing Obama to Bush originated in right wing media.

So no one ever compared a sitting President to a former one before the Evil Right-Wing Conspirators[sup]TM[/sup] thought it up? Do you have some kind of cite to back that up?

Regards,
Shodan

[Jeff_Tompkins]

Republicans would have turned any potential Democratic president into their version of “Bush.” The Sour Grapes crowd is reaching scary new heights these days.

[Sam_Stone]

Some of the criticism from the right certainly falls into the category of knee-jerk, sour grapes criticism. But a significant amount of it doesn’t. There are a lot of Republicans who were cheering Obama on, especially during the transition where he was picking his economic team. I said a lot of nice things about him on this board between November and February. I still say some nice things about him.

There were Republicans who jumped ship and actually supported him before the election - Christopher Buckley and David Brooks, for example. There were enough of them that they had their own term: “Obamacons.”

The fact is, Obama is moving significantly to the left, and that is causing Republicans to step up their attacks on him. A lot of them thought he was going to govern as a moderate centrist, and so far that hasn’t been the case.

It was predictable as rain that Obama would lose Republican support when he shifted left. It’s not knee-jerk, it’s just the reality of a divergence of political opinion.

Obama started with about 80% approval on inauguration day according to Pew, and disapproval ratings around 10%. That means the only people who disapproved of him were the far right, and not even all of those. So he had an opportunity to maintain widespread support from Republicans. But his disapproval ratings are now at 27%, and his approval down to 63% according to Gallup, and even lower by other polls.

Maybe this is standard partisanship. Bush and Clinton both had the same kinds of declines after they took office and started actually governing. Until you make decisions, it’s easy for everyone to like you. But with every decision you make you anger someone.

But speaking for myself, I know that I was about ready to jump on the Obama bandwagon, and actually had pretty high hopes after he picked his economic team, but I’ve been very disappointed so far.

[msmith537]

What do you expect? After 8 years of incompetant administration, the Republicans soundly lost and have become irrelevant politically. They are desperate to come back in 2012 and will take every opportunity to capitalize on any mistake Obama makes (real or imagined).

I’ll reserve my judgement for about 6 months until I can see what effect his policies are having on the economy.

[Aquila_Be]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

Bush, by contrast, was a drunk and a cokehead well into his 30’s with a multiple arrest record.

Bullshit.