Posted on 11/27/2008 8:09:14 AM PST by dbz77
"How long do you think it will take for the press to turn on Obama?" a friend asked.
"Eight years, if he's in that long," I told him. "Doesn't matter what happens. Either they'll blame Bush or 'circumstances beyond Obama's control' while writing articles about how heroically Obama handles them." It's already started.
Take President-elect Barack Obama's campaign narrative: a) Bush/McCain deregulation created our problems; b) the policies of President Clinton brought success and shared prosperity, c) President Bush's tax cuts unfairly enriched the rich, d) Obama intends to end posthaste the Iraq war, which "never should have been authorized and never should have been waged," and e) through Gitmo/unlawful wiretaps/illegal interrogation procedures, Bush "shredded" the Constitution.
Let's review.
Ever heard of the Glass-Steagall Act? President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose New Deal policies Obama wants to mirror, signed it into law to prevent commercial banks from engaging in investment banking. Investment banking, the kind of work done by Wall Street titans such as Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns, raises money to package and sell securities such as the now-discredited "toxic" mortgage and mortgage-backed derivatives. Clinton, with the backing of many Republicans, allowed the banking/investment wall to fall by signing the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, repealing a large part of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933. This led to the business model of the now-troubled and recently bailed-out Citigroup, a model impossible but for the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
The Clinton administration, during its waning days, published a paper called "The Clinton Presidency: Historic Economic Growth." It listed among its achievements "Modernizing for the New Economy through Technology and Consensus Deregulation."
Clinton denies -- correctly -- that his deregulation policies caused the current financial meltdown. "I don't see that signing that bill had anything to do with the current crisis," he said. "Indeed, one of the things that has helped stabilize the current situation as much as it has is the purchase of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America, which was much smoother than it would have been if I hadn't signed that bill." Blaming deregulation on the financial crisis ignores a whole chain of events, most notably the decline in housing values. But that didn't stop candidate Obama from screaming "deregulation," even though Clinton deregulated the financial sector more than did Bush.
Candidate Obama maligned the Bush tax cuts for benefiting the rich. But President-elect Obama now intends to retain all the tax cuts, keeping the lower rates on the "rich" until they expire in 2011 -- a far cry from his campaign promises.
What about Bush's "stupid" Iraq war?
Obama now wants Bush's secretary of defense, Robert Gates, to stay. Huh? Gates supported the successful surge and the change in counterinsurgent strategy. Sen. Obama opposed the surge, attempted to stop it, and predicted failure. Candidate Obama promised to have combat troops out within a year or 16 months of his administration, but President Bush and the Iraqi government now tentatively agree to have all troops out by 2011, a timetable unfathomable but for Bush's courageous and ultimately successful decision to surge.
What about the Guantanamo Bay detainees, the "evil" interrogation techniques and "unlawful" wiretaps?
Obama -- actually faced with governing -- seems now to understand the complex legal questions Bush grappled with. Gitmo contains some really, really bad people, and Obama's security advisers now appreciate the complex legal and logistical problems. Where to move the detainees? Moving them onto American soil creates a possible target for terror attacks. And what legal rights and procedures apply in moving the detainees to America? As for the Bush surveillance program -- which allegedly "shredded" the Constitution -- Team Obama signals an intention to retain many, if not most, of these "dreaded" policies.
Eric Holder, Obama's choice for attorney general, served as deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration. He agreed with Bush on a very important policy -- one opposed by liberal icons like Al Gore. Holder, in a 2002 interview, agreed that terrorists must be interrogated so we can learn information on their cells or future plans, and that the Geneva Conventions limited the amount of information interrogators could get. Clearly they were not prisoners of war, said Holder, and were, therefore, not covered by the protections of the Geneva Conventions. However, argued Holder, if we want our own prisoners treated well, we should treat the detainees very humanely and in a manner consistent with the Geneva Conventions -- a position that Bush ultimately came to.
So where does this leave us?
Bush wasn't so evil after all. And running for and governing as president are two different things. But don't expect the Obama-loving media to notice or care.
The media will turn on him because when it is all said and done they are whores
Larry, he’s the President Select, not yet the President Elect.
You can be sure that nary a discouraging word will be heard about BO except perhaps some mild criticisms about his lame jokes or one or more of his appointees as time goes on.
Liberals have to have a bad guy to blame. Anybody but them! It’s a mind-set of malignant narcissism—originating with the Devil himself. The irony is the Ultimate Bad Guy is the one who is truly running their world and deceiving the whole lot of them into his Hell.
He’ll walk on water like Clinton. Only the Republican presidents become instantly stupid, clumsy, and dumb. ANY AND ALL PROBLEMS WILL BE BLAMED ON BUSH.
President-eject
I’m just glad that we won’t be hearing anymore Homeless stories for the next 4-8 years...
[The media will turn on him because when it is all said and done they are whores]
Obama’s problem is that he is a stuffed shirt. Not a single idea is based in standard economic theory and his CIC abilities are absolutely nil. He’s going to be whipped around like a piece of straw in the wind.
Now, it might take a couple years to catch on, but if Bush is stupider than a fence post, Obama and his Ivy League baloney will make Bush look like a genius.
I mean, how do you increase taxes and government spending AND grow the economy? Something has to give.
The media have to sell papers and air-time. It ain’t going to take long at all before they discover that there is more revenue to be had by being controversial than by being compliant.
His Excellency will start getting a hard ride ‘round about the same time the media’s advertizing revenues start dropping off.
The media are prostitutes, whores, strumpets, trollops, wenches, putains...
I expect that the media will blame the governor of Alaska for most of the trouble.
No matter what Obama does, no matter how worthless his policies, the MSM will give him gobs of credit for “trying”.
The Drive-Bys just spent two years and billions of dollars electing their hand-picked multiracial stooge to assuage their white guilt. They chose a racist, lying, abortion-loving, anti-military, anti-American, anti-capitalist, Chicago street-thug, terrorist-befriending, dictator-appeasing, Jew-hating mutant who is an empty suit of rhetoric, who has never accomplished a single thing in hios miserable, crack-smoking, crack-selling life.
Hence, they cannot, and will not allow him to fail or be criticized! EVER!
New acronyms for the next 4-8 years ...
BEBO
Blame Everyone But Obama
EFBO
Everones’ Fault But Obama
NOF
Not Obama’s Fault
NOOB
Not On Obama’s Back
BOIR
Blaming Obama Is Racist
His Excellency will start getting a hard ride ‘round about the same time the media’s advertizing revenues start dropping off.
Agreed they will turn on him a little, but after 2-2 1/2 yrs it will be all positive again.
INTREP
As long as the price of a gallon of fuel stays below $2.00 a gallon, the US economy will recover and do OK.
It was no coincidence that when oil/barrel spiked to $150 the economy suddenly tanked.
$140-$150 was THE price which caused business leaders, bankers, fianciers to realize that the economy would stop growing.... and thus real estate collapsed.
Bush (the Fed) had little to do with it (some yes, but not much).
And Obama will have nothing to do with the recovery.
We are an energy-based economy. It affects EVERYTHING.. from the cost of a pencil to the manufacture of a Baggie... to the delivery price of milk.
That said, the only thing that COULD keep the economy tanked is if Iran and Israel and the world get into a hot shooting war... and the oil flow suddenly stops cold.
I gotta disagree. Blaming a forgotten ex-president or a vague villain like circumstances beyond Obama's control will not satisfy the MSM's insatiable need for schadenfraude. The same people who protected and fawned on him will turn on him ... by the end of 2009.
They may not be as vicious as they were to Bush, Cheney, and Palin, but they will turn on him.
Whores will do anything for a Pulitzer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.