George Bush as the Steve Jobs of World Politics

Spiegel Online ^ | February 25, 2005 | Spiegel Online

[r5boston]

The conservative Die Welt comes up with the day's oddest and most weirdly thought-out editorial in which the author manages to both compare Bush to Franklin D. Roosevelt and to crown him "the Steve Jobs of world politics." Essentially, the paper says, Bush wants to be a great reformer, both in terms of domestic and foreign politics. Domestically, he wants to revamp America to the same degree FDR did with his New Deal, only for Bush, the program might be called the "Ownership Society," the paper says. "The target is: We want to break with all losers, domestically that means the Roosevelt social state, internationally with all states that have anything to do with terror. The new plan involves marketing, surprises, big design overhauls." As such, says the paper, Bush is like the endlessly creative (and fabulously wealthy) founder of Apple Computer, Steve Jobs.

[satchmodog9]

That was nice. Not once did I see Bush and Boob in the same article.

[ThreePuttinDude]

OK, whats the problem here. Am I missing something,
or is this the Duetchland version of Scrappleface??

Loose lips sink ships.

[DUMBGRUNT]

And Karl Rove is Steve Wozniak ?

[bayourod]

Those of us who remember Reagan during the early part of his second term will recall that there was not nearly as much type space given to his historical greatness or conservative leadership.

Reagan was great. Bush will be greater.

[newgeezer]

Such an unfair comparison!!!

Dubya's creativity does not and will likely never appeal mostly to homosexuals.

;^)

[gaspar.manny]

Gosh, I don't know how we got on the subject of gays, but this is a pretty cool article!

[bpjam]

Maybe zee germans were confused about something and thought that Bush was actually bent on world conquest. I'm quite sure that they wouldn't be even remotely flattering if they actually understood that he was creating freedom and democracy across the world.

Consider that Germany has become a democracy twice in the past century but only after the US invaded and kicked their butts in order to reverse dictatorships. The French's version of democracy is basically populist socialism which was best expressed by public lynchings and beheadings by angry mobs and/or capitulation to anybody with a tank (hardly a model of democratic ideals).

[Steel Wolf]

I've been wondering the same thing, about the 'legacy' thing. Reagan's place is set, and even his old enemies have accepted his place in history will be one of triumph and vision. I wonder about Bush's place in history, and suspect that it will be similar, if not greater. When our nation faces times of hardship down the road, you know that nostalgia will kick in, and people will say 'I wish old G W was still around, cuz you know he'd put those bastards in their place'

[longtermmemmory]

So the german press is trying to make the liberty of the USA to be a niche concept that nobody else can seriously use as a government. (just an analogy mac fanatics)

Very Goebles, they are trying to "isolate" the USA by pigeon holing the USA into a margin.

The success of the USA speaks volumes. (has anyone seen the lines of people at US embasies for visa applications? they are long even in this day and age.)

[longtermmemmory]

Reagans enemies refuse to accept his place in history. They are revisionist history-ing the end of the cold war as "inevitable" or "gorbachev did it" or even "it never happened".

[GOP_Raider]

...the author manages to both compare Bush to Franklin D. Roosevelt

Oh, no he di'int!

[bayourod]

The overriding media question during Clinton's second administration was whether he could find a legacy.

You will never see an article or newscast ask that question about Bush; instead it will be "which legacy will he best be remembered for?"
Social Security reform?
Peace between Israel and the Arabs?
No child left behind?
Supreme Court strict constructionist makeover?
Tort reform?
Homeland defense?
Changing American hearts on abortion?
Tax cuts?
Economic prosperity?
Republican hegemony?
Containing North Korea?
Eliminating state sponsored terrorism?
Medicare reform?
Eliminating the barrier to Blacks and Hispanics occupying critical positions in the highest level of government?
Creating a tidal wave of democracy in the Middle East?
Making decency, faith, compassion and unpretentiousness the hallmarks of conservatism?

Clinton would have given his left elbow for any of those legacies. Instead he will be remembered for the stain on a blue dress.

I would love to see what some of the FReepers who now call Bush a traitor will say in ten years after experiencing two terms of Hillary.