The Tiger talked about this yesterday and this poll has many jaws flapping down in Yankee-land: more Yanks think W was a better president than the Great O is currently.
There could be lots of good reasons for this. I'll pick on the two big, flashing, obvious ones:
1. W's presidency responded to the challenges of the times. When 9/11 hit, W's presidency was completely re-defined - compassionate conservatism was out, homeland security was in.
Obama was presented with economic enormous challenges and, for the most part, ignored them. That's the nice way to put it. Really, he compounded them. Regardless of its long-term merit, health care reform was a bone-headed project in the midst of the current economic horrors. The legislation passed months ago and still most companies haven't quite figured out what it means to them. Uncertainty is instability's best friend. Why nurse uncertainty?
2. W accepted protest and dissent. Visiting Canada, W once had a terrific line about the warm reception Canadians gave him as he drove from Ottawa airport to Parliament hill: "I want to particularly thank those Canadians who waved with all five fingers." Bookstores were overflowing with anti-W books. There was even a movie that fetishized his assasination. W took it all.
Obama has fairly nasty stuff to say about anyone who gets in his way. The electorate is largely stupid, afraid, religiously dogmatic, impervious to facts and ignorant of science. The last is my favorite: a lawyer who feels he's mastered science. Obama's skin is thinner than a sheet of graphene. And, cloistered in the academic world for so long, he is not accustomed to the diversity of thought one encounters in the wider world.
A wise, wise man - whose good looks rival mine - once said that if W could run against Obama, W would win. In 2012, this observation will be plain to everyone. Like Ethel and Archie Bunker once sang, "mister, we could use a man lie George W Bush again."
The problem is there is no man like Bush just kicking around waiting for 2012. After Tuesday, the GOP will be flying high but without a viable candidate there is no compelling reason why Obama will not get re-elected.
ReplyDeleteWell, seriously, you can never underestimate the stupidity of the electorate, or the weaselousness of journalists. Is that what you carner from Pres. Obama's thinking?
ReplyDeleteThanks to the U.S. Supreme Court billions can now be spent on GOP ads, and even you, Tarkwell are taken in by the BS.
It is my opinion that Obama is the greatest President since FDR, but unlike the case of Roosevelt, he has to deal with Daddy Warbucks corporations and Third Rail Goverment which is not based in Washington.
Tea partiers and other optimists have no idea of this, as nuclear armed subs are heading for Iran. Raise the shit! Make money!
Ivan is correct. While his worldview has been shaped with careful precision from the accumulated wisdom of human civilization, my worldview has been shaped by a few ads on tv.
ReplyDeleteHe is right about Daddy Warbucks. Even if FDR is actually a character in the same story that inveted Daddy Warbucks, FDR had no Daddy Warbucks to deal with like Obama.
Drama critics have always slammed the musical Annie for that very flaw: why in a good story about FDR's depression days would they invent a character, Daddy Warbucks, who was really like a person from the future. It is only know that a character like Daddy Warbucks makes sense.
And poor Obama, he's president when the real Daddy Warbucks finally shows. Shame, shame, shame.
Tarkwell,
ReplyDeleteAfter that gracious response, I will speak to you in soothing voice, and agree with everything you say.
Ivan,
ReplyDeleteNow don't get sore with me. You must admit a few chuckles over Daddy Warbucks.
Poor Obama. Why is the world so unfair to him?
We need heat in the kitchen to cook. Continue your dissent and allow me mine!
Cheers,
Tarkwell.
What's wrong with Daddy Warbucks?
ReplyDeleteI like Daddy Warbucks (see Wikipedia entry for Lt Gen Oliver "Daddy" Warbucks).
He was a great fictional American.