If President Obama is Bush's 3rd term, why then is the GOP infuriated?

[Politics_Guy25]

So, some in the blogosphere say that President Obama is Bush's third term, that he's Bush-lite, that he's a corporate dem, that he is selling out progressive ideals. If he's being a good little Republican soldier, why has the GOP mobilized against him with unprecedented rage, unprecedented fear mongering, unprecedented racism and unprecedented HATE. All one has to do is listen to Rush Limbaugh every day or to the FNC primetime line-up and here them rant and rave about how Obama is not only a democrat, he's much worse. He's a socialist! He's a communist! He's a marxist! Why are they opposing and fillibustering EVERYTHING that he does if he's a good little republican soldier?

Why all the hate from them if he's being a good little republican soldier? Perhaps because HE'S NOT and PERHAPS because they KNOW that he has the potential to re-draw America into a center-left liberal country the way Reagan redrew the map, made progressive progress very difficult for 28 years, and forced America more center to far right? Perhaps, because they know he's the gravest threat they've faced in 40 years since JFK?

Is this Bush II1?:
1. Torture ban
2. Planned closure of Gitmo
3. USSC justice Sonia Sotomayor
4. NYC KSM/AQ trials
5. Climate change initiatives.
6. Winner of 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
7. More even handed stance in Israel-Palestinian dispute
8. Liberal federal court nominations
9. SCHIP.
10. Attempt to expand and make health care universal.

I guess it is Bush III though. The GOP doesn't realize how good they have it I guess...right??

[anonymous171]

1. Who cares what the GOP thinks? They are always wrong, stop listening to them

[Politics_Guy25]

2. The point is what DU thinks

This post is trying to snap them out of the idea that somehow they are being sold out. They are not.

[anonymous171]

3. The GOP will go batshit no matter what Obama does. They are reactionaries. Ignore them

The only thing you should be thinking about in relation to the GOP is how to destroy them. That's how I see it, anyways. Unlike Obama, I believe that the GOP is an enemy that needs to be annihilated, not placated.

[tblue]

8. You said it! Obama is way too gracious to stupid, mean, backward people.

I WISH Obama treated the Left with as much deference as he does the Right. And no, I'm not saying this is Bush's 3rd term. But I would love for Obama to throw the book at the torturers, fight for a real, broadly available public option, and bring the troops home from Afghanistan. Is it my fault if Obama's actions on those matters are not a complete 180 degrees different from Bush?

[cliffordu]

4. Two words:

BLACK GUY.

[Bonn1997]

17. I was thinking the same thing. I might add this:

Black guy with scary name!

[cliffordu]

28. Yep, yep.....

[me b zola]

5. "Bush's 3rd term"

That's one of the stupidest things that I've heard here.

[HughMoran]

23. ...might want to get used to it

there's a whole contingency of DUers who firmly believe this and use this sort of rhetoric regularly.

[cowcommander]

6. Because the GOP is full of morons

And no, it doesn't always have to do with Obama being black, they whined just as much during Clinton's administration.

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. Yep, they sure did and worse.

:thumbsup:

[athenasatanjesus]

7. I'm still not sure one way or the other on Obama but...

The Democratic party overall good or bad is pretty moderate,so when the GOP goes hard towards the right while claiming the democrats are hard towards the left the perception of most americans who are in between politically shifts between a moderate party,and an extreme right party making most people center right.

[elleng]

9. 'Some in the blogosphere' are very foolish,

understand little if anything about politics, and don't have the requisite patience.

As to GOP being infuriated, would have to know WHICH GOP is being referred to. Its time for us to pay A LOT LESS attention to Repubs, and encourage/force Dems to do our/their jobs.

[chollybocker]

10. Does this mean Obama gets to be POTUS till 2020?

Then I'm all for this 'Bush-3rd-Term' thing.

[MSchreader]

11. OK, I'll make the argument

For the sake of this not being just an echo chamber.

DISCLAIMER: I ask that all those interested, including moderators and admins, take notice of the above statement. I'm not looking to do anything more than provide the argument for the benefit of readers, and won't reply to any response in this thread if the content of those replies to the below amount to little more than the "Am not!" side of the "Am not! Are too!" argument.

Now then, to the discussion at hand....

"If he's being a good little Republican soldier, why has the GOP mobilized against him with unprecedented rage, unprecedented fear mongering, unprecedented racism and unprecedented HATE." To put it simply, it's because, these days, being "Bush's third term" is still too "socialist" for the Palin/Beck/Limbaugh/Bachmann/Dobbs Republicans. We saw how the proto-teabaggers, birthers, deathers, Tenthers, etc., had been distancing themselves from Bush after he pushed through the TARP program at the end of last year and then signed the deal to withdraw combat troops from Iraq by 2012. The far right felt betrayed, and were already beginning to organize before Obama's election.

"Is this Bush III?" Let's look at the list:...

1. Torture ban - Bush also insisted that he and his regime did not torture, and even made public gestures to the Justice Department effectively "banning" the use of torture. Nevertheless, torture continued. Obama's declaration said that torture would not be engaged in by U.S. military personnel, but said nothing about non-U.S. military personnel operating in occupation zones (e.g., Xe) or at the secret facilities that are still operating and are being used.

2. Planned closure of Gitmo - Bush also talked about closing Gitmo. And the fact is that Obama continues to run into resistance when it comes to actually getting that concentration camp closed. Moreover, what need is there for Gitmo when Bagram and Diego Garcia are operating much closer to the conflict ... and farther away from the prying eyes of the media?

3. USSC justice Sonia Sotomayor - If you're referring to the fact that Sotomayor is Latina, then my response is Clarence Thomas. If it's her record, I have to say it's hit-and-miss. She's more of a centrist than a liberal; her interpretation of the firefighter case was actually based on case law, not "liberal judicial activism", and her rulings on reproductive rights have been checkered. She may not be an Alito, Roberts or Scalia, but she's also no Stevens or Thurgood Marshall.

4. NYC KSM/AQ trials - These are show trials, regardless of the fact that they are using the civilian legal system as a cover. Both Obama and Holder have made it clear that they would not have even scheduled the NYC trials if they were not "confident" of getting a guilty verdict. And let's not forget that only five of the 10 detainees being brought to the U.S. are going to NYC; the other five are going to face military commissions.

5. Climate change initiatives - While Obama was in China last week, he expressed his agreement for a deal worked out by the world's other major polluting countries to push off any actual compact on reducing emissions until "at least" next year. This means that Copenhagen is nothing more than a supper club, and Kyoto may very well expire without a new agreement in place.

6. Winner of 2009 Nobel Peace Prize - Doesn't Kissinger have one of these? But, OK, fine, you got me on this one.

7. More even handed stance in Israel-Palestinian dispute - Not really. Bush also called for a halt to the settlements being constructed in Palestine, and supported an independent Palestinian state.

8. Liberal federal court nominations - This could be a difference, if it was not for the fact that the character of current legislation was not negating the point of appointing more liberal judges, such as on the question of a woman's right to privacy/choice. Talk to me more about this if one of these liberal judges overturns the Stupak-Pitts Amendment or one of the anti-same-sex marriage laws passed by referendum.

9. SCHIP - This is not something Obama can really take credit for. Leaving aside the fact that Bush ended up signing SCHIP reauthorization into law December 2007, the CHIPRA 2 Act (which is probably what you're thinking of) passed both houses with two-thirds majorities, making Obama's signature a mere formality.

10. Attempt to expand and make health care universal - Obama's promise of "univeral" health care is gone. The White House acknowledges that any version of health care "reform" that makes it out of Congress and on to his desk will still leave millions uninsured. And Bush actually did attempt to "expand" health care coverage through that disastrous Medicare bill that passed in 2003.

Now that we're done with that exercise, let's see about putting together another 10 points, and see where we're at (in no particular order):

1. Extending the most anti-democratic provisions of the USA-PATRIOT Act and other "anti-terrorist" laws, and supporting the "domestic extremist" bill currently in Congress
2. Expanding the occupation of Afghanistan and adhering to Bush's withdrawal plan for Iraq
3. Approved two trillion-dollar bribes for the Wall Street speculators and finance capitalists, and is signaling support for a third
4. Upheld Bush's union-busting conditions for the GM and Chrysler bailouts
5. Opposes enforcing the equal protection clause of the Constitution regarding same-sex couples
6. Continuing the illegal incursions into Pakistan, saber-rattling against Iran, and undermining of disagreeable regimes in Honduras, Venezuela and Bolivia
7. Maintaining the practice of using government revenue to financially underwrite capitalist corporations (the corporate welfare state)
8. Continuing to promote the "free market" privatizing of public education and other public services
9. Rejecting the implementation of public works programs to address growing unemployment and maintaining the anti-poor "welfare reform" policies in a time of economic crisis
10. Continuing to shift the burden of financing the government disproportionately onto working people through tax cuts for businesses and corporations, and offsetting rollbacks through other cuts

I tried to group these together so that I wasn't trying to use a lot of relatively small issues to pack a list.

BTW, it was not the hard left that first referred to an Obama administration as "Bush's Third Term", it was the Wall Street Journal. Just thought you'd be interested to know that.

[gleaner]

12. Excellent post ....

You made all of my points for me. The people who hate Obama the most in the GOP are the extremists. The militant conservatives who will not give up on having someone like McCain who would be a carbon copy of Bush. Of course they hate Obama. He has what they wanted for themselves; the presidency.

The problem I have with Obmama is that he made all of the right promises when he was campaigning and held out hope for a different direction for this country. If you concentrate on the promises he has actually kept, you see a void. A large void. I think it is fine to admire Obama if he is a leader you trust and want to follow. But he is not my leader and he is taking us further down the same old road. I don't want to go there. I want my hoped for different direction. Am I going to get it? I seriously doubt it. I wonder what this country will be when he finishes whatever it is he is starting. It sure isn't a progressive democracy. That seems to be a lost dream that some of us have that may never be realized again. And that is just sad.

Again, excellent post and for whatever reason you had, thanks for writing it.

[Mari333]

16. well said

[Bonn1997]

18. Wow that is one impressive post. People K and Ring the OP seem to be speechless on your post.

[SammyWinstonJack]

25. There's a shocker.

No rebuttal. :evilgrin:

[AnOhioan]

19. Thanks for your input...saved me the effort :)

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. +1 nt

[laughingliberal]

27. Great response!

On the ways in which President Obama is like Bush your points #3,4,7,8,9, & 10 represent the continuation of the transfer of wealth upwards. These policies are destructive to the working class and continue our push towards oligarchy. Not saying I'm not worried about the other issues but my support for Democrats has always been based on the belief that Democrats stand for working people. Now, not so much.

As for Republicans being mad, they just want their party back in power. They really don't care what the policies are. If there's no (R) behind the name, that's what matters to them.

[O is 44]

29. You say Obama is just like Bush...

I say you are wrong by this simple fact, when Bush came into office he was handed a surplus during peace time. He implemented torture; he created the deplorable gitmo situation. Bush did this himself, so for you to say that he also wanted to stop torture and close gitmo so that makes Obama just like him is disingenuous. He created this shit so he had absolutely no credibility. Just what actions did Bush take to close Gitmo? There is no way you will convince me that if Obama was handed a surplus in peace time he would have created this disaster.

As for Justice Sonia Sotomayor, to compare her to Clarence Thomas is a disgrace. It has been well documented that this judicial candidate had more experience then any other justice to be nominated to the SC. Bush Sr. nominated the joke Clarence Thomas after only one year of judicial experience. Mr. Thomas has no individual thought he only parrots Scalia. In fact, on Sotomayor’s first day of open court she asked more questions then Mr. Thomas has done since he became a Justice. You may not like her because she is not as liberal as you would like, but please do not diminish her intelligence by comparing her to Thomas. By the way President Obama is not required to pick someone that fits the progressive ideology but he does have an obligation to pick someone competent.

You want to believe that Bush cared one iota about the Palestinians, please show me an action that would support this belief. As I recall about a year ago Israel was bombing the shit out of them and I heard Bush not once speak out about this as the US President. Obama has made numerous overtures towards the Muslim world in which he stresses that the US is not a war with Islam. I never remember Bush making that distinction with any of his actions. I admit that the US support for Israel and Palestine is not 50/50 under Obama but it has been said that Obama has used the toughest rhetoric towards Israel in recent memory. I still believe he could be much tougher if he had a more compliant congress willing to cut off funds.

As for the SCHIP signing, the President is apart of the executive branch that is what he does, he signs bills. If Bush could have done it why did he leave it for Obama?

You are comparing Bush’s failed Medicare bill to a bill that has yet to be finalized which the President has not signed. Bush passed this bill in 2003 its failure has already played out. Sorry but this is an incomplete comparison.

As far as the Patriot act I have seen no coverage of Obama signing any extensions. I would also like to know if the FISA court is being utilized in the correct fashion, something that was not done under Bush. Any extension he does sign I would like to see how it stands up to our constitution. It would be a shame if a former constitutional law professor chooses to violate the supreme law of the land. As far as the bill you mentioned that is still in Congress how is that Obama’s fault it has yet to make it to his desk.

If you followed Obama’s campaign he always stated that Afghanistan was the correct war and that he planned to finish the job. I voted for him understanding this although today I wish he would change his mind after being able to access the situation and bring all the troops home.



As far as Iraq, Obama had stated all along that he wanted a 16 month timetable for withdrawal and I remember vividly the right slamming him as well as Hillary for being naïve. I also remember the Bush administration quietly adopting his strategy while his side was publicly bashing him, something of course the media did not point out.

The Wall Street bail out happened under Bush, the only blame I lay at Obama’s feet is that he continued the AIG bail out.


Bush never supported a bailout for the car industry hence he never bailed them out.


I wish Obama was at least the socialist the Republicans accuse him of being. I also wish wall streets supposed hate of him was real. I too believe he has been far too cozy with Wall Street and far too nice to his enemies. I don’t understand why he can’t see that their main goal is that he fails, but yet his supporters saw it from the beginning.

[MSchreader]

30. Even though there is very much an "Am not!" feel to this post

There are some things that could use a little clarification.

"I say you are wrong by this simple fact, when Bush came into office he was handed a surplus during peace time...." On one level, the point made in this paragraph is a fair one. Yes, a big difference between Bush and Obama is that the former initiated these things, with one (big) result being that the budget surplus became a budget deficit. But it is disingenuous (to use the author's term) to ignore the fact that these policies have been continued after the transfer of power. During the argument on the "stimulus" bribe, for example, numerous White House officials justified the expansion of the budget deficit, sometimes using arguments that paralleled those raised under the Bush regime. So, I'm not so convinced that Obama would have been free from the pressures of the ruling class to plunge the country further into debt for the sake of implementing their agenda.

"As for Justice Sonia Sotomayor, to compare her to Clarence Thomas is a disgrace." I think you miss the point of why I made that comparison. My point was to highlight the fallacy of arguing that Obama is different because he appointed a non-white male to the Supreme Court. That's why it was said quickly, and I moved on quickly. I would rather deal with her judicial record. (And, incidentally, apart from the fact that both Sotomayor and Thomas are both non-white-male justices, I do not see anything more they have in common.)

"As for the SCHIP signing, the President is apart of the executive branch that is what he does, he signs bills. If Bush could have done it why did he leave it for Obama?" The CHIPRA 2 bill wasn't finally passed by the Senate until January 29, 2009.

"As far as the Patriot act I have seen no coverage of Obama signing any extensions...." Extensions? Not yet. But there is an article (http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=2694 ) pointing to how the White House is maneuvering behind the scenes in Congress to keep certain provisions from expiring. And in terms of the "domestic extremists" bill, my point in that was to say that he supports it.

"The Wall Street bail out happened under Bush, the only blame I lay at Obama’s feet is that he continued the AIG bail out." Obama did vote for that trillion-dollar bribe, so he does share some responsibility for it.

"Bush never supported a bailout for the car industry hence he never bailed them out." The conditions of the GM and Chrysler bailouts were formulated by Bush and Paulson in the closing months of the regime. They and the Congressional Republicans backed the plan because it "punished the union" while keeping the two corporations afloat ... temporarily, at least. The UAW and AFL-CIO both looked to Obama to reverse the most egregious conditions, such as requiring the UAW to reduce wages and benefits to the level of the non-union transplants in the South. He did not. In fact, when it came down to it, the White House threatened to kill the deal if the UAW did not submit.

Now that those points are addressed, I will further concede one more: Over the course of eight years, Bush made a number of shifts and turns that led him in certain directions. It needs to be noted that some of the points where one can find common ground between Bush and Obama are a result of movement by Bush away from the far-right wing of the GOP in the last two years of his regime. Looking back, I do tend to think that the Bush of 2008 would be roundly criticized by the Bush of 2004.

My point in raising this is to acknowledge that we are still in the first year of Obama's White House, and where he will be in another three to seven years is not clearly determined. Events may compel him to take positions he is not currently prepared or willing to take, and I hold out the possibility that a fundamental break with the corporatist agenda is not impossible. But I have no illusions that this will happen; I, as an historian, only place on the table the idea that it could happen. We will see what happens.

[MSchreader]

31. Kick

:kick:

Given the words of Obama earlier tonight, I thought it might be worthwhile to kick this back into activity and see if opinions have changed.

[Neecy]

33. Excellent post.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

13. Rec'ing

for MSchreader's comment

[Hannah Bell]

14. same reason they pretended clinton was the second coming of marx,

red meat for their base.

[RufusTFirefly]

15. The GOP thinks the media are "liberal" too. They are deluded and never satisfied.

Besides, their perpetual persecution complex works wonders from a policy standpoint. The idea that anyone would try to seek some sort of middle ground with these whackos is both sad and laughable. Not to mention an utter waste of time.

[WI_DEM]

20. because only some idiots on DU really think that Obama is another Bush.

If you look at every poll Obama remains very popular among Democrats by over 90%. Where he has losing approval is among Republicans and now is only supported by them by single digits, but yet there are cornballs on DU who think that Obama is just another Bush.

[HughMoran]

22. socialism is equivalent to corporatism

everybody knows that.

;)

[Umbral]

24. Their not going to get credit for it? nt

[branders seine]

32. because they are insane.

they went after Clinton with everything they had, and he was basically a republican. He gave them NAFTA and welfare "reform" and plenty of military dough and lots and lots and lots of deregulation...still they hated him with a flaming hatred that would not die.