Obama's Bush Blame Game

[BMT (RIP)]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/10/30/its_time_for_obama_to_stop_blaming_bush.html

:munchin


BMT

[Sigaba]

In his piece, Dr. Krauthammer puts it best.There is nothing new here.The current administration is simply turning on its head an approach used by Republicans and Reagan Democrats over the last three decades. That approach saw politicians and policymakers hammering away again and again at the "Decade of Weakness" as a broad (and historically debatable) attack on détente in general. (One should note that while President Carter was a focal point of these comments, so was President Nixon.)

This approach not only helped President Reagan gain the presidency, it was also the foundation of his administration's national security policy. Indeed, if one spends time reading Caspar Weinberger's speeches to numerous civic groups in the early 1980s.*

During his acceptance speech in 2004 for his party's presidential nomination (source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57466-2004Sep2.html)), Bush the Younger obliquely revived that hoary polemic. He said:If America shows uncertainty or weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy.

This will not happen on my watch. More recently, former members of the Reagan administration have dusted off the rhetoric in an ongoing attempt to equate the current president to President Carter. An example is available here (http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/31/jimmy-carters-spirit-of-notre/print). (IMO, this effort is especially disrespectful to Carter. What ever else may be said of that man, he, unlike the incumbent, says what he believes rather than what he thinks people want to hear.)

__________________________________________________ __
* Drafts of these speeches are available at Ronald W. Reagan Presidential Library, WHORM FG013 (Department of Defense), boxes 1-3.

It is my opinion that the Reagan's administration's efforts to recast the debates over national security in terms of domestic politics came at the expense of the broader discussion of strategy that was initiated by, of all people, Jimmy Carter during his presidency.:confused:

[Pete]

Obama has flat out stated many times about the mess he got from Bush.

Can you find any speach by Bush while he was president where he blamed Clinton for 9-11?

There were a few rumblings of "Clinton got us into this mess" by others after 9-11 but the press and the D's said that Bush was the President and the buck stops on his desk.

[Sigaba]

Obama has flat out stated many times about the mess he got from Bush.

Can you find any speech by Bush while he was president where he blamed Clinton for 9-11?

There were a few rumblings of "Clinton got us into this mess" by others after 9-11 but the press and the D's said that Bush was the President and the buck stops on his desk.Pete--

I have not found a specific comment by President Bush blaming his predecessor for 9/11.

Bush the Younger did take oblique, elegant swings at President Clinton. For example, during the second debate between Bush and Vice President Gore in October, 2000 (source is here (http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2000b.html)). BUSH: I would like to, of course, and I presume this administration would as well. We don't know -- there are no inspectors now in Iraq, the coalition that was in place isn't as strong as it used to be. He is a danger. We don't want him fishing in troubled waters in the Middle East. And it's going to be hard, it's going to be important to rebuild that coalition to keep the pressure on him.

MODERATOR: You feel that is a failure of the Clinton administration?

BUSH: I do.Later, during the 2002 state of the union address (http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/01/print/20020129-11.html), President Bush offered what struck me as an indictment of the Age of Clinton.For too long our culture has said, "If it feels good, do it." Now America is embracing a new ethic and a new creed: "Let's roll." (Applause.) In the sacrifice of soldiers, the fierce brotherhood of firefighters, and the bravery and generosity of ordinary citizens, we have glimpsed what a new culture of responsibility could look like. We want to be a nation that serves goals larger than self. We've been offered a unique opportunity, and we must not let this moment pass. (Applause.) As a third example, I would return to the quote offered in my previous post in this thread. IMO, the meaning of the statement was clear: If America takes the same approach to national security that it did during the previous decade and the 'decade of weakness', disaster will follow.

In summary, while one could argue that the current president is attacking his predecessor in a way Bush the Younger did not, my take is that Bush the Younger did not make those kinds of direct attacks because he could, though subtle implication, achieve a similar objective.

As a counter point, I present a different question. Might a different approach work better to undermine the misplaced confidence in the incumbent other than an endless sequence of "he said / he said"? Every time this president or one of his supporters blames Bush the Younger, why not remind everyone how the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize said during his first (and hopefully only) inaugural address (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/20/us/politics/20text-obama.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print)?On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics. (That sound you're hearing is that of my eyes rolling. I just don't like him.)

[Box]

There is a big difference in Bush blaming the Clinton administration in a debate against al Gore.... Al Gore was the "2IC" in the Clinton administration and thus directly connected to any campaign attacks that Bush may have levied against the Clinton administration...

President Obama spent most of his effort campaigning AGAINST then president Bush.
Sen McCain could have hardly be considered 'part' of the Bush administration.

[Richard]

Anybody here ever hear words similar to these before?

You've been in command for over six months now - whether or not 'it was the previous commander's fault' is a moot point. It's your command now - so what are you going to do about it? ;)

And so it goes...;)

Richard's jaded $.02 :munchin

[longrange1947]

Richard, sounds like the three letters. :munchin :D

[HowardCohodas]

Obama wanted this gig. It is pretty childish to whine about how hard the job is now that he has it. He needs to man up and get with the program.

Not likely to happen in my opinion.

[Gypsy]

It's possible almost every new administration has made its jabs at the previous...however, I honestly don't recall (in my lifetime0 where an administration has repeated their lament over and over and over and over...ad nauseum.

Here's my simple advice. You won the election, DO something instead of whining. It's so unattractive. :rolleyes:

[Sigaba]

I honestly don't recall (in my lifetime) where an administration has repeated their lament over and over and over and over...ad nauseum.Surely you recall Andrew Jackson's 1830 state of the union address in which he railed against his predecessor's support of the American System.

(I'd like to leave all of my CDs and DVDs to my sister, my books to the University of Southern California libraries...)

[HowardCohodas]

DO something instead of whining. It's so unattractive. :rolleyes:

I used to think so also. But girly-men seem to get the girls to swoon. :mad:

[Gypsy]

Surely you recall Andrew Jackson's 1830 state of the union address in which he railed against his predecessor's support of the American System.



I was trying to forget that particularly ugly incident. Thanks.

:D

I used to think so also. But girly-men seem to get the girls to swoon. :mad:

You are socializing with the wrong girls.