Why I Miss George W. Bush…
For all his flaws as a leader, Bush 43 was a man. Obama looked so small last night, and I don’t just mean when he school-yard bullied the Supreme Court. I was recalling last night the situation at Bush’s first State of the Union. Bush had inherited a recession and nine months into his office, we were attacked. By his first State of the Union, Bush, however, enjoyed a high approval rating. His tax cuts had prevented the economy from spiraling downward, especially after 9-11. And he had united the nation in a response to the Taliban. Did he complain about the failures under Clinton? Did he blame either problem on the previous administration? I don’t recall so. But more importantly, a year into his presidency, Bush had concretely done something. Obama whined last night about the hand he was dealt. Seriously? He needs to man up, stop complaining, and act resolutely and pragmatically. Instead, he talks about liberal fantasies of the total welfare state and espouses delusional theories about deficit-spending to spur economic growth. Oh yes, and it’s all Bush’s fault. No matter how much the dinosaur media spins it, I think the American people see right through this and are discovering that Obama is indeed, a small, small man.
And he really did “look small”, as well. I’m not trying to cast facile aspersions on the man, but, dude, hit the free weights when you’re done playing hoops, and eat some red meat!
Well said. For all of Bush’s faults, I always got the sense that he took his duties of governance seriously. You’re not the only one who misses him. He also wasn’t in a permanent campaign mode.
Everything with Obama is about campaigning, I get the sense that he finds governing more difficult so he falls back on hollow rhetoric. I hope people see through the facade.
He is an immature, spoiled, self-absorbed little man with a 5 minute career who is in way over his head. Its going to be a very long 3 years.
It seemed to me that he spent the 1st 10 minutes blaming Bush, though not in so many words. It was clear, from the grins on the faces of Biden & Lizard Woman – sorry!, I mean Pelosi – that he was getting his digs in on W. Sad. You gotta own it now, Barry. I get the feeling he doesn’t want to own anything unless he can pat himself on the back about it. E.G.O. That’s what the SOTU was all about. “We need to come together & be bipartisan” was the message but “Let’s do this my way” was the subtext.
And small! Sheesh! How many possible ways could BO look small last night? The guy looked small in stature, too. I do not recall another SOTU, including last year’s non-SOTU, where a president looked so . . . puny. Biden seemed to tower over BO when he would stand & clap. I don’t recall Bush or Clinton ever being towered over. Reagan? Puh-leeze! HE towered over Tip in his SOTUs! There were shots from low in the center aisle that made BO look like a 12 year old boy! Who chose the camera angles? Forced perspective can make a person look very small (remember the tricks Jackson used in Lord of the Rings?) & it’s not becoming of a president, whether I agree with his political ideology or not.
Small . . . yeah, in every way.
And, for some stoopid reason, I’ve been watching the bad singers on American Idol, marveling at how people these days get *desire* totally confused with *ability*. The honestly think they can sing but seriously can not. It struck me this morning that I’d seen the exact same thing in BO during the SOTU! I think he honestly believes he’s being Presidential(tm) and strong, a leader. But, really, he has no clue! He just needs his Simon Cowell moment. “I’m sorry, Barry, but you’re just not right for this competition.”
Oh, man. I’d pay money to see that.
So well said without need to add or detract–
There is a lot to criticize Obama about, both in the SOTU and in his presidency up to this point. But is his stature, or the perceived stature as represented by camera angles, really what you want to hang your hat on? Criticizing that is like criticizing his shoe size: irrelevant.
“But is his stature, or the perceived stature as represented by camera angles, really what you want to hang your hat on? Criticizing that is like criticizing his shoe size: irrelevant.”
Which post did YOU read? Try it again.
Perhaps I should have clarified, Max, since you didn’t bother to do your homework and make sense of it yourself: I was referring to Gene’s post, in which he dedicated nearly 1/3 of it to criticizing who small Obama LITERALLY looked during the speech. Did you miss this? Or only read every other comment?
“But is his stature, or the perceived stature as represented by camera angles, really what you want to hang your hat on?” Gene didn’t.
Could have done without the stature part, but that wasn’t really what the hat was being hung upon. I took the physical stature as more of a comment on how eerily it parallels the substantive criticism rather than a substantive criticism in itself. YMMV
We can quibble on how much a part of the argument it was. The fact remains is that by criticizing Obama on irrelevant or otherwise inane points dilutes the value of legitimate criticism. Whether we like it, often the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. Spend 1/3 of your time talking about how tall he looks and people are likely to dismiss you as someone simply bent on denouncing the man at every turn, and you risk losing credibility.
Very well said, Alberto.
There are few men to be found among the Left, or evidently, among their supporters.
Lonestar-
And how, praytell, are you defining “manhood”?