It's not Reagan this time.
I was opining that Obama was looking a lot like George Bush (the H. W. version) in foreign affairs. That is, waiting while the ocean of events carried him along and left him with only one option in the end...which he grudgingly implements.
And sure enough the people on the left have seen it, too. Thus the great reevaluation of President Bush (41) by the left! He is no longer the out-of-touch man who didn't know/care you were suffering from a recession (that had already ended) or the sucker who kept falling for liberal tax now, cut spending later (hah!) "bi-partisan" agreements. No, Bush is now a brave, pragmatic man who single-handedly stopped death squads in El Salvador (when Reagan was President, no less...that they later returned during his stint as President is a mere inconvenient fact) and stopped Tiananmen Square (when it was going to happen in Berlin).
The revisionist history is necessary because if Obama is going to be compared to Bush on foreign policy, Bush (and by association, Obama) must be recast into a man of (behind the scenes) determination who was selflessly working for the greater good while it only appeared that he wasn't in control...of anything.
So rest assured that when Obama is increasing your taxes (and promising to cut spending...later); appears to be unwilling (or unable) to set his own course in foreign affairs; and gives the velvet-glove treatment to autocrats before following the rest of the world in celebrating their downfall he is really acting in the best interests of the nation and knows that somewhere down the line history will see his true heroism.
High gas prices? They'd be even higher without him! His apparent lack of concern about the economy and poor people? It would be even worse without him! World chaos and revolution? It would be even worse without him!
So until history "vindicates" his inaction and poor economic policies, it's okay to keep honoring Obama for his (alleged) potential and ignoring his (lack of) accomplishments.
And sure enough the people on the left have seen it, too. Thus the great reevaluation of President Bush (41) by the left! He is no longer the out-of-touch man who didn't know/care you were suffering from a recession (that had already ended) or the sucker who kept falling for liberal tax now, cut spending later (hah!) "bi-partisan" agreements. No, Bush is now a brave, pragmatic man who single-handedly stopped death squads in El Salvador (when Reagan was President, no less...that they later returned during his stint as President is a mere inconvenient fact) and stopped Tiananmen Square (when it was going to happen in Berlin).
The revisionist history is necessary because if Obama is going to be compared to Bush on foreign policy, Bush (and by association, Obama) must be recast into a man of (behind the scenes) determination who was selflessly working for the greater good while it only appeared that he wasn't in control...of anything.
So rest assured that when Obama is increasing your taxes (and promising to cut spending...later); appears to be unwilling (or unable) to set his own course in foreign affairs; and gives the velvet-glove treatment to autocrats before following the rest of the world in celebrating their downfall he is really acting in the best interests of the nation and knows that somewhere down the line history will see his true heroism.
High gas prices? They'd be even higher without him! His apparent lack of concern about the economy and poor people? It would be even worse without him! World chaos and revolution? It would be even worse without him!
So until history "vindicates" his inaction and poor economic policies, it's okay to keep honoring Obama for his (alleged) potential and ignoring his (lack of) accomplishments.