- Joined
- Nov 6, 2009
- Messages
- 36,923
- Reaction score
- 22,245
- Location
- Didjabringabeeralong
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Communist
No, but I have studied history extensively, and while Reagan's strength was foreign policy, his domestic policies were quite weak.
Obama is Obama.
Cut taxes: check, both did this
Stimulus spending: check, both did this
raise the deficit at previously unheard of rates: check, both did it
Popularity: check, both very similar so far
Battle congress but get most of what you ask for: check, both
So you agree that Obama is Bush as well, since your extremely broad and severely lacking context and detail examples fit for him as well. Hell add "Wars continued in Afghanistan and Iraq: check" and "Gitmo bieng used: Check"
I guess you think a real argument can be made that Obama is a Bushism.
Comparing end results alone in a broad sense without looking at the contributing factors of why they occured, not looking out how they occured, not looking at the reasons behind why they occured, is foolishness.
I find it hillarious that many on the left use a similar asinine bit of logic that you are to compare him to Reagan, thinking it will somehow remove complaints that he's left leaning or win over independents and republicans, but wouldn't dare do it with Bush...showing its a bull**** political move founded on obfuscation and dishonesty.
All you did was the inverse of the Obama = Hitler crap where they compare him with a few broad statements that can apply to both and declare it as if its an indisputable fact he's "Hitleresque". They do it for the negative emotioanl reaction to Hitler rubbing off on Obama, Liberals by and large are doing it for the emotional response to Reagan to be used as a shield to say "see, see, he's not liberal, he's really moderate/centrists/conservative!"
Do you really want to go down this road? I made it fairly simplistic since I was working off the top of my head, but the comparisons actually run quite a bit deeper. It is also quite true that Reagan's economic policy when taking office was tax cuts and stimulative spending, something that Obama get's heavily criticized for doing by many on the right.
.To carry this even further, look at the poll question. I did not say that Reagan was Obama(or vice versa), I agreed that Obama is more like Reagan than people want to say. There is a large unsubtle difference between saying there are similarities and showing where they are, than saying they are "just alike"
Lastly, my comments had nothing to do with trying to stifle criticism of Obama. If anything, it is the worship of Reagan as a conservative, mostly by people who would complain that some one with similar policies was a RINO today.
Reagan pushed for across the board tax CUTS to the CURRENT rate at the time, and to my knowledge did not himself push for tax raises or fines in other areas of income. Obama did pushed for tax EXTENTIONS of the current rates for some people and not for others. He also pushed for increased taxes and fines in various other areas other than income.
Reagan's "stimulus" spending was primarily focused towards military spending first and foremost as a stated intent to better defend against outside threats with the hopeful side effect to help the economy, and his stimulus didn't have the government buying out private businesses. Obama's "stimulus" spending was primarily focused on "getting the economy going" with the hopeful side effect to improve infastructure and did have the government buying out private business.
"Obama and Hitler both pushed for nationalized health care". Look, my statement is as accurate as your redress.
The poll question asked if Obama is more like reagan than anyone else. Your post seemed to suggest an agreement with this notion. Yet every broad point you stated about reagan could apply to Bush and Obama, however even MORE similarities could be made in that case.
Sure, are there broad similarities between Reagan and Obama? Sure. And Obama and Bush. And Clinton adn Bush. And Reagan and Clinton. And all of them and Hitler. Same goes for a specific similarity here and there. But they are not comparable in any sincere, legitimate, substantial way.
Ah, so emotional response to try and get people to shun Reagan instead...doens't really change. You're using a broad and disingenuous comparison to attempt to imply something that's not true in hopes of tieing the two together to make people react based on that tie.
You're not diffrent than the Obama/Hitler crowd in this.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?