4 ms·

>I think Obama was a great President, but he was also very little different than George Bush except in his oration Talk about revisionist history, my goodness.

nate_meurer 7y ago
In your opinion, what are notable differences between the GWB and Obama admins?
rayiner 7y ago
It’s in the hindsight of history that the differences that seemed significant at the time proved to not be. On the economy, both were mainstream neo-liberals. The best example is TARP. Obama inherited and continued TARP, but it’s also what he would’ve done anyway. Obama extended the Bush tax cuts for everyone earning below $400,000. On foreign relations, both were aggressive on terrorism. On immigration, their policies and rhetoric were similar, with Bush possibly being more liberal. (Bush strongly supported the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, which would have given everyone illegally present in the US on January 1, 2010, a permanent visa and pathway to citizenship.) The two had different rhetoric on guns, religion, and abortion, but very carefully preserved the detante on these social issues by not proposing any significant legislation affecting them. On energy policy, both supported fracking and coal. (Obama had some last minute 2015 environmental regulations, which were quickly rolled back by Trump, but they clearly aren’t a priority seeing as how he waited until the last year of his presidency to act.) On healthcare, both had significant measures to expand coverage. (Bush’s Medicare Part D was a $50 billion/year program, while ACA was estimated to be $95 billion/year.)
lubujackson 7y ago
It is certainly not a popular opinion. But as diametrically opposed as they appear, there are plenty of problematic issues under Obama that Dems (and Republicans) conveniently ignore. My biggest disappointment at the time: Obama kept all of Bush's economic team intact when he came into office. Yes, the same people who enabled the housing crisis and had strong ties to Goldman Sachs. Probably it should have been the biggest issue of the election but the dialogue was (and is) dominated by identity politics. The underlying issue is that Obama was beholden to the exact same corporate influences as Bush. You don't rise through Chicago politics that fast without some deals in place. This isn't a condemnation of Obama, by the way, but recognition of the system's vulnerability.
- rayiner 7y ago
  I disagree with your conclusion. Obama wasn’t “beholden to corporate interests.” He genuinely believed in the neo-liberal orthodoxy, and still does: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/21/sorry-president-obama-we-do-need-tear-down-system https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/21/sorry-presiden... I grew up during the Clinton/Blair/Merkel era. I thought socialism was defeated in 1991. Everyone understood that markets and the private sector, with some levels of “nudges” as necessary, were the solution to everything. “Politics” was about how much you thought we should nudge in various directions, and whether you thought kids should learn about condoms or abstinence in school. So when Obama initially ran for office, I didn’t perceive Obama’s fundamentally neo-liberal capitalist world view as being a profound similarity between him and Bush. It wasn’t until people like Sanders and Corbyn started getting substantial traction that I realized we weren’t yet at the end of history and a commitment to the current economic world order was actually not universal.

nate_meurer 7y ago

In your opinion, what are notable differences between the GWB and Obama admins?

rayiner 7y ago

It’s in the hindsight of history that the differences that seemed significant at the time proved to not be. On the economy, both were mainstream neo-liberals. The best example is TARP. Obama inherited and continued TARP, but it’s also what he would’ve done anyway. Obama extended the Bush tax cuts for everyone earning below $400,000. On foreign relations, both were aggressive on terrorism. On immigration, their policies and rhetoric were similar, with Bush possibly being more liberal. (Bush strongly supported the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, which would have given everyone illegally present in the US on January 1, 2010, a permanent visa and pathway to citizenship.) The two had different rhetoric on guns, religion, and abortion, but very carefully preserved the detante on these social issues by not proposing any significant legislation affecting them. On energy policy, both supported fracking and coal. (Obama had some last minute 2015 environmental regulations, which were quickly rolled back by Trump, but they clearly aren’t a priority seeing as how he waited until the last year of his presidency to act.) On healthcare, both had significant measures to expand coverage. (Bush’s Medicare Part D was a $50 billion/year program, while ACA was estimated to be $95 billion/year.)

lubujackson 7y ago

It is certainly not a popular opinion. But as diametrically opposed as they appear, there are plenty of problematic issues under Obama that Dems (and Republicans) conveniently ignore. My biggest disappointment at the time: Obama kept all of Bush's economic team intact when he came into office. Yes, the same people who enabled the housing crisis and had strong ties to Goldman Sachs. Probably it should have been the biggest issue of the election but the dialogue was (and is) dominated by identity politics. The underlying issue is that Obama was beholden to the exact same corporate influences as Bush. You don't rise through Chicago politics that fast without some deals in place. This isn't a condemnation of Obama, by the way, but recognition of the system's vulnerability.

rayiner 7y ago
I disagree with your conclusion. Obama wasn’t “beholden to corporate interests.” He genuinely believed in the neo-liberal orthodoxy, and still does: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/21/sorry-president-obama-we-do-need-tear-down-system https://www.commondreams.org/views/2019/11/21/sorry-presiden... I grew up during the Clinton/Blair/Merkel era. I thought socialism was defeated in 1991. Everyone understood that markets and the private sector, with some levels of “nudges” as necessary, were the solution to everything. “Politics” was about how much you thought we should nudge in various directions, and whether you thought kids should learn about condoms or abstinence in school. So when Obama initially ran for office, I didn’t perceive Obama’s fundamentally neo-liberal capitalist world view as being a profound similarity between him and Bush. It wasn’t until people like Sanders and Corbyn started getting substantial traction that I realized we weren’t yet at the end of history and a commitment to the current economic world order was actually not universal.