Obama did what? Well BUSH BLARG BLARG

[joe hx]

Some arguments some people bring up when someone criticizes Pres Obama is that "OMG Bush was so worse!!" and "Well Bush did it too!!"

For instance, last October/November, when Obama and McCain were still just running, someone in my sociology asked my very liberal professor (almost stereotypically liberal teacher) what she thought about Obama's association with Bill Ayres. Her response was "I'm proud of him," to which the student replied, "You proud he associates with terrorists."

Immediately she yelled out "Bush is a terrorist!!" even though the student never mentioned Bush or even implied that he liked Republicans or Bush.

You also see it with Obama's upcoming school speech. People's response to it seems to be "Hey! Reagon and Bush Sr gave similar school speeches!"

[BroomJockey]

Yeah, and?

In-office presidents are always compared to previous ones, especially the ones right before. I'm sure if you went back 8 years, people would be "Bush is," and then "OH YEAH?! WELL CLINTON BLARG BLARG BLARG."

[BlaqueKatt]

yup and these are the self same people that b*tched about, when criticizing Bush, their opposition brought up Clinton's failures.....

Personally-they were/are all human and therefore subject to human failures/flaws

[BroomJockey]

Personally-they were/are all human and therefore subject to human failures/flaws

Wait wait wait.

I disagree with that.

Clinton was not human. Dude was a sex machine. First non-humanoid in office.

[guywithashovel]

You also see it with Obama's upcoming school speech. People's response to it seems to be "Hey! Reagon and Bush Sr gave similar school speeches!"

I pointed this out in the thread about Obama's school speech. I did it to show that he isn't doing something that has never been done before, which is what some people seem to think.

[Fashion Lad!]

I hate it when someone says "well Bush did it so why are you upset that Obama's doing it now?"

But, the people saying that are the people who were mad when Bush did what he did.

(I won't go into specifics, just enough for you to get the general idea.)

What I tend to ask them is, "if you didn't like it when Bush did it, why is it suddenly OK for Obama? Shouldn't you be just as mad?"

Bush spent a lot of money, I was pissed. Obama is spending a lot of money, I'm still pissed. But a lot of people will argue in favor of Obama's spending by saying "Well, Bush spent a lot of money."

We really are a partisan nation and that will never change.

[tropicsgoddess]

Wait wait wait.

I disagree with that.

Clinton was not human. Dude was a sex machine. First non-humanoid in office.

Clinton may have strayed from Hillary one too many, but he knew how to keep things right in the country. Bush on the other hand, just plain screwed everything up. At least when Daddy Bush (Bush 41/ G.H.W. Bush) was president he had an exit strategy for the first Gulf War. Right now we have yet to see much progress with all the stuff going on in the economy and health care, but unlike Bush, Obama has an exit strategy that he is putting into fruition for Iraq. I didn't like that Obama put more money into the bailouts for AIG and such, especially after the way AIG spent it on lavish massages, hotels and such from the first bailout they received. The bailouts for business were utter bullshit and haven't done a damn thing regardless with Bush and Obama.

[Fashion Lad!]

Clinton may have strayed from Hillary one too many, but he knew how to keep things right in the country. Bush on the other hand, just plain screwed everything up.

Before you start spewing nonsense, bring a clown. We need to know you're not serious. Bush did not screw EVERYTHING up. That's not true. Not true. In fact, before Bush's first economic policy took effect in October 2001, the economy was already on its down turn. The housing crisis, that was a Clinton "everyone needs a house whether they can afford it or not."

Bush made mistakes, yes. We had dot com bubble burst, that didn't help. Yes, we went to Iraq and we're spending money there when we shouldn't have. But now we have corporate bailouts, banks closing because the housing bubble imploded. Why? Because of legislation that Clinton pushed for. The same legislation that Clinton pushed through that was really the forefront reason as to why we're in this mess, Bush tried to fix.

[Talon]

Immediately she yelled out "Bush is a terrorist!!" even though the student never mentioned Bush or even implied that he liked Republicans or Bush.

"An unloaded weapon always shoots the loudest." - Col. Mcqueen, Space: Above and Beyond

As far as I'm concerned, Bush/Cheney and their sycophants deserve no less than to spend the rest of their lives behind bars for war crimes. But screaming like that teacher did? That just makes her look like a hot-air bag.

[lordlundar]

I've seen it used mainly as a means to shut up the extremists using any little thing Obama as an excuse to impeach him. The most amusing one has to be the upcoming speech, where the extremists are screaming that the sheer act of giving the speech is a nazi-like indoctrination. So then the counter act is that their golden child who could do wrong did the same damn thing.

[BroomJockey]

Before you start spewing nonsense,

I'd watch the phrasing there, sir.

[bunnyboy]

If I might chime in, the whole thing is basically both sides are wrong, and while those of us in the center area of the political spectrum are getting drowned out by the far right and the far left... now while i may lean a little left of center, I'm not as far as Obama can do no wrong left, and while I have friends who lean to the right, they weren't Bush can do no wrong... the major problem we're having is that both extremes are shouting loud and trying to make it where you're either a Far-Left Neo-Liberal Anarcho-syndicalist in all but name/everything is the Capitalist's fault conspiracy theorist or you're a Far-Right Neo-Conservative Mussolini Fascist in all but name/Everything is (insert target group-s here)'s Fault conspiracy theorist...

I seem to remember a time when there was real debate in this country.... but the talking heads on both sides have too many sheeple following them for that to happen again.

[BlaqueKatt]

now while i may lean a little left of center, I'm not as far as Obama can do no wrong left, and while I have friends who lean to the right, they weren't Bush can do no wrong...

I'm about a half point right of center-but I can't stand either side, and I hate trying to talk politics with anyone because I criticize BOTH sides, and I don't fit into a neat little box-most people can't comprehend that. Dammit no matter who wins I'm pissed(hence why I vote for Nader every election )

[Lady_Foxfire]

Actually, people compared Bush to Clinton so often that there's a logical fallacy named after it: the "But Clinton!" defense. It probably goes back further than that, but that's what the argument is referred to as.

It's not always wrong, though; if Obama is being criticized for something that previous presidents did without being criticized, then it is a fair comparison. But if the previous presidents in question were criticized for it, or if the debater brings up a completely unrelated transgression (like defending Obama's economic policies by bringing up the Iraq war), then it's a proper "But Clinton!" fallacy.

[daleduke17]

Just remember, everyone, the only President who did not blame the President before him was George Washington.