Obama v Bush, Different or Not?

We had Bush for a not so wonderful eight years, now we have seen Obama in action for the past six plus months. I think we can compare and contrast two of our more recent, interesting and polarizing Presidents.

While Bush did inherit a stumbling economy, the real crisis during his term occurred on September 11, 2001. ( an interesting aside is this is my anniversary date ) Bush seized the opportunity and was able to shepherd through Congress many items ( specifically the Patriot Act and all its onerous infringements on personal liberty), that would have never passed were it not for 9/11.

Obama inherited a deep recession, the actual depth of which we may not realize for some time. In a typically political reaction to any crisis, a stimulus package was rammed through which would never have even seen the light of day had the economy been even slightly better.

After 8 years in office, Bush was a known quantity and he held true to what we knew about him. Like them or not, he was comfortable with the decisions he made, even in the face of whithering fire from diverse critics including liberals, libertarians, much of the printed media and even those amongst his own party. Taken away from areas of expertise, Bush is somewhat capable, as his comfort level with his core values comes to the rescue and points the way through the maze of policy direction.

Obama, while not a fully known or vetted quantity seems to lean substantially left on domestic issues. His actions with respect to Cap and Trade, Health care, and union politics seem to be consistent with what speeches and history we have on Obama from his days of Chicago politics. Obama has a much clearer understanding of these types of issues and has demonstrated this by delivering powerful and convincing speeches capable of tipping many of the voting public in his direction. Without the crutch of these core beliefs, Obama has demonstrated his inexperience as a member of the executive branch giving fumbling and meandering answers.

Obama is clearly superior as a public relations tool, showing a polish and speaking presence not matched since Reagan.... if he has rehearsed. Bush was an adequate public speaker, but his strength (comfort with core belief structure) is his weakness here, as his delivery can easily be perceived as arrogance. Ironically, I personally believe that Obama is the more arrogant of the two, but this is splitting hairs, as ALL politicians at this level have that trait.

Of course Bush and Obama differ greatly in their leanings, but the liberal leaning Obama supports warrantless wiretaps and unmanned attacks in Pakistan, and the conservative leaning Bush supported the single largest expansion of Medicare and the federal bailout of the financial industry. So perhaps, the left/right thinking of most pundits is flawed and should be replaced with a deeper understanding of the actual President of the moment.

History will judge both Presidents. Current polls are notoriously fickle as the low approval numbers for Truman indicated upon his departure. Bush still polls poorly, and Obama polls well, but his numbers are sinking.

So in summary, how different are they? Both have deviated from the middle of the road political spectrum at times. Both have made decisions that I believe history will judge poorly. In my book they are just two sides of the same coin, namely the modern electable politician.

A dark time in American politics, my friend. Not so different after all.