Download | Play 
Download | Play (h/t Heather)
(Nicole: MSNBC wasted no time parroting WSJ’s editorial and getting those talking points out there.)
Given John McCain’s record, and rhetoric, Republicans are clearly worried about how voters are going to react to the argument that McCain offers the nation “Bush’s third term.”
In fact, conservatives are so worried about it, the misguided ideologues at the Wall Street Journal editorial page have decided to make a novel argument: it’s Barack Obama, not McCain, who’s actually “running for … Bush’s third term.”
Take the surveillance of foreign terrorists. Last October, while running with the Democratic pack, the Illinois Senator vowed to “support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies” that assisted in such eavesdropping after 9/11. As recently as February, still running as the liberal favorite against Hillary Clinton, he was one of 29 Democrats who voted against allowing a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee reform of surveillance rules even to come to the floor.
Two weeks ago, however, the House passed a bill that is essentially the same as that Senate version, and Mr. Obama now says he supports it. Apparently legal immunity for the telcos is vital for U.S. national security, just as Mr. Bush has claimed.
Now, I think Obama’s wrong to accept the FISA “compromise,” and have said so on many occasions. But to suggest that Obama’s position brings him into line with Bush/Cheney/McCain is foolish. Indeed, far from conceding that retroactive telecom immunity is “vital for U.S. national security,” Obama actually said the exact opposite, arguing that he still opposes the provision, and vowing to vote for its removal. The Journal used “apparently” to draw the conclusion it wanted to reach, instead of the one supported by reality.
It gets worse.
Next up for Mr. Obama’s political blessing will be Mr. Bush’s Iraq policy. Only weeks ago, the Democrat was calling for an immediate and rapid U.S. withdrawal. When General David Petraeus first testified about the surge in September 2007, Mr. Obama was dismissive and skeptical. But with the surge having worked wonders in Iraq, this week Mr. Obama went out of his way to defend General Petraeus against MoveOn.org’s attacks in 2007 that he was “General Betray Us.” Perhaps he had a late epiphany.
If I read this on a fringe, right-wing blog, it would be easier to dismiss as nonsense, but the Journal was a respected national newspaper. The WSJ argues, seriously, that Obama is running for “Bush’s third term,” because he “will” support Bush’s Iraq policy, as evidenced by his discomfort with the “Betray Us?” ad. I’m actually feeling kind sorry for how ridiculous the Journal’s editors are making themselves appear.
Mr. Obama has also made ostentatious leaps toward Mr. Bush on domestic issues. While he once bid for labor support by pledging a unilateral rewrite of Nafta, the Democrat now says he favors free trade as long as it works for “everybody.”
In this reality, Bush and Obama don’t agree on trade at all; McCain and Bush do.
Back in the day, the first-term Senator also voted against the Supreme Court nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. But last week he agreed with their majority opinion in the Heller gun rights case, and with their dissent against the liberal majority’s ruling to ban the death penalty for rape.
Agreeing with two justices on two cases does not make Obama an acolyte of the Federalist Society.
This week the great Democratic hope even endorsed spending more money on faith-based charities. Apparently, this core plank of Mr. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” is not the assault on church-state separation that the ACLU and liberals have long claimed.
This is total nonsense. Obama’s policy bears no real resemblance to Bush’s, and Obama intends to protect the very safeguards that Bush’s faith-based initiative sought to eliminate. It’s the difference between a constitutional policy and an unconstitutional policy. Even a cursory glance at Obama’s speech makes that clear, which makes the Journal’s argument unusually intellectually dishonest.
The WSJ editorial helps demonstrate the flaw in starting with the answer and working backwards. Sensitive to McCain’s political problems, the Journal seems to have decided, “Let’s argue that Obama is running for Bush’s third term.” The editors then scrambled to come up with evidence to bolster the conclusion, ignoring inconvenient facts and details along the way.
If this sounds vaguely familiar, it’s evidence that the Bush White House has had an even greater influence on the Wall Street Journal than previously thought.
Post Script: By the way, to hear some of the unhinged corners of the right tell it, Obama is both a radical liberal and a Bush clone. Conservatives really are going to have to pick one.
No Trackbacks To “WSJ editorial paints Obama as Bush’s ideological heir- UPDATED with Video“
Must. Stop. Self. From. Cracking. Head. On. Keyboard.
I can agree with the premise. If obama keeps tacking right-ward just to get elected, THEN runs his administration totally lefty, it would be a mirror of what bush did.
Clearly, Obama doesn’t have the backbone that many of us hoped he would have, but to liken him to Bush when you have McCain as an alternative is ridiculous.
The whole article smells like desperation. They better be careful, that twenty percent that still approves of bush might end up voting for Senator Obama and then he’ll have all the Democrats and a bunch of Republicans too.
People can hold two opposing negative viewpoints in their heads at the same time.
Karl Rove has used this to his advantage over and over. And will continue to use it.
What the hell the poor guy has been branded as Cheney’s cousin and now Bush’s heir. Suppose the only thing left along these lines is for Obama to find out that Clinton is his Uncle. Oh yes, Obama has been called the Clinton’s houseboy which Queen Hillary is quite comfortable with since she tried to make Secret Service Agents assigned to her baggage handlers.
mccain is moving the right of the spectrum and obama is moving toward the center…..to say obama is running a bush third term campaign is ridiculous from my perspective. the american/public culture is presently in the conservative zone after 8 yrs. of the cheney administration….i meant to say bush administration.
liberals/progressives have to understand this strategy
we need to win this election….we must continue to compare mccain with a third bush term….this strategy is going to work….we must not let fatigue set in.
obama does differ from bush, in some regards.
but, really, he is not a change candidate. the obama strategery, post primary, has been abysmal. obama’s economic ideology is of the univ of chicago (like reagan, bush, clinton, bush), and from FISA to NAFTA to bush’s office of faith based initiatives and other such issues, obama has moved towards bush, not the other way around. this makes obama look weak, like a run-of-the-mill politician, and like a triangulating vote-panderer.
it is gaspingly shocking that obama’s campaign would attempt to move obama closer to the worst president we have ever had. i pray that this is for (dunderheaded) political reasons. but, as obama has said, people shouldn’t be surprised, he is not of the left, but of the “center” (see, right).
sorry, guys. flame away.
Anyone who believes that an Obama administration would be like the bush administration is just not being honest with themselves or doesn’t see the big picture. These two men are about as different as any two men could be.
The WSJ stopped being a reliable source of information years ago.
Glenn Greenwald’s column is instructive today.
Spin that, Barack.
BTW, I was more than just a bit of an asshole on a post here yesterday. I was not feeling well, and some cat posted a response to a comment of mine that just set me off. Sorry for the “bad words” and the hostility.
Given Obama’s failure of late to stand up for the Constitution, I don’t see much of a qualitative difference between Bush, McCain or Obama.
QUESTION: How come progressive talk radio is always about Obama and his missteps? Righty radio is also talking about Obama and his missteps and I don’t hear anything of late about John McCain’s flip-flops (more like that Zipper ride at the local carnival) and obvious delusional advertising that goes against everything he has said he wants to do.
Seems like taking on McCain makes more sense than over-anaylzing Barack Obama. Am I wrong?
Filthy Harry @ 2:
Same old Lie. If the right-wing ideals fail, it must be because they weren’t right wing ideals after all.
Hey, the wingnuts are going to stop at nothing to smear Obama…so Obama better stop giving them ammunition. He has supported the FISA “compromise” and he was stupidly saying he wanted to EXPAND faith-based nonsense. Obama is acting like a suck-up to right-wingers (also known as the mushy middle-of-the-roaders) and he deserves criticism for it. If he continues his foolish ways, he’s going to lose. Hate to say it, but I think it’s true.
pissed off patricia @ 9:
I’m just about finished reading Obama’s “The Audacity of Hope.” Pretty inspiring and informative read.
I can live with a lot of policy differences, but the FISA waffle gives me major heartburn.
And, yeah, you’re right. he’s way different from the Narcissist-in-Chief.
.
Up IS Down…
.
Tom from NJ @ 13:
If a leopard has spots its not news. A spotted zebra…now that’s worth talkin about.
Anyone see the today’s Wall Street Journal?
Main story on front “McCain Allies find Finace-Law (loop)Holes” It goes on to tell precisely where and how Rethuglican donors can donate 5-6 figure checks to help McCain and go right around the very law that he help to write.
And for irony to lose your breakfast over, when you turn to the second page of the story, right next to is is this headline: “Can Barack Obama Buy the Presidency?” Who wrote that article Karl f’n Rove.
These scumbag’s scheme needs to be exposed and stopped now!
This is just to weird for me. Never before have I seen a political party attempt to paint its political opponents as being just as bad for America as are the members of their own party. When a political party has to do that you know they have reached the bottom in popularity.
Off topic, sorry, but….
I want to see a video that does to McCain’s “rarely mentions his POW history” what that earlier Guiliani video did to Rudy and 9/11, in which he repeated 9/11, 9/11, 9/11 ad infinitum.
Somebody needs to dig up all the old footage, beginning at least in the early 1980s (old Fourth of July celebrations, etc., also), and start editing!
Kay @ 3:
The Neocons are Mentally Ill. The first thing is to get somebody that is SANE in charge of the White House. After the World is safe, we can start worrying about cleaning up the mess.
Here is a vid of Bush’s third term
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXRlG_6Bk-8
So isn’t the WSJ owned by Rupert Murdoch now?
But to suggest that Obama’s position brings him into line with Bush/Cheney/McCain is foolish
Really? The talk is one thing, the actions are something else.
He is a corporate employee just like Bush is. Vetted and approved by the “board of directors”.
He won’t change/fix campaign finance, health care, military spending, election reform, defense spending, mideast policy, faith based initiatives, climate issues, our relationship with China and India, our dependence on foreign oil, our unsustainable economy, AIDS, the war on drugs, poverty, or race based profiling and sentencing.
He is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. FISA was a wakeup. There is more to come.
Remind me again how allowing King Rupert to buy the WSJ wasn’t gong to affect their journalistic integrity?
Typically White & Bitter Agent Wright-is-right Huessein Provocateur @ 19:
Sure he can….apparently he’s got the $$ and the machine for it.
““What’s the dollar value of a starry-eyed idealist?”
Love that line.
Looks/sounds like the republicons are a wee bit desperate, eh? Obama is now a Bush 3rd term? LOL! The only people who would be dumb enough to buy that shit are mAnn Coulter lovers and Hannity fans.
The latest Rasmussen poll shows Obama up 5 points over gramps in Montana.
http://www.rasmussenreports.co....._election2
I almost feel sorry (I said almost) for the falling on the floor, twitching, dying a slow death GOP.
BobbyG @ 11:
Gotta love Glenn…
Hell, most of CONgress is spinning this B.S. usurpation of the People’s Rights, Freedoms, and Liberties.
R E M E M B E R:
THEY(sic) HATE US FOR OUR FREEDOMS…
… And so THEY(sic) attempt to legislate away those freedoms.
.
I wonder at what point the Repugs thought that absolute stupidity would sell.
I’ll be damned if that isn’t the most dead-on, poignant response. Nice going! My mind was blown for a second there. That’s awesome.
BobbyG @ 16:
Be sure to also read his other book, “Dreams from My Father”. It’s very good and he tells you about his life as he grew up and the things that made him the kind of person he is today. This book was first published in 1995, long before he even thought of being president.
Johnny2Bad @ 18:
ZEBRA? is that a racist slur?
it’s unfortunate but obama feels he has to offset the claim he is the most liberal member of the senate…liberal
is a nasty word to republicans…..so it’s twofold attempting to pick up votes from constituents in the middle a growing demographic and dilute the liberal labeling……some americans all they hear is liberal which equates to negativity…..bush in 2000 gave the compassionate gop and nation then after he in office he changed….because he was being less than truthful all along………obama is doing this before getting elected changing seeming less liberal than people want. he is doing it to win…..period
pissed off patricia @ 9:
POP i just wish that was so. believe me i do. i prayed for meaningful change. instead i am seeing just a different flavor of what we have been burdened (the good) and cursed (the bad) with for decades.
the trajectory we are on is very, very scary, and i see obama as just rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic, instead of real change.
again, i wish i could believe. i wish obama’s “free” market rhetoric could be forgotten. i wish that the FISA, NAFTA and other such issues weren’t so problematic for me.
but they are.
and it is sad.
Johnny2Bad @ 27:
You miss the point. The irony lies where Rove is asking will Obama buy the Presidency, the article right next to it is telling people exactly how, despite his own law, McCain intends to buy the Presidency.
The loop hole should be pointed out to Democrats with money, power, influence to either close it up or to play by the same game. Despite what you may hear on TV, once you get McCain donors legally writting ten and hundreds of thousand dollar checks, that financing advantage Dems currently hold will close quickly and quietly.
marko @ 25:
Oh give me a break. I smells me a RW troll on this thread.
He’s either the most “liberal senator” or he’s polishing Bush’s golf balls? Yeah… he took a position progressives disagree with on FISA. But he’s voted on a lot of positions that we agree with. But to say that he’s more akin to Bush than McCain is just plain stupid at best or a flat out lie at worst.
And what’s the crap about him being a corporate pawn? Is this Rove’s new spin since the “Elitist Country Club Guy” attack failed? Yes corporations have donated to his campaign, but most of his money is netroots/small-contributors. Compare that to the percentage of the campaign coffers filled by large corporate investors that Bush got in 2000/2004 and McCain is getting now. But the RW will likely keep sticking their heads in the sands (or really up their collective ass to be honest).
Unfortunately, Obama himself is inviting these comparisons with comments he made about attacking Pakistan, an apparent pro-FISA stance, and of course kneeling to the cross…
Hopefully, it wasn’t burning at the time.
Another Bush “accomplishment” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....10654.html
marko @ 33:
No, but the “leopard” part was a “slur” on McCain’s skin cancer
…Sheesh.
it’s a murdick publication, right?
just asking.
Wouldn’t this be great if it gets the 25%-ers to actually vote for Obama because the prestigious WSJ said that he would give them another term of their Dear Bush Leader! Poor McCain would be left with the 4% of people who actually hit the wrong button when voting for someone else.
37 TimV
He’s either the most “liberal senator” or he’s polishing Bush’s golf balls?
__________________________________________________________________
And let us pray, only polishing boosh’s golf balls.