Obama to cast Romney as Bush III

[Bern]

When President Obama holds his first public campaign rallies this week, he'll take direct control of a populist re-election narrative that Vice President Joe Biden and senior Obama strategists have spent weeks honing on the campaign trail.

The message: incumbent Obama is a firewall against a return to the "failed" foreign, social and economic policies of the George W. Bush administration, which are now embodied by presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney.
...

http://news.yahoo.com/president-obamas-2012-pitch-focus-firewall-against-romney-100138413--abc-news-politics.html

http://zfacts.com/sites/all/files/image/war/zFacts_neocon_clique.gif

http://zfacts.com/p/775.html

Romney has picked PNAC peeps for his foreign policy advisors:

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/10/06/337666/many-of-romneys-foreign-policy-helped-push-the-u-s-into-war-with-iraq/?mobile=nc

Tell me again why Romney can beat Obama?

[AuH20]

Obama is Bush III and then some. This is hilarious on his part.

[Bern]

I know. Too bad primary voters aren't seeing it.

[VBRonPaulFan]

Obama is Bush III and then some. This is hilarious on his part.

+1

[cheapseats]

Obama is Bush III and then some.


ImplausibleEndeavors ‏ @MindOfMo
#Obama #ScareTactic, lol: #Romney = #BushIII. Democrats/Liberals SUCK at the math/funding that permits #DoGoodery, too. #BushIII v. #BushIV.






This is hilarious on his part.


Not if nobody ridicules the hypocrisy.

PARTY OF BUSH/CHENEY (and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Paulson and Chertoff and and and ) is, in point of fact, an extremely valid card to play.

That punch LANDS.

Redirect:

Are the nuts 'n bolts of YOUR life any better under high-flying Obama than they were under HEARTLESS HAVE MORE'S BUSH/CHENEY? But Republicans daren't make that argument.

That LOGICAL argument "naturally" gooses people of even average intelligence and only modest political awareness toward a THIRD PARTY...to shove a chaperone into an obscene=toxic tango.

[jkr]

wait,
whut?
but HE is bUSh 3 that would make r-money BusH 4 right?
right?

omg! the president cant add!

we r f'ed

[rp08orbust]

That's hilarious, because Joe Biden was an Iraq war architect/cheerleader.

[cheapseats]

You can "hear"/agree with each other, and plus-rep one another when you REALLY agree with the Like-Minded.

But I do NOT hear you in what DOES pass as The News, for people who "get their news" from...where else...The News.

Will unfailingly polite Paul issue a strongly worded rebuttal, to call Obama out on his TRANSPARENT Blame Game sleight-of-hand?

Will he metaphorically scream and yell OUTSIDE THE BUBBLE, BEYOND THE CHOIR that only his policies meaningfully diverge from Bush's AND Obama's AND Business As Usual? In other words, get in Obama's face and call him a LIAR, without calling him a Liar?

Here's the rub. Politics is NUTHIN' if not Dirty Pool. Ron Paul is not a DOWN 'N DIRTY kinduva guy.

He is so not down 'n dirty, he doesn't even LOOK for Trouble (see also Newsletters). He doesn't think like that. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY...and a pollyanna-read-that-unrealistic presumption of NO Dirty Pool.

It is one of the things for which he is beloved by those who love him, yes?

It is not MEAN to point out that some of his personal strengths are political liabilities.

If he wants to win, he must use "his" campaign (that other people fund) as Bully Pulpit, not lecture podium. Which raises AGAIN the question of whether he DOES want to win. WILLING and WANTING are quite different. Would YOU want the job?

Recovery Circuit Wisdom: "Watch the whole movie." He actually loves his wife and family, doesn't actually LOOK to jet-set and hobnob. C'ya in a few years, Carol! I'll send postcards!

By and large (Goldman Sachs has its own arrangement), the people who are most recognized for accomplishments other than "years in office" are LEAST likely to seek office. More than half of Congress are millionaires, but that is not big money to Big Money.

"Market News" sez it all in a country wherein MONEY TRUMPS ALL. Most of what is passionately debated in Political Junkie circles does NOT grace Market headlines, any more than Ron Paul graces Mainstream headlines.

[Lucille]

http://rlv.zcache.com/george_w_obamney_for_president_bumper_sticker-p128446284719788381en7pq_328.jpg

[matt0611]

Obama is Bush III and then some. This is hilarious on his part.

Yeah, Obama is Bush III, Romney would be Bush IV.

[tennman]

Yeah, Obama is Bush III, Romney would be Bush IV.

Exactly....but Obama has been WORSE than Bush. And that's saying something.

[TheTexan]

You can "hear"/agree with each other, and plus-rep one another when you REALLY agree with the Like-Minded.

But I do NOT hear you in what DOES pass as The News, for people who "get their news" from...where else...The News.

Will unfailingly polite Paul issue a strongly worded rebuttal, to call Obama out on his TRANSPARENT Blame Game sleight-of-hand?

Will he metaphorically scream and yell OUTSIDE THE BUBBLE, BEYOND THE CHOIR that only his policies meaningfully diverge from Bush's AND Obama's AND Business As Usual? In other words, get in Obama's face and call him a LIAR, without calling him a Liar?

Here's the rub. Politics is NUTHIN' if not Dirty Pool.

Ron Paul is not personally a DOWN 'N DIRTY kinda guy (so not down 'n dirty, he doesn't even LOOK for it). He doesn't think like that. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY...and no inclination to check that anything warrants proving.

It is one of the things for which he is beloved by those who love him, yes?

It is not MEAN to point out that some of his personal strengths are political liabilities.

If he wants to win, he must use campaign as Bully Pulpit, not an educational podium. Which raises AGAIN the question of whether he DOES want to win. WILLING and WANTING are quite different. Would YOU want the job?

Observe that the people who are famous for accomplishments rather than "years in office" by and large do not SEEK office. More than half of Congress are millionaires, but that is not big money to Big Money.

"Market News" sez it all in a country wherein MONEY TRUMPS ALL. Most of what is passionately debated in Political Junkie circles does NOT grace Market headlines, any more than Ron Paul graces Mainstream headlines.

I have come to believe that the message is the only thing that counts. You can get wins by playing the political game, but these wins are artificial and won't result in real progress.

If the message isn't enough to get people on board, we shouldn't be thinking about how to play the political game better, but instead we need to identify the root problem. The root problem is that these people simply do not want freedom, and re-packaging freedom with the tricks of politics is not going to fix this problem.

[cheapseats]

Exactly....but Obama has been WORSE than Bush.


Baloney, and I can't stand the guy.

On the flip side of the coin, Bush/Cheney prompted me to abandon the THOROUGHLY CORRUPTED "PARTY" after more than three decades as a Registered Republican.

Kinduva toss up . . . after the fashion of WOULD YOU RATHER HANG OR FRY?

[jbauer]

Glad everyone hit this one out of the park. In reading the title I thought it was possible that Obama himself wasn't able to add. Not that I would expect anything less from him. He seems clueless about the 1.5T deficts he's running


Obama is Bush III and then some. This is hilarious on his part.

[jbauer]

You have a little bit of a point in that they're both equally evi....however, Obama has taken Bush's dirty pool tactics to all time highs. So eventhough he used the Bush2 playbook, he's executed the plays even better then Bush ever did. Thus making him worse than Bush.


Baloney, and I can't stand the guy.

On the flip side of the coin, Bush/Cheney prompted me to abandon the THOROUGHLY CORRUPTED "PARTY" after more than three decades as a Registered Republican.

Kinduva toss up . . . after the fashion of WOULD YOU RATHER HANG OR FRY?

[Bern]

Folks - I didn't post this here to spark a discussion about Obama. I posted it here to highlight an opportunity to change Republican primary voter's minds about Romney while they still have a chance to vote for an alternative.

[Anti Federalist]

Folks - I didn't post this here to spark a discussion about Obama. I posted it here to highlight an opportunity to change Republican primary voter's minds about Romney while they still have a chance to vote for an alternative.

Good luck with that.

I'm failrly convinced they want to lose.

[Bern]

I'm trying at least.

[Anti Federalist]

I'm trying at least.

As are we all, in our own small ways.

+rep

[cheapseats]

I'm failrly convinced they want to lose.



As are we all, in our own small ways.



The flip side of wanting to lose is PRETENDING TO HELP Ron Paul (and other Republicans) win.

The Resistance is at a juncture. STAYING THE COURSE speaks to "Republican gains", almost certainly NOT to a Ron Paul presidency.

There are Patriots who think party infiltration is more consequential that an ALL-IN-BALLS-TO-THE-WALL Third Party run...which pretty much has the same chance of success as Ron Paul winning the GOP nomination.

The key difference is that if he loses in Tampa, as he is OVERWHELMINGLY likely to do, THAT'S THAT, he's out. Third Party, he HAS the percent to be in the debates. Both Americans Elect (where he leads in voting) and the Libertarian Party will have ballot access in all 50 states.

What would YOU advise, if you were his Trusted Counsel?

[jkr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_3TlrZLpQ0

[timosman]

bmp