Obama Will Never Be Bill Clinton (Carter? Maybe)
The MSM prefers making Obama analogies with Clinton, though the two figures couldn't be less alike.
May 18, 2010 - 12:00 am
Since snatching the Democratic presidential nomination from Hillary Clinton in 2008, Barack Obama has been touted as an intellectual, a great communicator, and a political savior. With messianic phraseology, his supporters have described him as the one who will “repair” America’s image abroad, better the lives of the downtrodden here at home, and use “his enormous skills as a communicator to express a moral system” to those who will listen.
When John McCain ran against Obama’s brand of redemption and warned that electing Obama would be equivalent to giving Jimmy Carter a second term, Obama’s surrogates in the media cried foul — insisting Obama was more of a Bill Clinton than a Carter.
These surrogates were only following Obama’s lead, as he has clearly tried to capture a bit of whatever it was that made the Clinton years so memorable for leftists. What other explanation can be given for the fact that the Obama administration is staffed “with so many people with high-level experience [from] Bill Clinton’s presidency”?
But with unemployment rising, government takeovers more common, and President Obama stuttering through “uh-oh” without a teleprompter, it appears this political savior won’t be turning water into wine any time soon. Taken with his poll numbers, which have “fallen at a record rate (for a first-year president),” McCain’s Carter comparison was the apt one.
Apparently, Obama is a false prophet. And he is definitely no Bill Clinton. He never has been and never will be.
While it makes sense that a Democratic president losing support prior to midterm elections might examine Clinton’s recovery from 1994, Obama has to face how different he and Clinton are. So different, in fact, that the experience of Clinton is not a worthwhile model.
The closest these two have come to being similar is their mutual claim to being this nation’s first black president.
But even on this issue there are differences: Clinton was lying (as usual), while Obama was telling the truth (a rarity).
Yet Bill Clinton is now ubiquitous, and offshoots of the very same mainstream media that spent the 1990s laying cover for Clinton’s liaisons are openly bragging that Obama might be a womanizer as well. Is this how desperate they are to make Obama appear “Clintonesque”? Asylum’s Brian Fairbanks recently wrote a piece that asked: “Bill Clinton vs. Barack Obama — Who Scores the Best Groupies?”
Predictably, the comparison between the quality of “groupies” was just as forced as all the other comparisons of Obama and Clinton. And even if the current reports concerning Obama’s alleged affair with Vera Baker prove true, “getting lucky” with one impressionable campaign aide does not begin to stack up with the many women Clinton secretly met or openly groped.
Although Clinton was impeached, he survived six more years in office beyond 1994 because he bowed (somewhat) to the will of the American people and compromised with Republicans — even to the point of signing off on central portions of their agenda. But the great and powerful Obama saves all his compromises for our military enemies and all his bows for tyrants and figureheads of foreign countries.
Obama and his minions can push the Clinton comparisons all they want, but they’ll only be apt for one day this November.