Posted by Tina
One of the more fantastic revelations last week, first reported by Rory Cooper of the Heritage Foundation via twitter, was news that President Obama has inserted his name and record into the biographies of all former presidents since our 30th, Calvin Coolidge…except for Gerald Fords. Leaving Ford out of the shenanigans is a puzzlement, but not more so than this incredible act of…what…desperation? Did it flow from a need to create a legacy where none really exists? Most folks are just flabbergasted that he should presume to have the authority to alter official presidential biographies in this way. Does he think his own biography will lack sufficient weight?
Seth Mandel lists a few examples of this legacy manipulation in his piece in Commentary Magazine:
On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc.
In a 1946 letter to the National Urban League, President Truman wrote that the government has “an obligation to see that the civil rights of every citizen are fully and equally protected.” He ended racial segregation in civil service and the armed forces in 1948. Today the Obama administration continues to strive toward upholding the civil rights of its citizens, repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing people of all sexual orientations to serve openly in our armed forces.
Follow the link above for more examples or check out The Presidents at the official White House web page.
It is called providing continuity to the story.
ALL presidents have done it. Why are you trying to make Obama look bad when he no different than any other in this respect?
Sorry O, No other president has done it. READ the biographies…none, zip, nada.
Moreover, his own biography will contain whatever information has been posted about him to other presidents biographies.
This act is truly horrid.
Tina, you make it sound like the OA is trying to insinuate the O into past presidential biographies … which is horsepucky.
The OA is asserting that the O has built upon the work of his predecessors, and there ain’t nothing wrong with that … if he has … which can be argued.
But the horsepucky you assert is not worth a response at all. What’s more, this infantile hyperbole is going to lose you the election, so you should think about dialing it back a bit.
Libby, I’m glad you’re concerned about helping us win the election. You finally got your trolly on the right track. ; )
Libby your dedication to this man even in the face of such unprecedented arrogance is charming.
Once again you flatter me with the power you attribute to me in making the election a done deal for the O man. You keep on keeping the faith, dearie, and we’ll both see in November.
Tina: “Libby your dedication to this man even in the face of such unprecedented arrogance is charming.”
Me: “The OA is asserting that the O has built upon the work of his predecessors, and there ain’t nothing wrong with that … if he has … which can be argued.”
What, Tina? Your “reading comprehension” not what it was?
As “your” boy Romney has himself asserted (though I give his conviction four months … tops), anything like character assassination is gonna blow up in yer face, because, alas, the O-man’s character is seemingly unassailable. You’ll have to make this one on policy. And as “your” boy Romney still refuses to make any assertions at all, whatsoever, re policy … you ain’t got no shot at all.
Hi Libby! I just saw your post. I agree with you both sides ought to leave religion, family, and character assassination alone and talk on issues and policy and whats good for America. Romney recently rejected using Rev. Wright to attack Obama, but he can’t stop other folks from doing it like Ed Klein in his new book The Amateur.
Ah yes … the book title is a Clinton quote, dating from back when the O-man was giving Clinton’s Missus a dreadful time in the primaries.
The O-man’s been baptized in the fire since.
And then we get to ponder the opinion of a man who botched any remediation of farm subsidies that cripple agricultural innovation, botched their attempt at universal health care, signed off on the abolition of “Glass-Stegall” (and we now know what a brilliant idea that was), and … were his second term to have had anything like historical significance, it was totally obliterated by his foray into semi-public penis waving.
Humph.
Libby: “What, Tina? Your “reading comprehension” not what it was?”
Comprehension is A-OK. Your ability to observe and articulate is under question…obtuse is a word I might use.
“…the O-man’s character is seemingly unassailable…”
And still lacking. I seem to recall you excoriating me for being blindly partisan…have you a mirror handy?
“You’ll have to make this one on policy.”
Not to worry. The time will come.
“And as “your” boy Romney still refuses to make any assertions at all, whatsoever, re policy … you ain’t got no shot at all.”
You never want to peak too soon.
The O-man has not been baptized in the fire. the very idea is absurd.
Both of your “men”, and I use the term with great trepidation, are discredited as less than honest and without significant abilities beyond personal promotion. Both speak almost entirely in the first person.
I-me-my I-me-my I me my!
Compare the speeches of men in high office:
http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/05/17/bush-vs-obama-different-ways-use-i-speech
Obama after the killing of Osama bin Laden:
George Bush after capture of Saddam:
http://www.sweetspeeches.com/s/1627-winston-churchill-end-of-the-war-in-europe
Churchill at the end of the war in Europe WWII:
Leadership is not an exercize in self-agrandizement.
We desperately need a man with leadership qualities NOW!
Here’s a question for anybody: Why is it that when a Democrat is being personally criticized personal attacks are suddenly a big problem to be avoided?
Please don’t tell me we’re bigger than that…it doesn’t hold up in the political process as a successful way to run a campaign regardless the ugly taste it may leave in one’s mouth.