What do Obama and Nixon have in common?
Bookworm on Aug 01 2009 at 10:40 pm | Filed under: Barack Obama
You’d think that Obama and Richard Nixon have nothing in common — but you’d be wrong. They both were whining self-pitiers who couldn’t stand the attacks that are entirely normative in a democratic political process. You can read here about Obama’s inability to take any criticism whatsoever, and the following should remind you of Nixon’s character:
Can you imagine how Obama, who has the kind of fawning, loving, deferential press Nixon could only dream of, would have handled things if he’d faced a press that actually tried to kick him around a bit? Of course, had that been the case, there wouldn’t have been a President Obama.
Related posts:
Email This Post To A Friend
One Response to “What do Obama and Nixon have in common?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
If Nixon was a whining self-pitier, he could not have built himself back up. Nor would he have defended Israel, even as he knew most Jews would still vote Democrat.
If he is bitter, he is bitter because he knew the true face of the Left and could not handle that nature. Bush had his ways and Nixon had his. Bush tried his best to ignore the press, and while that saved his own sanity, it did not particularly do much good for America. Because, as was true back then, the press is still the enemy.
They just hadn’t realized this fact back in Nixon’s day. The press that is. There were still honest reporters out there, in quantities that actually mattered. There were still editors raised on the stories of Korea and WWII, rather than Vietnam. But Nixon, like Sherman, knew them for what they were.
Everything you have heard or seen about Nixon comes through the filters of the media. It isn’t history until the Left says it is.
The media’s inability to tell the truth has been destroying the American system for a long time now. Their power has never been greater than now. It’s not their fault they were limited in the past. It is not their fault that great statesmen and leaders could often override the media’s reach.