It has become a familiar tune recently with just a little bit of the lyrics changed. Critics chant, “Clinton, Bush, Obama lied” and hope the masses believe it. With Bill Clinton, it was accusations about multiple sexual partners/victims. Defenders came up with a variety of arguments–the President’s personal business doesn’t affect his job performance, it’s part of a right-wing conspiracy, any alleged crimes don’t measure up to impeachable offenses–but it was pretty well established that President cheated on his wife, engaged in inappropriate relations in his work place, and lied to the American people. Did he obstruct justice, etc.? The answer you get depends on whom you ask.
George W. Bush was accused of lying about the Iraqis’ possession of weapons of mass destruction. Defenders argue that many Democratic leaders also thought WMD’s existed there, and it was up to Saddam Hussein to prove they weren’t. Did W. knowingly lie? Again, the answer you get might depends on whom you ask.
Now critics are complaining about Barack Obama’s take on health care reform. They are accusing him of lying when he says that health care can be cheaper, thus helping the economy, and more people can get insurance (even when they have expensive problems). Critics say the math doesn’t work. Defenders say the current math doesn’t work and the system as it exists now is immoral. Is President Obama following the alleged presidential trend here?
What does it all mean? Is it worth pointing out that every President gets criticized in some way?
Clinton weathered his storms, W.’s popularity was beaten down over time, but both men have at least one characteristic of a champion: They were elected twice by the American people. Will President Obama be able to say the same? Stay tuned…