Thursday, June 30, 2011

Which Version Of Obama Should the Dwarfs Attack?

link here to article

Foreign Policy has an interesting take on the first debate among the GOP 7 dwarfs. They are confused about which version of Obama that they want to run against. Unlike most debates, they did not debate each other, they all attacked different versions of Obama. Two of the dwarfs were hawks who told us that Obama was not tough enough to lead the most powerful nation in the universe. Most of the other dwarfs told us that the US should not be engaged in nation building as we are in the mid-east. They sound like Bush in his first campaign when he was against nation building, which has a venerable tradition in the GOP. Of course Bush turned into a hawk after 9/11 gave him the excuse to invade Iraq, so there are two versions of Bush on foreign policy. The 7 dwarfs can't decide which version of Obama/Bush to attack. He can't be too weak on defense and too strong on defense simultaneously. One of them even reversed his position from attacking Obama as being weak on defense, to attacking him on his efforts at nation building. His polls probably told him that the tea party crowd wanted to cut the defense budget along with the rest of government. His behavior should not be surprising since he is now against the healthcare reform he engineered in Massachusetts, since it is too similar to Obamacare that the tea partier's hate.

If the dwarfs remain too confused over which version of Obama to attack, they can always move to the next game to play. That is, which of the dwarfs is most like Ronald Reagan. This is a safe bet, but some in the GOP are comparing themselves to Margaret Thatcher instead of Ronald Reagan, which is so 2008. Maybe they like showing some solidarity with the conservative government in the UK which is intent upon restoring Thatcherism after years of nation building by Tony Blair.

No comments:

Post a Comment