Time magazine has finally taken the Obama presidency into The Twilight Zone
At a glance, it's hard to imagine a President who had less in common with Reagan than the Ivy League lawyer from Hawaii who seeks larger federal investments, a bigger social safety net and new regulations for Wall Street and Big Oil. But under the surface, there is no mistaking Obama's increasing reliance on his predecessor's career as a helpful template for his own. …
Obama's affection for Reagan's political style carries with it a clear self-interest. White House aides gaze fondly at the arc of the Reagan presidency in part because they pray Obama's will mirror it. Both men entered office in wave elections in which the political center made a historic shift. Both faced deep economic downturns with spiking unemployment in their first term. Both relied heavily on the power of oratory. "Our hope," admits Gibbs, "is the story ends the same way."
Get the entire article here
It's a long article, so here are some of the reasons why, according to Time, Obama's presidential destiny may be divined from Reagan's:
All of these similarites are well and good, but I feel like they barely scratch the surface of why Obama looks to Reagan's history as a template for his own impending success. For instance:
When you look at this laundry list you can't help but wonder what took us all so long to figure out that Obama is so much more than a liberal Ronald Reagan. The two are presidential soul mates and we just never knew it.
It makes me think of that scene in "Back to the Future" where George McFly approaches Marty's mom Lorraine in the diner and says "I'm George McFly, I'm your density."
In that analogy George is Obama, Lorraine is of course Reagan (a girl, yes unless YOU are willing to rewrite the 50's into some gay utopia).
Hey! You know what has absolutely no relevance to all of this? The fact that both men have diametrically opposing views of the role of government!
Talk about freakin' fluff! Time magazine brilliantly hit the nail on the head when they decided to focus on the superficial similarities and ignore red herrings like the fact their philosophical and moral cores go together like oil and the Gulf of Mexico.
Similar historical circumstances produce similar results regardless of whether the decisions made to navigate out of them are rooted in individual liberty or a more central authority.
The difference couldn't be more stark...or less important, right?
I'm telling you, if this conclusion were more scientific than they already are you could prove global warming with it.