Four daughters, Two Very Different Examples: George W. Bush vs. Barack Obama
To say that George Bush and Barack Obama don't have much in common is an almost laughable understatement. About the only thing they share is the fact that each has two daughters. After Obama's mea culpa yesterday, I was thinking about what different examples the fathers have set.
From watching their father in action, Barbara and Jenna Bush learned some interesting lessons:
- the ends justifies the means;
- money can wash away any problems you might get yourself into;
- it's okay go to any length to protect your friends, even when they've done something wrong;
- you don't have to listen to opposing ideas--just do what you want; and
- admitting a mistake is a sign of weakness.
Malia and Sasha Obama are learning a different set of lessons:
- accept responsibility for your errors in judgment and action;
- work hard and you can achieve anything;
- collaboration is important;
- listening to opposing ideas is valuable; and
- it's important for your actions to match your stated convictions.
Now, I'm sure that Barbara and Jenna Bush are lovely young women. They've got two parents, after all, and at least one of them appears to be normal. But I think that raising children is as much about the example you set by your actions as the lessons you attempt to teach them. By this measure, I think Barack Obama has reason to be proud of his parenting. The other guy, not so much.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cross posted at Dagblog.com, where Joe the Banker has been whining about his plight.
Though I recognize that this is more about the actions of the parent vs. the actions of the child, I still think it's an unnecessary comparison. Leave the kids alone.
February 4, 2009 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fair enough. Although I think my point is more that Obama may be thinking more about the example he sets for his kids as he leads and I'm happy to have someone with an actual moral compass leading the nation.
February 4, 2009 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm inclined to agree with you, but the broader point, Orlando, I do agree with - a better example, for all the kids, (and grown-ups) across the country.
Admitting a mistake? Novel concept.
February 4, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dem, whats up lately?
February 4, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you mean in general, I'm drowning in books and insane elementary children at work. Who knew libraries took so much upkeep!
What's up witcherself?
February 4, 2009 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just... glad to see you.
Insane children? What? The little angels? (I was a reading buddy for a few years.) =D
February 4, 2009 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent blog! I think using the examples a father sets his children is a great way to get your point across.
Highly recommended!
February 4, 2009 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
So can we assume then that one of Jeff Dahmers parents were homicidal maniacs that feasted on human flesh?
February 4, 2009 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
L'ville! Where ya been?
February 4, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
As for Jeffrey Dahmer, even he knew there was something wrong with his behavior. That much he must have learned from his parents. His reaction to getting arrested was relief.
February 4, 2009 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
This blog speaks more about the fathers than the children, IMHO. While we are not their children, the examples our top leaders present affects us whether we are completely conscious of it or not. It's part of the national psyche.
February 4, 2009 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Says you.
February 4, 2009 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Me or one of the voices in my head.
February 4, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
How an adult views them self is impossible to separate from how they parent. Looking at the two men's parenting styles it is hard not to be impressed with how Obama behaves as a father and how closely his actions seem to parallel his ideals.
February 4, 2009 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
w's method:
Don't get caught.
If you get caught, deny it.
If denial does not work attack the source and call them traitors e.g. NYT and surveillance.
Then just keep lying about it every single day until it goes away.
February 4, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except that now w is not longer prez. And every day is another day closer to ACCOUNTABILITY!@
February 4, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because the Obama girls will be attending private school, will they still be beneficiaries of affirmative action grading?
February 4, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
At a private school?
Apparently you have no experience with that.
February 4, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
spric, who said they ever got affirmative action grading? Are you just assuming that because they are black? I think it's pretty obvious that they have great genes.
February 4, 2009 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good genes? Why,, you must be a big fan of Dr Eugen Fischer!!!!
February 4, 2009 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Great genes."
And you are obviously a fan of I.M. Stupid.
February 4, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Hmmmm . . .
It's baaaaackkk . . .
~OGD~
February 4, 2009 10:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I teach. I am convinced: "children learn from the example we set rather than from our pretty speeches."
Nothing in my experience, either as a parent or as a teacher, indicates that this supposition is wrong.
Obama is to be revered -- yes, revered -- for the example he sets as a parent. Not only not so much, but not at all, for W.
February 4, 2009 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a former teacher of young children, Amen!
February 4, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
OK, now this is an example of a post that makes me mad. It is not issue related, not trying to solve any problems, just trying to keep throwing mud at GWB and resorting to bringing the kids into it. How does this help anything? You won the election, now, do you want us to all work together, or do we just keep this crap up for four more years?
February 4, 2009 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want us all to work together, but I also want us to tell the truth. I can see how it appears that I am bringing the kids into it, but I am focused not on the children but on the examples that their fathers have and are setting. I'm sorry if that makes you mad, but it's the way I see it.
This is probably a topic for another post, but speaking of not wanting to solve any problems, what's your take on the Republicans in Congress and their actions regarding the stimulus? Because from where I sit, that's more of the same crap from the last eight years and not working together at all.
February 4, 2009 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I am glad you admit that the democrats refused to work with Bush at all over the last 8 years. It was Pelosi herself that told her minions to oppose anything Bush brought forward because she didn't want him to get credit for anything.
Now, of course I realize you think it was the exact opposite of that, that Bush was the one who refused to work with anyone.
Regarding the stimulus, Pelosi shut out the republicans. She refused to alow any input from them, so big surprise they ALL voted against it. That should point out there was a problem. She crafted a 'stimulus' that is just an excuse to fund her pet projects.
I think Obama is getting sold down the river by Pelosi. If he doesn't reign her in, she will cripple his administration.
A stimulus should do that, jump start the economy. Not fund STD prevention and ACORN and a bunch of other crap. Build infrastructure - roads, bridges, broadband, fiber to the home. Cut taxes. These are stimulus. Her bill is junk.
February 4, 2009 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
And for a second I thought you were truly interested in a discussion. I should trust the adages: old dog/new tricks, etc.
Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you hear on Fox News.
February 4, 2009 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
You askedabout working together on the stimulus. Ipointed out that republicans in the house were shut out by Pelosi, leading them to oppose it. I also pointed out my thoughts on the bill, that it was filled with pork, not stimulus spending. The bulk of the projects don't take effect until 2010 or later. So, how did I not answer your question? Do you think STD research and block grants to HHS are appropriate in a stimulus emergency package?
February 5, 2009 7:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Filled with pork? 1/7th of 1% doesn't constitute filling. Maybe you could convince me that a little pork is sprinkled on top. But instead of talking about what is good about the bill, Congressional republicans have seized (as usual) on a minor point to make it seem like the entire bill is bad. As far as I'm concerned, take out the 1/7th of 1%. I don't care. It can always be appropriated later. But if that happens, then what will the republicans complain about? Oh, I know. Government hasn't ever created a job and if you stack 100 dollar bills on top of each other it makes a really pretty picture that somebody can talk about when they don't know what else to say but want to be obstructionist. This isn't about republican opposition to the bill. This is about republican opposition to anything and everything every proposed by democrats. It's revealing, that's for sure.
February 5, 2009 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Your claim that only 1.7 billion is not related to economic stimulus is debunked by the facts:
The draft American Recovery and Reinvestment Act calls for an unprecedented increase in federal education funding. The proposed legislation includes at least $142 billion in new federal funds to be disbursed over the next two years--nearly double the total outlays of the U.S. Department of Education in 2007.
$87 billion over the next two years to relieve the states from the pressures of the Medicaid programs that they administer.
Digital TV Coupons ($650 Million), Gov’t Cars ($600 Million), Nat’l Endowment for the Arts ($50 Million), Repairs to National Mall ($200 Million, including $21m for sod).
Education, medicare, etc. are NOT economic stimulus spending, regardless of if you support the spending for other reasons.
February 5, 2009 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
*$142 billion for education
*Digital TV Coupons ($650 Million)
I guess the argument is predicated on what you consider to be stimulative. Repairs to the national mall? I'm guessing most of that $200 million is labor costs (or, you know, JOBS), but whatever. I thought they cut that anyway.
As for Medicaid programs, I have no problem with that funding being included in the bill. States are laying off employees because they can't make their budgets, and the Medicaid funding will ease pressure on the states. Therefore, it is stimulative.
Government cars? You're kidding me on this one right? Because when somebody buys a car a certain industry historically important to the US economy and currently DYING sees profit and keeps JOBS.
National Endowment for the Arts? Artists need jobs too. And the country needs the art that they produce. This, I suppose is arguable, but only if you're a philistine. :)
Digital TV coupons? Ok, I'll give you this one. Television is in no way stimulative to the economy or the mind.
Lastly, education. Keeping in mind that much of the money will probably be used to retain or hire teachers in districts that face layoffs due to funding cuts, even if some of the money is used for books or computers or even freaking field trips, I really don't care. Educating our children IS stimulative and also thinking long-term.
February 5, 2009 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
By your broad definition, any spending is stimulative and therefore not inappropriate for this emergency bill. I disagree. This bill is being rushed through and touted as an emergency fix to help the economy. Most people think it consists only of infrastructure and tax measures. If it did I would support it. Just lumping in all spending on your wish list and arguing that it creates jobs is just a backdoor way to get programs funded that liberals want funded. Why not increase the defense budget by 500 billion. That would create jobs, right? So it would be a good idea, right? In fact, simply increasing the military troop limits would instantly create lots of jobs. Funny, I don't think too many liberals would agree with those stimulus ideas.
February 5, 2009 10:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're wasting your breath discussing anything political with this hard core socialist you've engaged.
What you've got in Nancy Pelosi is a really, really, dumb woman from a hard core socialist district, rich on her husband's wealth. Pelosi is so dumb she is oblivious to the fact her dumbness is on national display.
The moronic Cretins who constitute a majority in her district are Godless Sodomites. They're so steeped in Marxist dogma, they're as oblivious as Orlando.
February 5, 2009 9:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am so not a socialist. I would never share with you.
February 5, 2009 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, the clinics aren't free around here.
February 5, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whine and complain. You got nothing to complain about. How's the job cleaning the men's bathroom stalls at the Creation Museum going? It probably doesn't pay much but I bet you get off on the benefits.
February 4, 2009 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you. Whenever I start thinking that liberals are people too, and that we should work for a better America together, I'm glad I will have you to remind me of the scum that you are and how pointless it is to even try.
February 4, 2009 10:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Bush girls inherited both their parents good looks. Especially the lovely Laura.
But unfortunately, both the Obama girls appear to inherit their mother's head. Yikes!
February 4, 2009 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
spric: Sad for you that you will never be able to rise above your many shortcomings! You would have been so lucky to have inherited ANYTHING from Michelle Obama! I don't blame you for being jealous, but try not to let it make you sound too petty.
February 4, 2009 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sick, sick perverted old dog.
February 4, 2009 8:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Forget it. I won't bite on that clue. You really aren't worth the trouble.
February 4, 2009 8:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Hmmmm . . .
It's baaaaackkk ? ? ?
~OGD~
February 4, 2009 10:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
spric - when did you get out on work-release?
February 4, 2009 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
.
Hmmmm . . .
It's baaaaackkk . . .
~OGD~
February 4, 2009 10:57 PM | Reply | Permalink