Presidential Address to Schoolchildren

[prisonchaplain]

I didn't feel the same way then because at least the Democratic congress had the common sense to criticize him AFTER he addressed the students, unlike conservatives who criticized Obama BEFORE they'd even heard the speech. Big difference.

And there's likewise a big difference between being "booed", and being accused of being a liar.

No difference. It was a minor issue in both circumstances. Republicans chose to capitalize on a President with declining numbers, thinking the issue might have traction. That the Obama administration admitted the particular phrase was "inartful," suggests they were doing more than throwing a bone. They were attempted damage control on an over-reach they were caught in.

Democrats, in '91 knew that they didn't have much of an issue either--a minor one that might stir up their base. They waited, because they hoped Bush would say something they could pounce on. In a sense, it was even more disingenious for them to complain after the fact. They alleged damage was already done.

As for who's ruder, Democrats or Republicans, do we really want to have that conversation???

[john doe]

And there's likewise a big difference between being "booed", and being accused of being a liar.

So you're saying Bush wasn't called a liar? What universe do you live in?

[Dravin]

So you're saying Bush wasn't called a liar? What universe do you live in?

Ah but you see, Bush was/is a liar and Obama isn't!

Quite frankly chances are you can call any random politician a liar and you'd be right to some degree or another, the tricky part is when you narrow it down as to what.

[bytor2112]

Please provide evidence to support your assertion.

Where did you read that? Can you provide a link?

FYI there are plenty of conservatives in Chicago. And what'll you bet the only people complaining about it in Chicago were conservatives. I'd put money on it.

Can't find the one I had read....here is a WSJ link Why do you think ONLY conservatives??? Polls suggest it's independents and single white females that have turned on Obama.

[talisyn]

No difference. It was a minor issue in both circumstances. Republicans chose to capitalize on a President with declining numbers, thinking the issue might have traction. That the Obama administration admitted the particular phrase was "inartful," suggests they were doing more than throwing a bone. They were attempted damage control on an over-reach they were caught in.

Democrats, in '91 knew that they didn't have much of an issue either--a minor one that might stir up their base. They waited, because they hoped Bush would say something they could pounce on. In a sense, it was even more disingenious for them to complain after the fact. They alleged damage was already done.

As for who's ruder, Democrats or Republicans, do we really want to have that conversation???

So the Dems were more horrible because they waited so hear what the president had to say, as opposed to the Reps who didn't wait? I'm sorry I'm not understanding that.

[bytor2112]

So the Dems were more horrible because they waited so hear what the president had to say, as opposed to the Reps who didn't wait? I'm sorry I'm not understanding that.

It is a GIANT political mistake for Democrats to assume that the out rage was and is among conservatives only. Political arrogance. Read the polls. The independents that supported Obama and put him in the White House have abandoned him, 2-1 and so have single white women.