In January 2009, at a time of deep political division and economic crisis, an unparalleled meeting occurred in the Oval Office. Outgoing President George W. Bush invited his successor, Barack Obama, and all living former presidents—Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, and Bill Clinton—for a private lunch.
The resulting photograph is more than a collection of famous faces; it is a powerful lesson in American democracy. Five men, whose campaigns and policies had often placed them in direct opposition, sat together as custodians of a single, enduring office. They represented nearly four decades of national leadership, embodying the principle that political power is temporary, but the republic is permanent.
President-elect Obama later reflected that the meeting was a humbling reminder of being “part of something bigger than ourselves.” This gathering, unique in its spirit of camaraderie at a moment of transition, stands in stark contrast to the partisan battles that define so much of political life. It captures a rare and essential truth: that the peaceful transfer of power is the ultimate triumph of the system they all served.
There are pictures now of the King and his court dutifully praising him. Isn’t that the same?
camaraderie vs discipleship? hardly a comparison
The uni-party in one pic.
It goes without saying that I have policy disagreements with all of them, contrary to some who blindly follow a party.
Let’s start with the one positive connection with all them: For the most part, they respected the Constitution by realizing it is the law of the land. Although some were happy to betray it for personal gain. Having said that let me address the successes or failures of each.
Obama’s need to not come off as “the angry black man” may have created his lack of forcing the public option thru in the ACA. But Lieberman, an Independent at this point, refused to sign onto the bill unless that was dropped. The public option would have helped to better control healthcare costs in the end. Obama really needed to put Lieberman on the spot, but being as Lieberman was getting donations from that industry, his job, as he saw it, was to make sure they didn’t risk losing money. Obama’s effort to preside was constantly roadblocked by the opposing party, mostly for no other reason than simple partisan racist impudence. That tactic was set in action in the Caucus Room by a few main GQPers who agreed to block every piece of legislation from the other party.( https://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/03/The-Conspiracy-to-Commit-Legislative-Constipation?srsltid=AfmBOorbUI5Q37RDAve3ByTTNQqPzet98AJCc3dFkQAaHFHv8-zhOWWU) Even with all the effort to fight him every step of the way, Obama managed to reduce the deficit and pull the nation out of another republican caused recession. (https://www.investopedia.com/us-debt-by-president-dollar-and-percentage-7371225)
Junior Bush had his wars, just as he promised with biographer Mickey Herskowitz. (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/450172.CHARGE_TO_KEEP) Winning an election not by the people, but given to him by a SCOTUS who had intervened in a recount that the state had a legal right to do. Had a total recount taken place he would have lost Florida and Gore would have been President. (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jan/29/uselections2000.usa ). It’s a safe assumption had Gore won, we may avoided a 9/11 as he took bin Laden as serious threat. Following a conservative precedent of winning not by a majority of the popular vote, but by a plurality, Junior won re-election. Despite the fact he took Clinton’s surplus, and as conservatives are prone to do, wasted it on tax cuts for the rich, and added to our debt in doing so. (https://www.cato.org/blog/george-w-bush-biggest-spender-lbj ) Additional policies enacted led us to the recession that brought his successor.
Clinton, sadly talked progressive in his campaign but ran the office along neoliberal policies. The two biggest negatives he provided was the signing the reversal of the Glass-Steagal Act and then the Telecommunications Act. The first set the economy for collapse later, which Junior tried to stave off before he left office. The second gave us the present day problems of right wing billionaires owning and controlling much of the major media. Both passed by a majority GQP congress and sadly a few Democrats. The positive is he left office with a surplus. (https://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/)
Bush senior had his little war in hopes of establishing the image of a war president to maintain his position as president. In similar move for a president flailing in polls, like his predecessor, he went in thinking it would help him. Unfortunate for him, as his son pointed out in his biography, it was too short to propel him into a second term. During his one term he realized that Reagan’s tax cuts were increasingly adding to the deficit, so he was able to face the fact he needed to raise taxes, which eventually hurt him in his run for a second term. He conveniently avoided treason with a handy set of pardons at the end of his term to curtail the investigation. (https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1224.html)
Carter, who is not given enough credit and but is incorrectly credited for his “malaise speech” in which he never used that word in his speech. (https://www.cartercenter.org/news/editorials_speeches/crisis_of_confidence.html?s_src=cartercenter&s_subsrc=search&gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQiAst67BhCEARIsAKKdWOkCEnVL0bBgs9_wSgRIqfgu_GJbrj95Bv3v_KSPhCvDBdViMLr4xXwaAkPqEALw_wcB) If he were able to complete his wishes from that speech, we, as a nation, could be entirely energy independent today. He recognized the energy issues early on and the need to pull away from foreign dependence for oil. He left office with a balanced budget, in which Reagan squandered it on tax cuts for the rich which added to a $3 trillion to our debt. Carter was leading the polls in his run for a second term, but Reagan, following in Nixon’s footsteps, (https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/this-is-treason) committed treason by interfering in negotiations. This time with Iran, asking them to not release the hostages until after the election and in doing so will offer them parts for military weapons. (https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Global-Viewpoint/2013/0305/Argo-helps-Iran-s-dictatorship-harms-democracy#:~:text=By%20this%20time%2C%20the%20clergy,relationship%20between%20Khomeinism%20and%20Reaganism.)
In the end, there are two points to be made. One, because of the GQP’s reliance on tax cuts for the rich, we are missing out on a having a surplus in our budget, (https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GOP%20Policies%20Caused%20the%20Deficit%20REPORT%2010-25-19.pdf). And two, I’d take any of them over the treasonous fascist pedophile protector now in office.