http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6044MI20100106

When I die, if the good Lord deems me suitable for heaven, I’ll be up there sitting in a Chipotle where I can eat as many double chicken burritos as I want and they play Journey’s greatest hits on repeat.

That there was a president who:
Came into office under a stagnant economy, and favored cutting taxes to spur growth.
Tried to invade another country as a response to a perceived threat to United States national safety.
Backed a coup in Iraq.
Agreed to let the FBI wiretap private individuals.
Signed legislation which eased the ability of Latin American citizens to immigrate to the United States.
Presided over the United States during a time when the average citizen feared an attack on U.S. soil was imminent.
Would you say G.W. Bush, or would you say John F. Kennedy?

Franken Wins Minnesota Senate Seat, Gives Democrats Plenty of Rope

Jobless Rate at Level Promised If We Don’t Pass the Stimulus Bill

N. Korea Fires 4th Missile, Breathes Sigh of Relief Bush No Longer President

Obama might well be remembered for being the PR president.  His lasting contribution, in my opinion, will be simply that he was elected.  How does this relate to Microsoft?

Anyone in the know will admit that Windows Vista is a fine operating system.  It offers the user an attractive interface, a relatively intuit environment and maintains years of legacy desperately needed by its millions of users while simultaneously bridging the gap into the future.  The general populace however, still has this idea that Windows Vista was a huge blunder on Microsoft’s part and has staved off adoption.  I am prepared to admit that Microsoft could have done a few things better: sought to ensure driver compatibility earlier and priced it lower in order to gain higher market share.  On the whole though, Vista represented a pretty significant breakthrough on a lot of fronts.  The mindshare of the computing public prevented it from completely replacing Windows XP in the homes and especially in the offices of America.  The perception dominated the reality.George W. Bush experienced a lot of the same things.  The media and the left succeeded in perpetuating this idea of W. as a bungling fool who screwed up everything he touched, was a warmonger that we haven’t seen since Adolf Hitler, and killed small puppies in the basement of the White House on his spare time.  W. compounded this public perception problem by generally not caring what the press or the American people thought about him.  Maybe he was ill equipped rhetorically to fire back, or maybe he lacked the inclination.  Either way, Bush was content to sit in the White House while the mainstream media painted this portrait of him.By the time the 2008 election came along, one of Barack Obama’s greatest selling points was that he was in no way connected to George W. Bush.  Characterizing a McCain vote as a Bush vote became a common refrain in his campaign speeches.  It worked.Obviously, I have my problems with the man.  Big problems.  I’m actually planning an in depth look at some of these very soon.  In the meantime though, I might need to give him credit for one thing.  He is not George W. Bush.  He becomes a kind of get out of jail free card where the American people can say, “Look we didn’t vote for Bush again, we go the other guy.”  He even intimated this himself when he claimed that his election would heal dangerously poor foreign relations.  I am not claiming that the value in these things outweighs the harm he is looking to inflict in other arenas, but it might be necessary on a couple of levels for him to have at least been elected.

Republicans, if you believe they still have hope as a party, get to play defense for awhile.  Traditionally, this has been their strong suit.  Ideologically speaking, you can make a case that they should play defense all the time.  The GOP is the party of no.  No on this program, no on that program.  While the media uses this turn of phrase disparagingly, I actually love it.  I wish they said no more often.  When the House and the Senate talk about compromise, its a code word for the left getting their way.  Harry Reid can propose a $80 billion handout, the Republicans can balk, they can settle on a $50 billion handout and everyone walks away happy.  Everyone except for the American taxpayer who has another $50 billion on his hands that will never go away.   The Republicans do too much of this kind of compromising, and not enough “saying no”, which needs to be its bread and butter.  They need to get back to playing defense.  They also need to put W. behind them at least in the minds of voters.  This is not meant to disparage W., only the perception that dominates his presidency.They also need to give the Democrats enough rope to let them hang themselves.  Allow the discussion to go to healthcare, allow the discussion to go to defense, allow the discussion to include Medicare and Social Security.  Republicans have the luxury of being right on almost all the landmark issues facing the nation.  They need to allow Obama to take healthcare off of liberal protest signs and turn it into a 14,000 page bill that neatly outlines the $2 trillion it will take and concisely tells the voter exactly how it will fail.  When Hillary tried this in the early 90s, it failed because it was too detailed and transparent.  When the American people are allowed to see the effects of liberal policies, they vote against them.  When they see that Social Security and Medicare are bankrupt, they realize the folly of the programs from the outset.  And when they see that the federal government can’t even run Medicare, they might think twice about entrusting the entire healthcare industry to the federal government.

I have used Windows 7 extensively already and I enjoy it.  It’s biggest value, to Microsoft revenue at least, might be that its simply not Windows Vista and does not have the PR problems that exist there.  I suspect the only positive contribution Obama will make to the United States is that he is not named George W. Bush.