http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/10/14/criticism/index.htmlThe Atlantic's Marc Ambinder makes the following observation:
From day one of his administration, the left has held Barack Obama's feet to the fire way more than the right ever did to George W. Bush -- at least until Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Put another way: the diversity of opinion about Obama and his presidency among activist Dems far exceeds early Bush-era diversity of opinion among activist GOPers.
Is there any doubt that this is accurate? I can't imagine how there could be. And is there anyone who believes that this is a bad thing?
It's worth remembering how the GOP and the Right treated Bush and the role they played in his presidency. Ambinder says that it wasn't until the Miers nomination that the Right criticized Bush in any meaningful way. That's pretty extraordinary, since that took place in September, 2005 -- almost five full years into the Bush presidency. For the first five years, look at what happened:
The Right's leading commentators saw their role as defending the Bush administration no matter what it did, rather than expressing their honest opinions, as Rush Limbaugh infamously admitted after the GOP lost control of Congress in the 2006 election: "I feel liberated. . . I no longer am going to have to carry the water for people who I don't think deserve having their water carried." Personalized hagiographies were churned out glorifying the President in borderline-religious tones. Conservative groups devoted themselves to blind defense of the White House -- justifying whatever Bush did and turning themselves into a political arm of the administration -- rather than exerting pressure for adherence to their agenda.<snip>
More at the link.