Originally published on The Agonist

Was it just a week ago that President Obama was hanging tough, insisting he would never accept a debt ceiling package that excluded tax increases? In rejecting a six month extension of the debt ceiling, Obama said last week:

But there’s an even greater danger to this approach. Based on what we’ve seen these past few weeks, we know what to expect six months from now. The House of Representatives will once again refuse to prevent default unless the rest of us accept their cuts-only approach. Again, they will refuse to ask the wealthiest Americans to give up their tax cuts or deductions. Again, they will demand harsh cuts to programs like Medicare. And once again, the economy will be held captive unless they get their way.

Here is what Speaker of the House John Boehner said today about the debt ceiling package that has now been agreed to by the House and Senate leadership, along with President Obama:

Now listen, this isn’t the greatest deal in the world," he said, according to excerpts of the call provided to press by Boehner's office. "But it shows how much we’ve changed the terms of the debate in this town."
Boehner painted the deal as victory for the Republican party because it did not include revenues, which Democrats have long called for as part of a final deal.
"There is nothing in this framework that violates our principles," he said. "It’s all spending cuts. The White House bid to raise taxes has been shut down." – source HuffPost

To add credibility to rhetoric, and to provide a measure of substance to minor accomplishments, politicians often cite relatively insignificant numbers and data to boost support. The most recent claim of success is being lauded today in Schenectady, N.Y., birthplace of the General Electric Co., to showcase a new GE deal with India, and to announce a restructured presidential advisory board to focus on increasing employment and competitiveness.

A chicken in every pot and a car in every garage – Herbert Hoover, 1928

President Barack Obama wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Toward a 21st Century Regulatory System, trying to justify his administration's decision to review and rescind Federal Regulations by executive order.

This order requires that federal agencies ensure that regulations protect our safety, health and environment while promoting economic growth. And it orders a government-wide review of the rules already on the books to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. It's a review that will help bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislators of both parties and the influence of special interests in Washington over decades.

Where necessary, we won't shy away from addressing obvious gaps: new safety rules for infant formula; procedures to stop preventable infections in hospitals; efforts to target chronic violators of workplace safety laws. But we are also making it our mission to root out regulations that conflict, that are not worth the cost, or that are just plain dumb.

Perhaps the worst insult you can hurl at a politician these days is to give him the middle name of "Hoover".
Such as George Hoover Bush and Barack Hoover Obama. 80 years later Herbert Hoover is still the standard for the "do-nothing" president in the face of economic collapse.

Like most easy comparisons, these examples lack details. That's because the names are there for the purpose of accusation, rather than enlightenment.
However, if you dig down into the individual economic policies of Hoover, Bush, and Obama, the story gets much more interesting.

As Mark Twain once said, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." I'm not going to try and find direct connections in this essay, just broad picture comparisons. If the reader confuses the two, then that will only mean I was justified in writing this.