Yesterday, I dubbed our president Barack “Milhous” Obama [something I've since learned from readers that Mark Levin has been doing for some time]. That was in honor of the prez’s reported plan to slap wage controls on financial industry employees, thus following in the footsteps of Richard Nixon, who as president imposed wage-price controls.

This morning, we have a new middle name for the President Obama: W.  It comes courtesy of the New York Times. Both a NYT editorial and a Frank Rich column draw what they see as worrisome parallels between the Obama presidency and that of his immediate predecessor.

First comes Frank, whose very column is entitled: “Has a ‘Katrina Moment’ Arrived?” Rich rips Larry Summers for being condescending and “high-handed” and depicts David Axelrod as out of touch with Americans’ concerns.  Then comes this [emphasis added]:

“Why has there been so little transparency and so much evasiveness so far? The answer, I fear, is that too many of the administration’s officials are too marinated in the insiders’ culture to police it, reform it or own up to their own past complicity with it.”

Ouch.

The Times’ editorial is equally unkind. Its criticism of Pres. Obama for being too slow in overturning various Bush-era policies includes this line [emphasis added]:

“Some of what the public has heard from the Obama administration on issues like state secrets and detainees sounds a bit too close for comfort to the Bush team’s benighted ideas.“

That’s gotta hurt at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue!

Of course many of us would be glad to go back to the good old days of the Bush era: budget deficits of a piddling few hundred billion dollars. A successful surge. Lower taxes.

But in the meantime, let our president wear his new name with pride.  All hail President Barack W. Obama!