Let’s go back to an article I wrote last year titled, “Obama Promise To Transcend Political Divide His Signature Failure And Lie“:
Back in March of 2008, the New York Times correctly identified what they described as the CORE of Barack Obama’s promise to the American people, and they correctly identified why reasonable people should be skeptical:
WASHINGTON — At the core of Senator Barack Obama’s presidential campaign is a promise that he can transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years, end the partisan and ideological wars and build a new governing majority.
To achieve the change the country wants, he says, “we need a leader who can finally move beyond the divisive politics of Washington and bring Democrats, independents and Republicans together to get things done.”
But this promise leads, inevitably, to a question: Can such a majority be built and led by Mr. Obama, whose voting record was, by one ranking, the most liberal in the Senate last year?
Anyone who possessed more reason than their dog or cat, of course, should have known that the answer to the last question would be a resounding “NO!” If Obama had wanted to be a “unifier,” he wouldn’t have been the most liberal (and radical) member of the U.S. Senate.
And of course, anyone who truly possessed even a shred of bipartisanship wouldn’t have spent 23 seconds in Jeremiah Wright’s demagogic, racist, anti-American, Marxist church, let alone 23 years.
Obama PROMISED he would heal the partisan divide, that he would reach across the divide in an unprecedented way. According to the New York Times, that was Obama’s CORE promise.
He did the exact opposite. He couldn’t have lied to us more.
Again, in his State of the Union Speech, Obama went back to the same demagoguery, even as he called upon those he was demagoguing to abandon their principles and follow him:
From some on the right, I expect we’ll hear a different argument, that if we just make fewer investments in our people, extend tax cuts, including those for the wealthier Americans, eliminate more regulations, maintain the status quo on health care, our deficits will go away.
The problem is, that’s what we did for eight years.
(APPLAUSE)
That’s what helped us into this crisis. It’s what helped lead to these deficits. We can’t do it again.
Rather than fight the same tired battles that have dominated Washington for decades, it’s time to try something new. Let’s invest in our people without leaving them a mountain of debt. Let’s meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let’s try common sense, a novel concept.
Now, to do that, we have to recognize that we face more than a deficit of dollars right now. We face a deficit of trust, deep and corrosive doubts about how Washington works that have been growing for years.
Then later Obama said:
And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, a supermajority, then the responsibility to govern is now yours, as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions.
If Obama wants Republicans to cooperate with his agenda, he should stop demonizing them. He keeps demagoguing “the last eight years” (as if we should forget the unprecedented 52 consecutive months of growth during those eight years); maybe he should also mention his party’s unprecedented eight years’ of vicious attacks against George Bush.
Democrats now demagogue Republicans as the “party of no” without ever bothering to answer for why they did the same thing:
But did congressional Democrats offer their own alternative to President Bush’s 2005 Social Security plan? When a fellow Democrat asked Rep. Nancy Pelosi when their party would offer its own Social Security plan, her answer was “Never. Is that soon enough for you?” Democrats would not even negotiate until personal retirement accounts were taken off the table. Why should Republicans act differently today, regarding the “public option”?
Obama is a polarizing, divisive demagogue. He refuses to understand that you don’t get people to join you by demonizing them. You get them to fight you to their last breath.
Obama lies when he says his administration has reached out to Republicans. He’s shut them out. And that tactic was employed so heavily that even blue-dog DEMOCRATS were shut out of any part in the debate:
Forty-five House Democrats in the party’s moderate-to-conservative wing have protested the secretive process by which party leaders in their chamber are developing legislation to remake the health care system.
The lawmakers, members of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, said they were “increasingly troubled” by their exclusion from the bill-writing process.
So when Democrats claim they included Republicans, they are just rank liars; they even refused to include their own moderate Democrats!
Obama is the most cynical demagogue America has seen in decades, and nothing more.
And the American people now readily understand that:
January 25, 2010Obama’s Approval Most Polarized for First-Year President
Shows much greater party differences than approval for any prior first-year president by Jeffrey M. Jones
PRINCETON, NJ — The 65 percentage-point gap between Democrats’ (88%) and Republicans’ (23%) average job approval ratings for Barack Obama is easily the largest for any president in his first year in office, greatly exceeding the prior high of 52 points for Bill Clinton.
Overall, Obama averaged 57% job approval among all Americans from his inauguration to the end of his first full year on Jan. 19. He came into office seeking to unite the country, and his initial approval ratings ranked among the best for post-World War II presidents, including an average of 41% approval from Republicans in his first week in office. But he quickly lost most of his Republican support, with his approval rating among Republicans dropping below 30% in mid-February and below 20% in August. Throughout the year, his approval rating among Democrats exceeded 80%, and it showed little decline even as his overall approval rating fell from the mid-60s to roughly 50%.
Democrats suffered a MASSIVE defeat and a MASSIVE repudiation of their agenda in even the heavily Democrat state of Massachusetts. Obama has lost every single statewide race since becoming president – all of which occurred in states that overwhelmingly voted for him in 2008. The people are no longer with Obama; they are against him. But judging by his performance in the State of the Union, Obama is determined to keep heading full speed ahead off the cliff.
No comments:
Post a Comment