Free Markets, Free People

Obama: Ideologue selling what no one is buying

Two articles of interest this week which caught my eye.  On comes from the NY Times and is headlined, “Obama pushes agenda, despite political risks”.

One of the things I remember clearly from the campaign is how the lapdog media – and that would include the NY Times – kept telling us what a “pragmatist” Barack Obama was.  That we would most likely see the 2nd coming of Bill Clinton with this guy.

Meanwhile there were a small group of us out here pointing out that there was nothing in this guy’s scant background that pointed to pragmatism and a lot that pointed to an idealist, activist and ideologue.  We were scoffed at quite consistently.

I love “I told you so moments”.  While Sheryl Gay Stolberg can’t quite make herself use the “ideologue” word, pragmatism is a word unheard.  And she does say:

What Mr. Obama and his allies portray as progressive, activist government has been framed by his opponents as overreaching and profligate when it comes to the economy.

Remember, she’s supposedly portraying the Obama administration as they’ve portrayed themselves – as ideologues.

Her essential message is, while he and his cronies may have managed to pass some legislation they tout as historic or landmark, that’s not how it is perceived by the seething, voting masses.  But, ever tuned into the electorate (yeah, that’s sarcasm), he’s pushing ahead with those legislative agenda items his ideology favors despite the electorates rejection of them in poll after poll.  That includes stimulus, health care and now financial regulation.

That brings us to the financial regulation bill and an article by Kimberley Strassel.  You need to read it, but again, it is the way she phrases a certain part of it that I find interesting:

Which brings us to yesterday’s passage of Mr. Obama’s financial overhaul bill. The press is hailing it as another big Obama victory, one that allows the president to brag about fulfilling his agenda and allows Democrats a "reform" to wave going into midterms.

Certainly that can be read a couple of ways, no doubt.  But in the context of the next paragraph, not so much:

Maybe. Or maybe there’s every reason to believe the financial overhaul—like stimulus and health care—proves more political liability than political benefit.

Of course, stimulus and financial regulation were not “agenda items” of the campaign.  Health care certainly was, even if the final law was a progressive monstrosity of which the majority of Americans wanted no part.  Same with the “stimulus”.  But, the ideology Obama believes in dictated those moves regardless of the public’s wants and desires.

Financial regulation, however, was a target of opportunity.  It was the crisis opportunity Rahm Emanuel spoke about early in the administration which allowed them to push their ideological even a step further.  Another 2,500 page bill filled with who knows what aimed specifically at the private sector, while the role of the mismanaged Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have all but been ignored and they’ve been fed another half trillion dollars with little fan fare (they’ve also been delisted from the stock market making it even harder to monitor their activity).

The whole point here is only an ideologue would push an “agenda” so hard that it harmed him and his party politically to the point that they may be voted out of power and stay out for some time (assuming the GOP can field better candidates than it is right now or seems likely to field in 2012).  A pragmatist would favor an incremental bi-partisan approach that is politically healthy.  An ideologue, while mouthing platitudes about bi-partisanship, wouldn’t really care that much as long as he had the votes needed to pass his agenda item.

That’s the real Obama.  That was pretty clear to those of us who weren’t wearing blinders or rose colored glasses (or both) during the campaign.  It is clear we were right.  It is also clear that the media was complicit in selling us a bill of goods on this man that was never evident nor believable to those with a discerning eye.

Meanwhile, in Alaska, the media was going through Sarah Palin’s underwear drawer.

Yeah – they should indeed be ashamed (and the “journalists” wonder why they’re held in such low esteem and they have to hint at government subsidies as a good idea for their survival.  They earned that  low esteem and they can go under with it as well.).



[tweetmeme only_single=”false”]
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

18 Responses to Obama: Ideologue selling what no one is buying

  • 1) I think we should refer to them all as “journolists” until Journolist is made transparent and we see what they were really doing. Seriously, if 400 bankers had a secret website would that be cool or would that be collusion?
    “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public.”
    In this case, not for profit but for power.
    2) I am curious about the political sausage making of these comprehensive 2,000+ page bills. Does that create more opportunity for true compromise and analysis rather than making each section a smaller bill by itself? For example, consumer financial protection might be a great idea – but wouldn’t it be better debated by itself rather than as part of a massive all-encompassing bill? Maybe the GOP could run with a plank that promised to limit the size of bills to so many pages per bill. This is the 2nd 2,000+ page bill passed and both with slow-release time bombs in them that add to uncertainty.

    • Some of the analysis I’ve read of all recently passed “comprehensive” (Collectivist code for “totalitarian”) bills discovered explicit race and gender discrimination embedded in the drafting.  Little wonder, as these bills were not drafted by legislators…or even their staff…but by interest groups of the Collective.  Hell, the Congresscritters never ATTEMPTED to read the damn stinking piles of crap!

  • NOBODY who read what Obama (supposedly) wrote, knew about his Rev. Wright fixation, or listened to what he said in less guarded moments EVER doubted that is puke is a pure Collectivist ideologue.
    Pragmatists are at least grounded in reality.  Obama is totally divorced from reality.

  • What to do when Hope & Change don’t work for you any more

  • *chuckle*  The left is livid that Obama works too much with Republicans and isn’t liberal enough.  The right tries to paint him as an ideologue.  But he’s gotten two major pieces of legislation through (which many thought he couldn’t), named two new Supreme Court justices, and is dealing with a crisis of epic proportions that was here when he arrived.   Beyond major legislation he’s overhauled US military efforts, and has been forging a new diplomatic path.   While the partisans bicker, he demonstrate true leadership (which is probably why the right is so upset — for all their complaining, he’s winning every battle).  Moreover, even his ratings are above what Reagan and Clinton experienced early in their Presidency despite the bad economy.  So the left thinks he’s too far right, and the right thinks he’s too far left.  That means he’s probably where he should be.   I think you’re just upset that he’s getting things done — he’s proven himself a true leader.

    • Screw the Left.  They aren’t happy when they are fornacating.
      The middle ground that you nudging us toward is already so far out of the mainstream that Charlie the singing fish is singing “Take me to the water.”

    • I think you’re just upset that he’s getting things done — he’s proven himself a true leader.

      LOL!!!  Once again Erb, you can scurry back to your Messiah and get your 30 pieces of silver.

      But for once, to show you that your tripe really carries no weight at all, lets take a look at a few of the points you tried to make.

      Winning every battle?  How could he not?  In the 19 months of his regime, he has held an insurmountable majority in the House and had a fillibuster proof Senate for 12 of the 19 months.  The real question is why it has taken so much effort for him to get what he has so far and still not come accross with Card Check or Cap & Trade or any number of the other items on his agenda.  And of those Wins, Stimulus was a complete bust and the majority of the country still wants Obamacare repealed – not modified or adjusted or realigned or compromised – REPEALED!  And that is before all of the new taxes come into effect.  If any other Leader (??) would have had that kind of majority, it boggles the mind the accomplishments that could have taken place. 

      On the foreign policy front – what a joke!  North Korea is rattling it sabers and threatening war with the South – and in fact has already commited an act of war; Russia has virtually threatened the US to stay away from its refound “Sphere of Influence” in the Ukraine, Georgia, and the Baltic States; Iran has spit on every Obama attempt to genuflect to the mullahs and continue on their merry way to Nukedom and the Chinese and Russians have played havoc with any attempt by Obama to put any sanctions in place; Obama will need additional Secret Service protection the next time he visits Great Britain after his State Department sided with Argentina regarding the Falklands (Or should we now call them the Malvinas?); Turkey is in the process of splitting from NATO and joining the reat of the mad mullahs in their merry search for Jihad; and I haven’t even touched on Obama stopping all military support of Israel where the polls there indicate 90% of the populace believe Obama is supportive of the Palestinian cause (i.e. the destruction of Israel).

      On the military front – Obama has had to fire his chosen war leader for rank insubordination and has had to fall back on the one General the entire Democratic Party slandered no less that 36 months ago.  A general that even Obama himself, as a mere Senator, called his Surge Strategy a failure and continued to do so up until his inauguration.  And now, whenever the question arises, “Conditions on the Ground” is the word from the front while the Obama team keeps saying “We’re Outta Here” back home.  Yep, he really has gotten this military thing figured out!?!?!?

      I guess a True Leader from the left is a term that is completely foreign to what the dictionary says it is.  I will say that I will join you, Erb, and follow Obama anywhere – but while you will slavishly follow your Messiah,  for me it will only be out of a sense of morbid curiosity!!!

      • Methinks thou doth protest too much.  Your worldview is obsolete, and politically impotent.  The times, they are a changing!

        • Protest too much?  I was just getting started.  And, as usual,  not one response from you regarding any point I brought up.  Typical!

          Obsolete? Impotent?   By whose standards?  And for once I will agree with you, the times they are a changing.  You’ll see come November. 

          By the way, do you get any more  money from your Democratic masters for making BS responses like this one?  If so, go collect your silver – thou hast made your Messiah proud!

        • The times are indeed a changin’, but not in your direction, Mr. Jones.

        • Is this really the best you’ve got, Erb? You can’t address a single point, you just spout some stupid platitude and some stupid slogan. The only thing that’s obsolete in this equation is you!!

        • Methinks thou doth protest too much.  Your worldview is obsolete, and politically impotent.  The times, they are a changing!

          Are you even trying?  Tossing out your three most commonly over-used, misused banal platitudes does not an argument make.
          I know it gives you a sick sense of pleasure to imagine Republicans frustrated and angry, disregarding any lip service you might give to wanting your boy to do good things and save the world, etc..  But in a few decades you and everyone with whom you argue will be pushing up daisies, while your children and grandchildren suffer the ramifications of these economically devastating changes.  Will they review your petty, sneering tit-for-tat exchanges and wonder why Dad/Grandpa was so fixated on the destructive pursuit of doing his best to see that people he didn’t like were angered, disheartened, and screwed over?
          “Why did Dad/Grandpa care about those people so much?  Why didn’t he care about us?”

    • “True leadership” in the mode of Mussolini.

      “Everything inside the state, nothing outside the state.”

    • “So the left thinks he’s too far right, and the right thinks he’s too far left.That means he’s probably where he should be.”

      Once again showing the keen analysis of a moron.

  • Erb thinks Reagan was economic failure who’s first term foreign policy (of military strength) was complete garbage. Maybe Erb’s unique combination of ignorance and hypocrisy led him to accidentally being honest when he compared the two.