Skip to comments.Obama Stands Between the American People and the Powerful, Evil Forces Working Against Them
Posted on 02/13/2013 2:18:01 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: There's a Rasmussen Reports story on survey results: "Americans overwhelmingly believe that it's not only fair for entrepreneurs to get rich, it's good for the economy." Now, you see something like this, and you swear you're living in an alternative universe. How can this be? How can this be with Barack Obama continuing to gain approval for his policies, to be untied to the fate of the country? Americans overwhelmingly believe that it's not only fair for entrepreneurs to get rich, it's good for the economy.
"A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 86% of Likely US Voters believe it is fair for those who build very successful companies to get very rich. Only 10% see it as unfair. Those figures include 56% who see such rewards as Very Fair and two percent (2%) who say they're Not at All Fair." It was over a thousand people that were surveyed, a thousand likely voters. Now, we have polls that show dissatisfaction with the country's direction but support for Obama's agenda.
A giant, total disconnect.
The people of this country -- and let's leave it as low-information voters. They happen to be a majority of people voting. A majority of low-information voters do not associate what's happening in the country with Obama policies at all. They don't associate Obama as having any relationship whatsoever to what's happening in the country. I'm sorry. I wish I could have figured this out in February of 2009. I really do.
I can't tell you how embarrassed I feel. (interruption) Well, I know it doesn't makes sense but still it's been out there to be seen. It has been discoverable. It was learnable, and I missed it. We've been beating our heads up against the wall trying to understand why it is that people do not associate the decline in the country with the president of the United States, when every president heretofore has either gotten the blame or the credit when the economy goes down or up.
Every president has. Now, in the case of George W. Bush, they finagled a way to get him out of credit for a good economy that they reported as being bad. They convinced the American people we were in a recession long before we were. They convinced the American people that millions of soldiers were dying in Iraq. But the key to understanding this is that Barack Obama never governs. He's never does it.
He doesn't allow himself to be seen as governing. Yeah, he's been elected, but he's not governing. This explains the never-ending, perpetual campaign. Obama is constantly running against what's wrong. There are forces, powerful forces arrayed against Obama and you, and he's representing you, and he's trying to stop these forces, and he's trying to expose these people. And he's trying to overcome the dastardly things that they are doing -- and who are "they"? They are the rich!
They're the people who cornered the market on everything. The rich and the people who've managed to commandeer everything for them and left but mere crumbs for everybody else. Obama is trying to get it all back for you -- and not only get it back for you, it was yours to start with. Somewhere along the line it was all yours, and over the years, these mysterious, powerful forces ended up finding a way to take it away from you.
Barack Obama is not linked to the direction of the country at all. He has no relationship to it. His policies, his agenda, are not seen as having anything to do with the direction the country's going. It's a profound marvel here. This is an amazing political feat that has been accomplished. Into the fifth year of running the country, and still he's seen... It's not as an outsider. It goes deeper than that. It's not that he's seen as an outsider. He's seen as a crusader.
He's seen as somebody who understands exactly what it is that's causing you all your problems and strife, and he's trying to expose it and fix it. It's like Hugo Chavez. I mentioned in the last half hour that throughout history, dictators have never been blamed for the bad things happening in their countries. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro? These people were all running the revolution. They were all running against whatever was happening that was making life miserable for people.
The revolution in Cuba, for crying out loud, is still going on! They still speak of " La Revolucion." Castro is still seen and idolized, envied. He is respected by the people of Cuba -- now, the majority; not all, of course, but a majority still do -- as a great savior, working against powerful enemies. That's why Castro, for example, never wants the US embargo to end. "The blockade," he calls it. That's why! The US is the evil force that's preventing Cuba from becoming all it could be, and that embargo is part and parcel of it.
It makes no common sense whatsoever, and you'll go absolutely insane trying to analyze this with common sense. This is how you understand massive support for Obama's agenda and total dissatisfaction with the country's direction. The only way those two things can co-exist at the same time, intellectually, is if Obama's agenda is not seen as having one shred of relationship to what's happening in the country.
Obama's agenda is seen as the fix, the attempted fix. Obama's agenda is seen as a valiant effort to fix the unemployment situation, to fix the housing problem, to fix the fact that the world hates us, to fix our foreign policy problems, to fix the health care problem and the immigration problem. None of what Obama does is seen as a cause. Not only that, it's not even seen as relating. So you have a story where 60% believe letting entrepreneurs get rich is good for the economy.
It's not only fair for entrepreneurs to get rich, it's good for the economy.
Yet Obama can, in his State of the Union speech, basically come out and blame those people for the problems that we face and not be seen as an obstacle to creating wealth, not be seen as an obstacle to entrepreneurism. He can come out and basically say he is opposed to entrepreneurism, but actually he doesn't. He opened his speech last night by talking about the one thing that we've always all agreed to is if you work hard and you play by the rules, you get ahead.
Everybody playing on a fair field and a fair shot and so forth. That is the exact opposite of what is happening, but it sounds good. So that's what Obama is trying for. Right now the deck is stacked against everybody. The rich have all the marbles. The 1% have all the marbles. It's profound thing. Yet if you look at just the one half of this, dissatisfaction with the country's direction, you say, "Okay, well, there's potential. There is at least potential to open people's eyes."
There's another factor here, too, folks, and you can't take this factor out of the equation. That's Obama's race and the historical nature of his presidency. He's the first black president. A lot of people voted for Obama in 2008 because that vote did a number of things, individually. That vote made those people feel good about themselves. Those people, when they voted for Obama, said, "I am not a racist, and nobody can ever say I am!"
That's number one. Number two: That vote was gonna fix the race problem. It was gonna erase slavery. It was gonna eliminate all the horrible things in this nation's past. Finally we were going to, as a nation, speak up and say in one voice, "We are no longer racist! We are no longer a slave state." Then, the blank canvas aspect of Obama. He stood for anything you wanted him be. Those people are not going to admit that they made a mistake.
Those people are not gonna admit that their vote was cast erroneously. So all those things add up. To me, this is important. I'm harping on it because, of course, the objective here is to have an informed public. The whole point of this program has been, the operating theory of the program has been that an informed public voting every four years or every two years, will bring about the best possible governance and the best possible culture/society that the country can have.
But they must be an informed voting public, winning in the arena of ideas. This is not about ideas. By the way, this explains Clinton, too. Clinton was a perpetual campaign. Only on rare occasions -- same thing for Obama -- did Clinton actually want to be perceived as governing, as in charge with something like welfare reform. He wanted credit for that. So for the two or three days that that mattered, he was president. He wasn't campaigning, he was governing. Obama does that when he signs various bills.
For example, the State of the Union speech last night, and for the rest of this week, he's on the campaign trail. What's he doing? He's running against the powerful forces trying to stop him from fixing these problems. He's not governing. And that's how he is able to create and maintain the illusion that he has no relationship whatsoever to what actually happens. Unemployment -- nothing to do with him, even after five years. National debt, deficit -- nothing to do with him. Budget cuts that might be harmful, there are no such things, by the way, nothing to do with him. And, Mike, if you would bear with me, play it one more time. It's the audio sound bite number 30. This is from the Frank Luntz focus group from Hannity last night. As you listen to this, every one of these people voted for Mitt Romney.
LUNTZ: From the Romney people, what did you like about Barack Obama's State of the Union Address? A couple of you...
WOMAN: I liked his immigration that he talked about putting people at the back of the line and so that they didn't get preferential treatment just because they were here.
MAN: I think education, the reform he was talking about -- affordability and making it efficient -- I think that's gonna... Education all starts from education, really. (sic)
LUNTZ: One more...
WOMAN: I like how he spoke of bipartisanship and working with Congress and moving the country forward by working together.
LUNTZ: Does he mean it?
WOMAN: I believe he means it.
LUNTZ: How many of you believe he means it, that he's gonna be more bipartisan this term than he was before?
WOMAN: He means it!
RUSH: Right. So immigration, "I like what Obama's proposing. He's making people go to the back of the line." He actually isn't, but he said that last night, so that's what people heard, they believe him. When he lies, they believe him. His immigration plan is not gonna make any of these illegals go to the back of the line. They're gonna be at the front of the line and they're gonna get citizenship right off the bat. It doesn't do me any good to say it. Those people are not gonna believe me. They're gonna believe him.
Education? Why, we love what he's doing with education. Education is it, that's everything for our kids. Of course Obama wants to fix it. Bipartisanship. We want everybody to work together. We want everybody to get along. The most partisan president ever, the most divisive, he's not seen that way. No, no, don't say that, nobody's gonna believe that. He's not. He wants everybody to get along. These are Romney voters. You heard 'em. That's their take from last night.
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, this explains why Obama walked away from the grand bargain last August on the expansion, the raising of the debt limit. John Boehner, remember how mad we were, we were going into the end of the campaign, whenever it was, and Boehner gave Obama everything he wanted, and then Obama changed the rules of the game and asked for another $500 billion or trillion dollars in tax increases. When Boehner finally caved on revenue, when Boehner said, "Okay, we'll agree to raise taxes." Then Obama came and asked for more and Boehner finally said, "That's it pal, we're outta here." Obama didn't want the grand bargain. He didn't want any kind of a deal, even though Boehner gave him everything he wanted.
The Washington Post couldn't understand it at the time. I'll never forget this. A grand bargain means there's an agreement. Obama doesn't want to agree. It's better for Obama to be seen as continuing to fight these powerful forces. Look, if the country's going to hell in a handbasket and you want it to and you're the architect, it's a brilliant maneuver to make sure that other people are seen as responsible for it. Now, folks, this could not happen without a totally compliant media. It's not just you need a charismatic figure. Sure, this is obviously true. You need a profoundly charismatic leader, but you have to have a complicit media. If you don't have the media on your side, you'll never get away with always blaming somebody else, the wreckers.
If Obama didn't have the media following his lead on this, he couldn't get away with any of this. So don't misunderstand. I'm not saying the media have no role here. They are willing and activist participants in this. But the grand bargain, Obama being offered everything he wanted and turning it down after making a demand that was impossible to be met, means that Obama wants no responsibility. He doesn't want to be perceived as responsible. He is shirking all responsibility by refusing to govern, by refusing to compromise, by refusing to take "yes" for an answer. The moment Obama agrees -- this is why, my instincts, there's no common ground. There isn't any way there can be bipartisanship in terms of ideological ideas, or ideological factoids or characteristics.
There's no common ground between what Obama wants and what the Republicans want. There is no way to have bipartisan compromise, but beyond that, it's the last thing Obama wants. He doesn't want there to be a real budget, for example. It's the same tactic. With no real budget, you can't tie Obama to anything that happens in the budget. With no budget deal, you can't tie Obama to it. But you can continue to portray the Republicans as the enemy. Look at the sequester. The sequester is his idea.
His entire existence today and last night and last week and next week is to run against it. And look what the sequester is going to do. It's gonna take food out of the mouths of babies. It's the same tactic. His agenda, his policies, have no relationship to what happens. He's constantly fighting the evil forces, and therefore he can never agree with 'em. He can never strike a deal with these evil forces because then he would share responsibility for what happens. And after eight years, he is gonna end up being held responsible for nothing that happens in this country. That's the objective.
RUSH: By the way, folks, this theory of mine explains so much. Everything that I have explained has a focal point, and it is this: It keeps Obama from being blamed for what is happening to the country, which is what he wants to happen. As you and I all know, he is devastating this country. He is tearing down the traditions and institutions that made the country great -- and all the while, he is seen as fighting it.
All the while he is seen by most people as trying to stop it.
He is seen by most people as doing everything he can to save this country. But there are powerful forces out there that are working hard, and they've gotten away with it ever since the days of the founding. Benghazi! Benghazi is a microcosm of this whole approach. It explains why Obama refused to get involved. He never wants to get involved when there's the slightest chance that he could be held responsible.
Therefore it's the video. Therefore it's Susan Rice. Therefore it's Hillary. Therefore it's anybody. So at the end of the day, it's always Obama who's seen as the great crusader. He's trying to get to the bottom of things and fix them and make sure it doesn't happen again. Nothing that happens has any relationship to the fact that he is the leader of the country. It has no relationship whatsoever to the fact that he is the president.
I think it's why he's always voted "present" throughout of his political career. This is what agitators do. It's what community organizers do. They rile people up, and then they step aside while the chaos happens, and then they pretend that they had nothing to do with it while they come in and try to calm everybody down and fix it. They then get everybody working together and make sure that we invest properly in education and make sure that we don't let the sea levels rise too much.
"We've gotta tackle global warming, and make sure those health insurance companies don't get away with raping people like they always have!" This explains why Obama let Pelosi write Obamacare. It's why Obama never went out and actually sold it. Do you remember the way the mainstream media, early on, would always complain about how Obama would never really go sell his policies? (interruption) Now, he is? He's not selling policies now.
What he's doing is he gives his State of the Union thing and then runs out and he's back on the campaign trail. He's not trying to sell policies. The purpose of these next three days is to explain what he said in the State of the Union speech and to continue this fairytale that there are powerful forces that are arrayed and aligned against you and everybody else in this country, and he's doing his best to protect you and make sure that the playing field is level and you get a fair shot.
RUSH: I want to get back to the audio sound bites. We're gonna go to the Charlie Rose Show last night on PBS, because this gets to the whole point once again confirming my theorem that there is no common ground that would facilitate bipartisanship. There's no area where the Republicans and Obama agree. There really isn't. So this mythical desire for bipartisanship is just that, it's a pipe dream. They were talking about this, Charlie Rose with Mark Halperin, TIME Magazine, last night. Charlie Rose said, "Has he made a decision that he can't deal with the Republicans, he can't bring 'em on board, so he's just gonna confront them?"
HALPERIN: There is a school of thought that people whisper about here in this city, which is, he's gonna spend two years trying to draw lines just like he did in the reelect and hope that the last two years of this last term he gets back control of the House, keeps control of the Senate, and finds a way to deal with some of these longer term issues back in a partisan way rather than a bipartisan. They're just too fundamentally at odds about how you get new revenue, the balance between taxes and tax reform and spending cuts and where those should come from. I think, as I said before, they're farther apart on specifics and ideology than they've been.
RUSH: Yeah, farther apart than ever. These guys are late arrivals to the obvious. There is no common ground. There hasn't been any common ground since January 2009, folks. By design there hasn't been any common ground. That's the point. There isn't any common ground. Obama cannot ever be seen to agree or compromise with the Republicans, unless it is seen as a total capitulation by the Republicans. If the Republicans are willing to cave, then they'll call that bipartisanship, gladly and happily. But Obama's not gonna compromise, not gonna give up one iota of anything in order to strike a deal on anything.
This exactly what I've been saying. And so what Halperin's saying here, the whole point of this is to spend the next two years campaigning for the 2014 midterms. That's what this current campaign is. It's already started. It's to make sure, or to try to make sure that the Democrats win the House and then there's not any need for compromise, there's no need for bipartisanship, because then Obama and the Democrats can't be stopped. If the Democrats retake the House in 2014, there's no way the Republicans could stop them, and so there wouldn't be any need for bipartisanship. And at that point they stop talking about it and just start talking about finally the American people have spoken, finally the American people have gotten what they want, one-party rule.
And at that point, Obama will still not be seen as governing. At that point Obama will be seen as finally victorious in wresting power, taking power from these mysterious forces that are constantly trying to harm you. So that's what this perpetual campaign is about. It's why there won't be any common ground, there won't be any agreement, Obama is not gonna let anything happen that would permit, require, or have people see him as being responsible for anything. Doris Kearns Goodwin was on the same show, Charlie Rose, and she weighs in, and she says that the 2014 election is the whole ball game now. It's what all this is about.
KEARNS: The long-term hope here, in a certain sense, on the part of the president is that even though history will say you can't get anything done in those last two years, you're gonna lose in the midterms, that maybe he just can keep that election base going, keep that campaign strategy alive and maybe have a chance to take back the House. And I think it's worth that. Meanwhile, you've educated the country, at the very least, in terms of what's necessary for climate change, for gun control, for immigration reform, but if you should win and if you should possibly take back the House -- look, the Tea Party took it over because they mobilized from the outside in, so it's not impossible to imagine, and then you get everything. Then you get the whole ball game.
RUSH: See, there it is, folks, but the key is you have to be perceived as doing it from the outside. So Obama is the president. He can't be perceived as an insider. He can't be perceived as governing. He's constantly at war with powerful forces unseen who are resisting fixing the climate, resisting fixing immigration, resisting fixing the problems with gun violence. These are mean, powerful people, whoever they are. And they don't want an end to gun violence, and they don't care about the climate is warming, because they want to continue to use oil to fly their airplanes and drive their big cars and cool their houses. And they clearly don't care about immigration reform because they're racists. And this is what Obama's fighting.
I've about gotten you convinced myself, haven't I? What a great, valiant warrior he is. It really isn't that hard. So 2014 comes and they finally win the House, and then the last two years are not irrelevant. The last two years are when you close the deal, you transform the country for good, and you throw away the key.
RUSH: So you heard Doris Kearns Goodwin in the sound bite, she says, "And you've educated the country," meaning you've shown 'em how you're fighting the wicked on climate change, same-sex marriage, gun control, amnesty. You're willing to show the educated and you're ready for the 2014 midterms, where it's finally time to take the country back from all of these evil people.
Depends on how you define “between”. I would say Obama himself is the publicly seen part of the gigantic hidden iceberg of powerful, evil forces working against us.
Is that a tacit admission by Obama that he, himself, is evil?
I noticed during the last two debates, Obama seemed to be attacking some incredibly incompetent incumbent president. Sometimes he almost stole Romney’s thunder.
I noticed during the last two debates, Obama seemed to be attacking some incredibly incompetent incumbent president. Sometimes he almost stole Romney’s thunder.
I’m glad that’s been cleared up. I thought Obama was the evil force!
These conversations have become lame.. If you do not know Zero is an evil SOB, you’re hopeless, like most american women...
Rush doing it like like yelling up a pipe..
Only Mark Levine is taking names and cleaning out the donkey stalls.. he has courage..
Other republicans are afraid of ending up dead of suicide with two bullets to the back of the head..
Sooo they STFU.... COWARDS... in the most craven way..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.