Posted on 01/29/2010 6:14:15 AM PST by Tolik
All politicians fudge on their promises. But this president manages to transcend the normal political exaggeration and dissimulation. Whereas past executives shaded the truth, Barack Obama trumps that: on almost every key issue, what Obama says he will do, and what he says is true, is a clear guide to what he will not do, and what is not true. It is as if “truth” is a mere problem of lesser mortals.
1. Obama now rails against a pernicious Washington and its insiders: ergo, Obama controls Washington through both houses of Congress and the White House, and wants to expand Washington’s control over the auto industry, health care, energy, student loans, transportation, etc.
2. Obama bashes the Supreme Court on weakening public efforts to curb campaign contributions. Therefore, we know Obama has done more than any other President in destroying public campaign financing by being the first presidential candidate in a general election to refuse public funds—in confidence that he could raise a record $1 billion, much of it from big moneyed interests on Wall Street.
3. Obama calls for a freeze on government spending and deplores deficits. Hence, we know that the possible $15 billion savings in some discretionary spending will not affect the Obama record budget deficits that will continue to grow well over an annual $1.5 trillion a year—as Obama piles up the greatest budgetary shortfalls in any four-year presidential term in history.
4. The President calls for Guantanamo Bay detention center to be closed within a year of his inauguration, and Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the architect of 9/11, to be tried in New York. Accordingly, we know that Guantanamo won’t be closed within a year and KSM won’t be tried in New York.
5. Obama issues four serial deadlines in autumn 2009 for Iran to comply with non-proliferation accords. Presto—we know that Iran will get the bomb unimpeded by U.S. opinion.
6. Obama promised an end to earmarks and lobbyists in government—of course, we assume, then, that lobbyists will be ubiquitous among his presidential appointments, and there will be thousands of earmarks.
7. Obama announces that He will end the war in Iraq by removing all combat brigades by August 2010. As a result, we understand that George Bush long ago signed an agreement with the Iraqis for a joint agreement on removing US combat forces by August 2010.
8. Obama laments that his fall in popularity resulted from a failure to communicate directly with the American people. We conclude as a result that Obama has given more interviews, radio and TV appearances, and stump speeches than any first-year president in history.
9. Obama reiterates that “this is not about me.” That reflects the fact that he has employed the first-person pronouns “I,” “me,” and “my” more than any prior president.
10. Obama assures on eight occasions he will televise all health-care deliberations on C-Span. This is clear proof that nothing will be televised as debate occurs behind closed doors, punctuated by votes purchased through $300 million bribes and state exemptions from federal statutes.
11. Obama promises to be a tax-cutter. So we know that vast new taxes will come through revised income tax rates, caps lifted off payroll taxes, Cadillac health care charges, and a variety of surcharges.
12. Obama warned that if another stimulus were not passed, unemployment would reach double-digits; hence, we were assured that the jobless rate would reach 10%.
13. Obama calls for bipartisanship and an end to finger-pointing. Of course, then, he will begin and end nearly every speech with attacks on George Bush and the prior administration.
I could continue ad nauseam, but you get the picture. So why does Obama serially tell untruths, mislead, and do the opposite of what he promises?
Here are four brief reasons. They are complementary, rather than mutually exclusive.
1) He does this because he can. Obama, from college at Occidental to Chicago organizing, has never been called to account. He was always assured that his charm, his ancestry, or his rhetoric alone mattered, while his record, actions, and accomplishments were mere footnotes. He channels our hopes and dreams and need not traffic in reality. We, the people, like the media, have tingly legs and believe the President is “some god”, and therefore need not question the charismatic face on the screen.
2) Obama is a reflection of an era of liberal academic postmodernism. There are no absolute facts; truth is only an illusion in the eye of the beholder. Reality instead is relative, and predicated on the basis of power. Ergo, what others say is true is simply a reflection of their race/class/gender/religion/cultural privileges. Speaking “truth” to power means simply opposing those who, you deem, have more advantages than you and yours.
3) Obama is a neo-socialist who believes the ends of social justice justify most means necessary to achieve them. As a philosopher-king who knows what is best for ignorant lesser folk, who can’t possibly appreciate all the ways in which he works and suffers on our behalf (Cf. Michelle’s “deigns to run”), Obama reluctantly must employ Platonic “noble lies” to achieve the common good: OK, we don’t understand Obamacare and therefore fear it and the way it is packaged and sold; but once it is forced down our throat, we will come to love—what is good for us.
4) Obama is a narcissist, who believes that his reality is our reality, that his rules are our rules. If the king, the autocrat, the heart-throb, the prophet, or the messiah says something is true, then facts and reality adjust accordingly. Facts and corrections are boring. And if confronted with contrary evidence, the self-infatuated simply smiles with the assurance that the problem is others’, not his.
And it is, sort of.
I have no problem with running our own 0bama against 0bama. It would be image vs image. You beat an Obama with an Obama 2.0
Scott Brown is an 0bama type candidate. He has such a good image the liberal women were voting for him. It was cool and “in” to be a Scott Brown supporter. Doug Flutie was a very public supporter and who was the last pol he endorsed? Hillary in the primaries
NObama accepted and processed millions of dollars of funds that had the sources knocked out of the system.
Money came from GAZA- and was recorded as GA- making people reading the campaign reciepts/expenditures statements that were filed with the Federal Election Committee believe that the GA really stood for Georgis- state of Georgia, USA.
The manipulation of the rules about the acceptance of donations is an area which is so fraught with NObama’s fraud, that I would beg a group of watchdogs to dig deeper and longer- and indict this hoax in the Oval Office for his transgressions, along with Howard Dean, the DNC, and all the officials in charge of NObama’s campaign.
Every dime of those illegal donations was expected and accepted by NObama and his campaign KNEW the money was fraudulent- otherwise, they would not have tampered with the sources in recording such.
For those Freepers who have read Atlas Shrugged, how much of that book is reflected in NObama’s first year in office???
I understand the need of a charismatic Presidential candidate. In the age of TV it’s a given, unfortunately - how many of pre-TV presidents or even founding fathers are electable by the current standards? Or would even consider running?
I have no problems with Leaders. I am against celebrity cults that replace a coherent political philosophy and a movement advancing it. Because humans are fallible, and no one can withstand scrutiny. Obama held as long as critical mass of people was willing to withhold scrutiny. If we want to bring country back to conservatism, we need more than just one even very talented and charismatic person.
Left did something of the kind, but not quite. They do have their movement cadres in charge - Dem leaders in congress and senate. The difference is that they got there not by advancing their political philosophy , but by having many candidates masquerading as conservatives - bait and switch. In the center-right America, conservatives should be able to win by running as conservatives, no masquerading needed.
What he has written here is true: the question is, how long before The One crashes and burns ?
No one can be this pathological, and truly be in a reasonable state of mental health.
See my tagline.
Fabian Socialist as postmodern president.
And puppet.
I don’t see how he will cope with three more years of performance pressure either.
for reference
VDH has totally got Obama’s number.
Well he did say he has a "gift".
bump
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.