On Barack Obama’s “Cojones,” Sarah Palin’s Aim Is a Little Off

David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog ^ | Calvin Freiburger

[Michael van der Galien]

Governor Sarah Palin ignited another media frenzy by accusing President Barack Obama of, er, not being man enough to stand against illegal immigration. The other night, Palin appeared on “Hannity” to defend her remarks in an interview that David Neiwert at Crooks & Liars objects to as glaringly inconsistent.

And for once, he’s got a point.

Palin first says that Obama’s not securing the border because he’s inexperienced and “in over his head.” But later, at Sean Hannity’s suggestion, the governor agrees that he’s doing it out of ideology and a desire to “fundamentally transform” America:

So wait, which is it? Is Barack Obama a lousy president because he’s a wishy-washy leader who doesn’t really know which way to go? Or is it because he’s a hardcore radical ideologue who refuses to budge or compromise or try to work with Republicans?

These nabobs seize on any straw in a windstorm to bash Obama. It’s pretty pathetic, really — except, of course, that one of them is about 90 percent likely to be a major Republican candidate for the presidency in 2012.

Ideology and incompetence aren’t completely mutually exclusive, but it’s true that in this case, the president isn’t simultaneously acting out of cowardice that keeps him from one goal and dogged determination to enact another. Failing to stick to a coherent message makes conservatives look like we’re simply out to throw anything we can find at our opponents and see what sticks, rather than serious observers who believe what we say.

In this case, I think Palin was wrong to suggest cowardice as playing any role in Obama’s decisions. Doing so implies that Obama wants to end illegal immigration, but is simply scared of offending the wrong people (be it Hispanic voters or the hardliners in his party).

[ansel12]

The guy sounds like an idiot.

[anniegetyourgun]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/slick_talk_aside_just_not_up_to_fphLDlAYpre5K2UxSEZNyK/0

[toddausauras]

Palin 2012.

[Slings and Arrows]

There is not necessarily an inconsistency here - like the coward who becomes a pacifist because he’s afraid to fight, it’s possible that Zer0’s border stance is informed by his fear of a fierce political battle. (Laziness and apathy are probably also in there somewhere.)

[Vaduz]

Clueless hardcore radical ideologue,he got that part right.

[PghBaldy]

Yeah, it is inconsistent. I question the need though for him to write this. When there are so many things to write about now, why (lightly) criticize Palin? Upon reflection, it makes no sense to say he lacks “cojones” in reference to securing the borders. He does not want to, just as the previous Prez did not want to. It’s ideology in both cases.

[nathanbedford]

I agree with the author, Sarah misspoke but the significance of her mischaracterizing Obama's motive is certainly not very large.

For the reasons expressed in this reply of August 1, I think that Obama is purely cynical and demagogic in his whole handling of the immigration issue:

FOR THE RECORD

We know that Free Republic is not only an echo chamber for like-minded conservatives but a forum for the expression conservative policies. Here they are expressed and here they are tested. We know that lurkers of all stripes can be found-or not found-embedded in virtually every thread. I think some of us should set down our position with respect to Obama and his shameful demagoguery over immigration and his opportunistic and reckless abandonment of his obligation to protect the borders in plain view for those independents and Democrats of good will to see and judge.

First, it is Obama himself and no conservative Republican who is the demagogue on the issue of immigration. It is Obama who has the motive to cynically capitalize on an influx of Latinos whom Obama can predict with confidence will vote Democrat.

Second, it is Obama who needs to gin up his poll numbers by throwing red meat to his base. There can be no doubt that the action of the NAACP and other left-wing organizations have been coordinated probably through the office of the Chief of Staff of the president of the United States. These actions have been designed to set one race against another. They come coordinate it with the lawsuit against Arizona. These actions have been designed to play the race card. It is cynical and it is racist and it is ignobly motivated for crass electoral advantage. It is the worst and cheapest kind of demagoguery which sells out the soul of the nation on its most sensitive issue over its whole history for partisan advantage at the polls. Obama clearly has motive and his office has given him the opportunity. He has shamefully abused his office.

Third, Obama has opportunity not only to exploit the situation by playing the race card, but, as president of the United States whose party controls Congress, he has the undisputed power to put assets in place along the border to stop the inflow of illegal immigrants. He will not. In fact, his administration has sent every signal imaginable not excluding his lawsuit against Arizona, to encourage the inflow of illegal immigrants and to hold out to them the hope of total amnesty. Despite murders along the border, despite huge jobless numbers for American citizens, despite hundreds of billions of dollars of costs to educate and medically treat illegal aliens, despite a tsunami of illegal drugs, Obama will not lift a finger to stop the flood. To the contrary, he tacitly encourages it.

Obama has the power and the opportunity to do good but he chooses to do evil.

Fourth, as a committed Marxist and leftist, Obama sees America not as the Shining City on the Hill which stands between the civilized world and the barbarians approaching the gate, but as the focus of evil which has retarded the global march of socialism. A basic tenet of Marxist/socialism is the destruction of the nationstate. By definition, a nation is not a nation which cannot control its borders. To the degree that America under Obama has countenanced uncontrolled borders, America loses sovereignty. Obama wants America ultimately to shed its role as protector of the weak and innocent and abandon any responsibility coming out of American exceptionalism. If America is a bulwark against socialism, Obama is content to let America die.

Fifth, to the degree that Obama can justify his refusal to see that the laws on immigration are faithfully executed by resort to identity politics-reverse racism-he undermines the rule of law and substitutes another kind of doctrine, a race based doctrine which is hateful and destructive of the American experience. But that process of destruction advances the cause of a committed Marxist as it undermines the Constitution and disparages the whole rule of law. We all are to be governed by executive whim and by identity politics.

These are the conclusions which I come to without much time to reflect. I'm sure more will come later and I am even more certain that other Freepers will have much to add. If you are a lurker, an independent, or a questioning Democrat, and you come across this thread why not come on board and say your piece? Maybe you agree with some of these conclusions, maybe you can change my mind.

[MNJohnnie]

It is possible for Obama to be a committed ideologue and in over his head at the same time.

It is because he is in over his head that he clings so desperately to his ideology. A comfortable, mature leader would know when to discard a failed policy and adopt a new approach. An untested, under qualified person will cling to what they know in a desperate attempt to keep their head above water. That is what Obama is doing. Clinging to the dogmas he learned from his radical mentors rather then moving even 1 inch outside his ideological comfort zone on any issue.

Obama lacks both the maturity, and the intellectual ability, to be an actual leader. What appears to us as malevolent intent on Obama's part is actually just his grotesque incompetence in action.

He is our 1st Affirmative Action President. Not really up to the job, but he did fill a quota slot.

[Venturer]

Blacks are being sold out by Obama in favor of the Hispanics.

When Blacks figure out that democrats are helping them commit Genocide by abortion and replacing them in the labor market with Hispanics, they will want to hang Obama themselves.

Problem is just like in our schools where they continue to lag behind, they are way behind on awakening to the big sell out.

[sirchtruth]

Is Barack Obama a lousy president because he’s a wishy-washy leader who doesn’t really know which way to go? Or is it because he’s a hardcore radical ideologue who refuses to budge or compromise or try to work with Republicans?

What's so hard to understand about this? Obama is both, which is dangerous as all get out! A clueless idiot.

These nabobs seize on any straw in a windstorm to bash Obama.

The guy is anti-American. No ones is grasping at any straws to point out the obvious.

Calvin, do strong women bother you?

[9YearLurker]

I’m a Palin supporter and yet I actually agree with this.

Inexperience and incompetence are dead-end attacks in this situation, I believe. By 2012 he’ll have been president for 4 years and nobody will consider him to have less governing experience than Palin.

Incompetence is a hard one too, because it suggests that he doesn’t mean to be doing to the country so much of what he is doing very intentionally. By using this argument Palin is undoing the strongest argument that she has, which is ideology.

The majority of the country agrees that his ideology is disastrous for the economy, so their motivation to vote against it, and him, is the biggest club she has—and that’s what she should be using.

Nobody believes that Obama wants to secure the borders an stop new Democrat voters from pouring into the country, so incompetence really doesn’t resonate on this issue at all.

I think Palin is understandably still miffed that she got painted as too inexperienced for the VP slot at the very same time that Obama was voted in at the top, but she has to let that go and focus on the winning argument for 2012.

[nathanbedford]

I would be among the last to underestimate the power of the human psyche to rationalize evil and especially is this tendency in modern times to be found prevalent among liberal fascists.

So I don't know whether Barack Obama does not know more or simply does not want to know more than his ideology has shown him. Nor do I know whether, knowing that he is doing evil, Obama rationalizes the doing as necessary for the greater good with the coming of social and racial justice.

I do know, or at least I have concluded from all the evidence to which we have been exposed here on Free Republic, that Obama is possessed of an ideology impervious to adverse experience or logic which he will maintain to the last circumstance. The only possible exception to this assessment are his actions in Afghanistan which were themselves delayed, halfhearted, handcuffed by a withdrawal date, and virtually forced on him by his campaign posture. But I can think of no other area in which Obama has not acted as a drone in the service of his ideology.

I am not inclined to see Obama with an empty head and a white heart, rather, I see him as a calculating Marxist who believes that the ends justify the means.

[raybbr]

I think Palin is understandably still miffed that she got painted as too inexperienced for the VP slot at the very same time that Obama was voted in at the top, but she has to let that go and focus on the winning argument for 2012.

I don't think it's that as much as Palin's desire to make everything stick. She talks mostly in soundbites and throws these one liners out there hoping the press will pick up on it. In the kerfluffle of throwing sometimes she's bound to contradict herself.

[dforest]

If Obama was a conservative, he would be incompetent. He is a far, far leftist and is competently doing what he is doing because that is his agenda.

It is an agenda that people aren’t liking, but so far he has been very successful because he has done great damage to America.

He doesn’t want the borders closed. That is the message we need to keep the emphasis on.

The person that wrote this piece is merely saying that we need to have a cohesive message rather than a mixed message.

[MNJohnnie]

Only problem for your thesis, she did not contradict herself.

It is not only possible, but highly probable Obama is both. The very fact that he is so blinded by his ideological outlook is what makes him so inflexible and incompetent as a leader.

[9YearLurker]

That may be—I really have no idea what her thoughts are on her ‘08 experience. But no matter the motivation, she needs to focus on a message that resonates with the majority of voters. Also, I think a number of moderate and conservative Democrat voters supported Obama because they liked the idea of voting for the nice, competent black man and they’re likely to be more squeamish about the incompetence argument than about one focused more on policy, pragmatism and ideology. They’d rather think of themselves as voting for the issues than against the man.

[MNJohnnie]

Your mistake here is you are thinking only in terms of political tactics, Palin is simply speaking truth.

I doubt Palin will run in 2012. I think what she is doing is being the lightning rod to drawn the Democrat Media attack machine away from the other 2012 candidates. At the same time she is performing a highly valuable service by knocking all cult of personality gloss she can off 0.

[MNJohnnie]

You don't fight a cult of personality like the one created around 0 by reason and rational argument. You do it with mocking and scorn.

Knocking the glitz off the media image of 0 is the key to defeating him.

When the McCain camp went for the mocking ads in Aug 2008, laughing at him as "the one" they shot into the lead in every poll. When they abandoned that attack track and to try reason with the voters, they got buried.

To defeat a media created cult of personality, you use scorn, not reason.

[nathanbedford]

Please permit me to add a couple of thoughts belatedly. First, I fully agree that Obama has been advanced well beyond his competence through a national spasm of affirmative action. His Marxism has been consciously hidden by the media as we have now had confirmed by the e-mails of the journolists.

Second, playing the race card is a truly heinous act. When it is done for electoral advantage it is more reprehensible because it tends to break up the electoral process and hence the whole Republic. In other words it is more than a simple act of personal effrontery. When done by a president of the United States, when the act is so obviously calculated, it is repugnant to the entire spirit of the American experience.

This is an evil act that Obama is doing in Arizona and elsewhere and it is almost impossible for me to accept that he knows not what he is doing.

Personal regards.