Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama: Irrelevant, Incompetent, or Intentional?
Townhall.com ^ | November 8, 2014 | Ken Blackwell

Posted on 11/08/2014 7:43:22 AM PST by Kaslin

“Remember,” said Ronald Reagan, “we have opponents; we don’t have enemies.”

That’s why President Reagan was so successful in gaining the respect and affection of the American people. Even people who did not like his policies liked him.

President Obama’s troubles in office stem in no small part from is willingness to treat American opponents as enemies. (He treats America’s true enemies as friends, but that’s another matter.)

The readout from Election Day is that Mr. Obama’s Democrats suffered “a massacre.”

That word from Britain’s prestigious Economist is being used even as Christians and Muslims in Syria and Iraq are suffering genuine massacres at the hands of ISIS.

Still, we can soberly describe the Mid-term Elections as a rout, as a massive rejection of President Obama’s policies, if not the president himself. He had told voters that his policies—“every one of them”—would be on the ballot this November. He also told voters that the endangered Democratic incumbents “vote with me.” As a result of Tuesday’s massive rejection, those folks will vote with him no longer.

The popular analysis of all this is not that President Obama is “irrelevant.” Alaska’s Mark Begich tried to save his seat by that absurd description of the Chief Executive. It didn’t work. But there is a growing consensus—especially among conservatives-- that Mr. Obama is “incompetent.”

But what if President Obama is, instead, intentional? He has said it again and again. He told interviewers he would rather be “a consequential one termer” than an inconsequential two-term president. He was echoing his previous remarks during the 2008 campaign when he paid a left-handed compliment to Ronald Reagan. He said then that the 40th president had “changed the trajectory of the country” in ways that Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton had not.

We should take Barack Obama at his word. He said he wanted to “fundamentally transform this nation.” He pledged in his 2009 Inaugural Address “to remake America.”

Let’s remember the bitter joke of Communist playwright Berthold Brecht. When it appeared clear the workers of East Germany were rejecting their Marxist proletarian paradise, Brecht said the party bosses would simply have to “elect a new people.”

This is what, in all seriousness, Barack Obama is doing. He is planning to go ahead with an Executive Order to make millions of new Americans of the illegal aliens currently residing here. He will probably stiff-arm Congress and act in defiance of the Constitution and the laws. He will probably nominate a new Attorney General—and press a lame-duck Senate to ram through the confirmation vote.

Socialism is inherently undemocratic. Its adherents believe they are “on the right side of history” and thus they feel entitled, empowered even, to bend and break the rules in order to achieve an ever-greater central control over Americans’ lives.

Now that the celebratory champagne has lost its fizz, we need to soberly assess where we stand with this administration. President Obama can veto any repeal of Obamacare. He still maintains control over college student loans. Common Core (fairly dubbed “Obamacore”) is still advancing despite fierce grassroots opposition. He is still converting a severely weakened military into a laboratory for radical social experimentation. He is packing the federal judiciary with radicals. He will rely on these black-robed rogue judges to force the changes he wants but cannot achieve through legislation. He is staffing the federal bureaucracy with his devotees—and creating new “Czars” not subject to Senate confirmation. He will use Executive Orders to limit or even frustrate the intent of Congress on major issues.

In foreign policy, he is presiding over the recessional of American power and influence in the world. In order to achieve socialism at home, America must only“lead from behind” abroad. He has said we are only “exceptional” in the same sense that Britain, Greece and every other nation regards itself as exceptional. With this exception: He has publicly apologized to the world for America’s perceived transgressions.

It is good that the voters came out in their millions to try to pull the country back from the brink. But President Barack Obama is a most serious adversary. He knows what he wants and he knows how to get it.

There’s another reason to reject the “incompetence” label. President Obama is telling Black Americans that he is the victim of racism, that opposition to his policies is the result of opposition to his historic status. The more conservatives cry “incompetent,” the more we feed into that liberal narrative. And the stronger support he gets in the Black community, the better able he will be to pursue policies we sincerely believe are injurious to the Black community itself as well as to the majority of all Americans


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: indifferent; insolent; intentional; intolerant; notincompetent; notirrelevant
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 last
To: ansel12

What a grievious insult...to Chauncey Gardner.


41 posted on 11/08/2014 12:32:14 PM PST by RipSawyer (OPM is the religion of the sheeple.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: woofie

Any good, honest person who will stand up for the truth is not going to be a liberal in the first place.


42 posted on 11/08/2014 12:34:57 PM PST by RipSawyer (OPM is the religion of the sheeple.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6

All of the above EXCEPT number one?


43 posted on 11/08/2014 12:54:43 PM PST by RipSawyer (OPM is the religion of the sheeple.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
He is not a political genius but he is driven on one direction and nothing else matters to him. What happens to the Democrat Party is of no concern to him once it has outlived its usefulness to the Umma. He used it to get where he is. He could not have done it without the Party. He is beyond that now. He must do as much damage as he can. The next two years will be very dangerous. I don't even think that he is the brains behind it all.The Saudis got him through the universities and put him in position to run for president. The communists and assorted other leftists and MSM made it sure. He will change direction only if he ̣(and with that pronoun I include his backup) finds his project is about to fail, that is if the Congress gets serious about stopping him and if the military does not co-operate with him.
The military has shown signs of bucking him, signs the military organization has never shown before (MacArthur's opposition was MacArthur's alone) with any other president.
The bombing of ISIS started without his sanction and he was informed of it and told he had better own it. He did, though reluctantly. The quarantining of the ebola troops was also apparently against his will. We shall see.
44 posted on 11/09/2014 5:16:41 AM PST by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-44 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson