I know this is old-story politics, but two things are different. One, never has the gap between pre-presidential and in-office behavior been so wide (heaven and earth really are quite distant), and, two, the past promises of utopia have so conditioned a mesmerized media that they don’t realize their own complacency in allowing an administration to use whatever means they chose for professedly exalted ends.
This is a strange time, when we are borrowing into oblivion, redefining 60 years of bilateral foreign policy, embarking on unproven — but costly — environmentalism, nationalizing industry and health care, and gleefully establishing a veritable state-sanctioned, pro-government media on the lines Americans used to be terrified about.In response, as I read between the lines, conservatives are told by the Obamans something to the effect, “Forget our prior demagoguery, aren’t you at least happy we backtracked and are now adopting some of your war-on-terror positions we used to trash?”, while liberals are supposed to be happy with something like, “Just forget all that stuff about ethics, transparency, and anti-lobbying/influence; we’re in power now and will do anything necessary to fulfill your agenda.”
I hope that he’s right, and that all of this two-faced behavior will come back to haunt them in the polling booths.
I do think his last line is very true “There will be a backlash to all this, and one of unprecedented fury.”
and could devistate the democratic party for a generation.
Hes not doing what he said, failing miserably on those things he tries to get done, pushing wildly unpopular things through congress, and he pumped his followers up with images of utopia and world people. Gods found to have feet of clay get stoned.
I think about 1/3rd of his supporters (the weakest supporters) will be disappointed in the man/angry at being deceived.
1/3rd will blame his failures on the Republican Party/the Christian Right/whatever boogeyman they can conjure up (the Jews?)
1/3rd will blame The System and the American People.
The Obamaniacs are afraid of conservative “terrorists” but what we all should keep in mind is that hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned. All that stamping of feet and high-pitched screaming could be the final cause of the Big One that makes California slide into the sea. Which reminds me, I need to buy some popcorn and earplugs.
He’s not doing what he said
Speaking as a supporter (from early 2007), I disagree. He has not done every single thing he promised, and there have been disappointments, but on the big things he’s done exactly what he promised. In the primary debates he was asked what his top domestic priorities would be, and his answer was always energy, health care, and his tax plan. Two years later, that’s what he’s doing. He said he’d pull the troops out of Iraq, and they’re withdrawing. He said he’d send more troops to Afghanistan, and he has.
pushing wildly unpopular things through congress
Name one “wildly unpopular thing” he’s pushed through Congress. Universal health care with a public plan polls very well. Cap and trade less so, but it isn’t wildly unpopular. The stimulus wasn’t wildly unpopular.
Gods found to have feet of clay get stoned.
Obama’s approval rating has barely moved in the last 3 months, and is higher than Bush or Clinton’s were at this point in their first terms. We’re a long way from Obama getting stoned.
Ah and once again Jim shows not just cognative dissonasance.
“Obama good! Obama never lie!”
So the War On Terror politicies are not “big things”. Hmm I wonder if “big thing” is defined on something that hasn’t yet had its expiration date. Oh and since Taxes are one of Obama’s “big things” do you still beleive that taxes won’t go up for anyone making less than 250,000?
ALso Jim also shows an inability to understand what quotes are.
Jim given your comments are critical of Victor Davis Hanson’s words perhaps your ire should be directed at him, instead of Rand.
Oh and *psst* Jim. You’re getting your talking points confused. You’re not supposed to tell the rubes that this is Universal Healthcare, it’s Healthcare Reform.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/var/plain/storage/images/media/obama_index_graphics/july_2009/obama_index_july_2_2009/229985-1-eng-US/obama_index_july_2_2009.jpg
“Obama’s approval rating has barely moved in the last 3 months, and is higher than Bush or Clinton’s were at this point in their first terms. We’re a long way from Obama getting stoned.”
No Jim, not by any rational pollster they aren’t. Not by the most accurate pollster in the past 4 election’s they aren’t.
According to Rasmussen, the most Obama-hostile pollster out there, his approval was 56% on 4/2/09 and 53% on 7/2/09. To my mind that’s “barely moved”.
Jim, did you even look at Mike’s Rasmussen link?
Yes.
Well, that’s about as informative an answer as any of your comments.
What do you want me to say? The linked graph doesn’t address my previous comment. My comment was about Obama’s approval rating, the graph is about the difference between Obama’s “strongly approve” and “strongly disapprove” ratings.
Again, the notion that the country is on the brink of rebelling against Obama is nonsense. Obama’s worst “strongly approve” minus “strongly disapprove” number at Rasmussen is -2. Bush finished his term at -30.
We see that you completely ignore (in “whistling past the graveyard fashion”) the opinion on the actual issues. Of course, the public will continue to love a charismatic figure. They did with Mussolini as well.
Clearly Jim is keeping faith with his messiah, but then he might just be a bitter ender too. On the other hand, I think it’s interesting that Colin Powell is beginning to turn against Obama. It begins with a trickle, eventually turning into a flood.
It will be interesting to see what line Jim uses a year from now. I imagine he will blame the unemployment rate, gas prices and inflation rate on Bush.
We see that you completely ignore (in “whistling past the graveyard fashion”) the opinion on the actual issues.
You are right, support for Obama’s big priorities (health care reform and cap-and-trade) is not nearly as strong as support for him personally. That is worrisome to me, since it might take strong public pressure to get the needed votes in Congress. But remember that this thread started with a prediction of a backlash of “unprecedented fury”. Given Obama’s personal popularity, that seems like a very remote possibility.
Mussolini was personally very popular, too, at first. After leading Italy to ruin, he ended up being strung up on a lamp post, with his mistress. I don’t expect things to get that bad. I suspect that VDH was referring to a devastating electoral result. Perhaps you’re too young to remember 1994.
I remember 1994. But Obama is more popular today than Clinton was then, and even a repeat of 1994 would not, by definition, constitute “unprecedented fury.”
To replay 1994 the GOP desperately needs a new Gingrich, along with a failure of the health reform effort or some other major domestic policy setback. Some big scandals and resignations from the Dem leadership wouldn’t hurt either.
Of scandals, there are plenty. They just aren’t getting airplay. But what the media can’t ignore is the tanking of the economy. In 1994 the economy was on an upswing and yet the Democrats still got hammered because of their liberal overreach. How do you think the public will react in 2010 with an economy worse than in 1982 combined with a liberal overreach worse than in 1994?
To replay 1994 the GOP desperately needs a new Gingrich, along with a failure of the health reform effort or some other major domestic policy setback. Some big scandals and resignations from the Dem leadership wouldn’t hurt either.
Good point. We have all the setting for a 1994 type takeover except possibly for competent GOP leadership. One of the “benefits” of a two party system.