Obama: “I won.”; Forget Bipartisanship
I’d really like to hear the Republican “intelligentsia” (paging Chris Buckley and Peggy Noonan) explain how Obama is really a centrist who wants to reach across the aisle again. Here’s Mr. Centrist telling the Republicans to take their concerns over the stimulus and shove ‘em. He “won” with a landslide 52%, so now it’s his way or the highway.
And here’s Mr. Centrist signing another Executive Order lifting the ban on the use of Federal dollars for foreign abortions. The economy is so good here that we can really afford to pay for abortions in foreign countries, right? I guess he figures why not. It’s not like Republicans are going to vote their convictions. They’re too busy rubber stamping his tax cheat Treasury Secretary and ignoring his role at the NY Fed while the credit crisis was brewing. He knows they won’t oppose him.
But perhaps I’m being too difficult on the Republican “intelligentsia”. After all, who would have guessed that the nations most liberal Senator wasn’t going to govern as a centrist. All they had was Obama’s voting record to go on and the fact that he voted for infanticide to warn them otherwise. But hey, he certainly is articulate and charming when given a teleprompter.
Archived in: Abortion, Economy, GOP, Liberals, President Barack Obama, StimulusJanuary 23, 2009 at 7:39 pm | Trackback
9 comments
C’mon, man! 52% is a landslide . . . a . . . a . . . MANDATE! Isn’t it?
[…] Optimistic Patriot wants the “Republican intelligentsia” to defend their “he’ll govern as a centrist” line from before the election. Did they ever really believe that? At least the idiots at Republicans for Obama never got specific enough to be proven wrong . . . they just went for hope ‘n’ change, claiming that Obama could “unify the country” — never mind his policies. To which I wrote: Folks, if your chief criterion for president is someone who can maintain enough popularity to win support of his proposals rather than what those proposals are, then you should never vote for another Republican again. Because every one of them, regardless of policy, is going to be relentlessly savaged by the media and thus — unless truly able to communicate with the people over the heads of the media and the politicians a la Ronald Reagan — is unlikely to command similar levels of support. […]
Its over 2.5x larger that the Bush 2004 victory (nevermind 2000), when he triumphantly went around declaring his mandate and ‘political capital’:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....9MKHV1.DTL
Not that Obama has claimed such a thing, despite his > 2:1 electoral college victory.
So what.
So I can find several posts on this very site from the late 2004/early 2005 time frame discussing Bush’s mandate and criticizing people who would deny he had one.
Yet Obama merely reminds opposing party leaders that the American people had endorsed his economic recipe - not even going so far as to claim a mandate - and he’s criticized for it? Hypocrisy they name is NER.
Wow. Powerful stuff. Now get back to your angel-counting.
“Hypocrisy they name is NER”. Scripture? The Bard? Some Medieval murdered cleric? Takes the breath away.
Fred, remember that there are many writers here. So making a blanket statement about NE Republican is not that useful. I did a search for mandate and Bush, but didn’t find much.
fredct, you’re talking to a bunch of Libertarians, we don’t care what happens to the GOP, spelled RINO. Haven’t you figured that out yet? In two years, Obama will have screwed the pooch so badly Congress will flip over. He’s a one termer.
However, be careful for in the short run, in his brave new world, he might declare you excess as an Epsilon.
OP, fredct would find a place in any totalitarian system. It pleases him to search for evidence of a thought crime 4 1/2 years old. This is Torquemada weird. I was surprised. This kind of screwball diligence is strange even for him. Thing is, you questioned his God, and that must be penalized.