Yes, I think President Obama is a socialist/statist, but in some areas he's acting like a conservative--or worse, he's doing the exact things he excoriated President Bush for doing. I don't fault him for doing them, or even for the flip-flop, but I do fault him for for either lying (to get elected) or being wrong (meriting his flip-flop) in the first place.
So this post lists some of the flip-flops: military tribunals for Guantanamo Bay inmates, the use of rendition for terror suspects, the imfamous "state secrets" defense when he doesn't want to release information, the infinite detention of suspected terrorists, and closing Guantanamo whilst beefing up Bagram.
The link above did not mention, however, President Obama's wiretapping authority, which will exceed President Bush's!
I think the Carrie Prejean (Miss California USA) situation has been beaten to death recently, but let's just restate it here for the record--she's been blasted for having expressed the exact same view that the President holds. Elton John, too. And Sarah Palin.
The Obama Administration agrees with the Palin Administration about polar bears and global warming, too:
Governor Sarah Palin was pleased to learn that U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar has decided not to change the existing Section 4(d) rule regulations concerning the protection of polar bears under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)...And just to be fun, let's throw in the President's utter inability to be articulate unless there's a teleprompter in front of him.
The Department of the Interior also announced the continuation of a policy disallowing a link between climate change and decisions made under the ESA. The governor has argued against such a linkage as an inappropriate use of the act.
So, what do we get for electing the President? Near as I can tell, we get the UAW running a car company on the taxpayer's dime (I still don't understand how that worked out), we have deficits triple the size of any under the "spend-crazy" President Bush, we have the threat of socialism and all the ills it brings, we have a class warrior, and we have a President for whom power is seemingly all that matters.
What don't we have that we were promised? Besides the flip-flops mentioned above we don't have the rest of the world tossing flowers to us now that Cowboy George is gone. The Europeans love us again, but they're not contributing militarily or financially to world peace any more now than they were a year ago. We've reached out to Venezuela, Iran, and Cuba (clearly some world powerhouses) and gotten that hand publicly swatted away. We get boneheaded moves like the NYC/Air Force One pics and the picture of bowing before the King of Saudi Arabia.
If it's true that we get the government we deserve, we should be on our knees begging God for forgiveness for whatever it was we as a country did to deserve this president.
Update: I've never liked the idea of "say whatever you need to in order to get elected, and then do what you think is best." That makes the candidate what's important, instead of the people. If you have to lie to get elected, you shouldn't be elected. If the people don't want whatever it is you're selling, you shouldn't trick them into buying it.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard Obama supporters say that they didn't believe him when he said something on the campaign trail. "Oh, he didn't mean that, that's just something he had to say." Are you kidding me? They expected him to lie.
I, on the other hand, believed him when he supported socialism. Why would he lie about that? I believed he was speaking as he truly felt when he spoke those few sentences to Joe The Plumber. Why people chose not to believe him, I cannot understand.
A top Obama fundraiser and hedge fund manager said: "I'm appalled at the anti-Wall Street rhetoric. It was OK on the campaign but now it's the real world. I'm surprised that Obama is turning out to be so left-wing. He's a real class warrior."Well, genius, we're all screwed because you were blind to reality.
Update #2, 5/11/09: Some lefties like to believe that I'm a racist because I'm not a fan of the President. One of the best replies to that tired tale comes from a comment on this post:
"Racist bigot" is progressive code for someone who believes in the Constitution, liberty and the foundational values of this country.
Update #3, 5/12/09: The latest from Instapundit:
HOPE AND CHANGE! Obama administration threatens Britain to keep torture evidence concealed. More from the Pro-Torture Obama Administration. Don’t all you people who told us it was a moral imperative to support Obama over this issue feel kinda silly now? You should. . . .
Salon is not a right-leaning magazine.
14 comments:
What's worse Darren is that the media and the celebrities who were oh so supportive of Obama's campaign, seem strangely silent on the many faux pas we have witnessed. Only in the UK has there been a media outcry regarding the failure to overturn the Bush recommendations regarding Polar Bears and Grey Wolves. That's because while publicly this administration gives homage to the junk science that is out there, their intel within the White House tells them that things such as cap and trade as well as other options will absolutely crater our economy. At one point, sure, they are ideologues of the Left with all that implies. But whatever they are, they aren't stupid. And stalling or retrograding any economic gains at this point is political suicide. I can only hope that the measures to give bailouts to newspapers doesn't go through or we will never ever see the depths to which this administration is willing to go. As for prayer, our President broke with a tradition held since Washington to forego this event. It wasn't directed at one faith, but at a unification of all faiths in prayers and support of our nation. Perhaps he's only a Professional Christian, not a Professing Christian in the best tradition of Mark Twain's short stories. And I think that shows a side of him that many of his supporters do not recognize.
You have some great points, but let me ask you something...do you really think you're getting fair and unbiased news from Fox News and "Pajamas Media"? If you can't see bias in their homepage then I don't really know what to say...
If you don't think being misinformed is a bad thing, then read this comment from Ellen K back here:
Bravo. I have so many parents who claim they cannot smell the pot smoke on their own kids jackets when most of the rest of the class is getting a contact high. I would like to think they honestly didn't know what it smelled like. But in reality, they just don't want to know. I am glad those kids were caught. Of course, if, as pundits suspect, the Obama Administration proposed selling and taxing marijuana as a way to dig ourselves out of this economic slump, those kids will be laughing-and paying off the American debt.
What's in bold is completely false, according to this and this. If you're misinformed due to biased news sources, then there's a pretty good chance you're going to hate whoever the news articles hate. But where would you find such an unbiased source? You probably can't, which is why you read them from as many sources as possible.
Are their facts mistaken?
I don't see Fox as the right-wing antidote to CNN/MSNBC/ABC/CBS/NBC/ETC. I see Fox as *not* automatically assuming that the right-leaning viewpoint is wrong; as a result, I *do* see its coverage as "fair and balanced". I don't watch it on TV, as I don't get cable, but no, I don't see their web site as biased as I do those of the other networks I mentioned above.
No, Fox new's online facts are usually not mistaken, but neither are the facts in Loose Change. It's just that they can present facts which support whichever political side they lean toward. And I'm not saying to read the online articles of the news networks you mentioned, but maybe the Washington Post, LA times, NY times, Reuters, the BBC, or something besides Fox once in a while. And to tell the truth, I haven't noticed very much bias on cnn.com, do you have some links that say otherwise?
I don't really trust Fox, because their TV station is VERY biased sometimes and the commentators they have can be incredibly weird. Perhaps their online articles are different. I do read them from time to time when they show up in Google news.
But "Pajamas Media"? That's almost funny. Their homepage spells bias everywhere you look.
Perhaps, before getting your panties in a bunch over Fox (as lefties often do), you might scroll through just the home page of this blog and run your cursor over the links and see where I'm getting my information from. Dare I say it, you'll find a wide "diversity" of sources there.
Pajamas Media sells itself as a libertarian-leaning web site, and it is. CNN sells itself as an unbiased news site, and it isn't. Really want to have some fun? Click on the Media/Press tab and find my posts linking to "bias" surveys done by all sorts of different organizations and universities. Guess which one comes out consistently as the least biased.
"...the Obama Administration proposed selling and taxing marijuana as"
I thought that governor Arnold "The Terminator" came up with that plan.
You mean to say that now they both want to charge state AND Fed taxes to fill the "pot"?
It's pretty funny how many leftists automatically assume all conservatives just listen to Rush or Fox or fail to read outside the narrow confines of our own preferences. It might bumfuzzle him to realize that I read Daily Kos, HuffPo(although I hold my nose) and such outlets as the New York Times and the Washington Post. I don't watch CNN because a. I don't have cable and b. when I do watch it the dialogue is so obviously biased that I cannot believe anything they say. As for the marijuana issue, that IS being talked about as a way of getting the nation out of debt. And if some lefties choose to ignore those ideas, then they need to consider who they got on the boat with. Someone who has the support of the likes of Woody Harralson is not going to dismiss legalizing pot lightly. And I do agree that the word racist is getting thrown around as an excuse to end an argument that is being lost for lack of retorts. If throwing the R-bomb is all a lefty can do, then maybe he should go back and do a review on his radical technique. Until then, I will stand by what I have read on many other outlets including many California newspapers, which you can hardly label as conservative at any level.
This has got to be one of the best posts you have written - well...at least since I've been reading. I excerpted you and put a link on my blog to this post. I hope you don't mind. (Don't worry...nobody reads it except my husband!) ;)
Bravo Darren! Bravo!
Great job!
Screw CNN, and especially MSNBC. Whenever I watch those it makes me want to smash my TV as it spews the godless lefty propaganda.
I personally like to get my news from The Onion. It's very fair and balanced, and like you said about CNN, it doesn't automatically assume the right-wing viewpoint is wrong. Their commentators and interviews present some very insightful facts, unlike those brainwashed-lefty cable stations.
Stupid lefties. Why can't they just learn to be more like us? They're always complaining about how scissors don't work correctly and how the doorknob is on the wrong side. I think they should try using their right hands once in a while.
And don't get me started on Obama. Little, subtle things, a few not-so-subtle, bother me about this guy. His insistence on retaining his blackberry for one. During the campaign, I watched him having very in depth conversations with "someone", while at the same time he was surrounded by several of his top advisers. I was already suspicious, but I caught myself wandering, "who's on the other end". Try his total dependency on the teleprompter - it just seems odd that someone so "smart" and "articulate" rarely can convey his "own" thoughts without looking, well, inexperienced. Bush was a horrible speaker, but you knew what was in his heart and you knew he was telling the truth. As for the not-so-subtle - his blatent radical agenda. I thought its implementation would have been a little more "subtle".
I'm sensing satire isn't one of your strengths.
^ Weird comment up there. ^
But anyway, upon looking at some other posts, it seems that you do use other sources. My mistake, sorry.
I'm impressed at your integrity. Thank you.
Post a Comment