Welcome to the new era of Hope ‘n Change. We were promised transparency. We were promised bipartisanship. We were promised that this would be the most ethical Congress ever!. We were promised that the old era of hateful politics and backstabbing and lies was over and dead. Obama was going to unite us all, and the world would be a shinier, happier place.
Unfortunately, it’s just the same old Chicago politics.
Last night, during Obama’s press conference, he flip-flopped yet again. This time, he smeared Republicans… and then turned around and boasted about how bipartisan and unifying he was (I don’t bash Republicans!).
I understand how easy it is for this town to become consumed in the game of politics – to turn every issue into running tally of who’s up and who’s down. I’ve heard that one Republican strategist told his party that even though they may want to compromise, it’s better politics to “go for the kill.” Another Republican Senator said that defeating health reform is about “breaking” me.
So let me be clear: This isn’t about me. I have great health insurance, and so does every Member of Congress. This debate is about the letters I read when I sit in the Oval Office every day, and the stories I hear at town hall meetings.
Moments later, he said:
Well, first of all, you haven’t seen me out there blaming the Republicans. I’ve been a little frustrated by some of the misinformation that’s been coming out of the Republicans, but that has to do with, as you pointed out, politics.
But… he just was smearing blaming Republicans. He just did bash them. And then he turns around and paints himself as some kind of bipartisan angel? Give me a break. Obama is no uniter. Obama is the Great Divider. He goes out of his way to ensure that title remains his.
Hat Tip: Hot Air
Linda in Texas says: Despite his long standing affiliation with the flaming hater Jeremiah Wright and others like him, Obama has tried to portray himself as the great messianic uniter of the races. However, throughout his campaign, many of his comments and remarks were clearly racially divisive, and since he took over the presidency, racial and ethnic tension seems to be escalating. It’s not because he is black (actually, bi-racial, but because he and his party are masters at broadening their power through the “divide and conquer” strategy that purposely keeps the races at odds with each other.
TennDon says: The mark of a true sociopath!
This is part of a very serious social problem that has engulfed our modern society. And although the “moderates” resent me more bitterly than any liberals for pointing out the obvious, the problem belongs predominantly to the liberals.
They’ve been imbibing deeply from this intoxicating elixir that is most accurately described as, “Any bashing of The Enemy is virtually nonexistent (since The Enemy has had it comin’).” Emphasis on that v-word, virtual. Any discrimination against whites, males, and white-males, virtually never happened since it isn’t really possible to do it. Any bitter arguments that result from a discussion started by a liberal, came from a political argument that was virtually started by the other guy.
This virtual world, in sum, allows them to heap abuse on others, while claiming it was the others who virtually heaped this abuse on them. This hairpin turn their Holy President just took, just goes to show how addicted they are to it. It’s the ends justifying the means. So of course they all do it. They’re entitled to; their intentions are oh so noble.
Virtually.
That’s why you really shouldn’t take them on, until you first acquire consent to The Ten Commandments for Liberals Who Want to Argue About Politics. Because if you’re well informed on the issues, once you back them into the corner they will go crying to the boss and report you for browbeating them and victimizing them.
Like I said. A serious societal problem. And I’m not entirely sure what to do about it. You can avoid them entirely, but it’s a little tough when it’s your friends family & co-workers who’ve been drinking the kool-aid, and they’re holding you to be exactly the captive audience they claim you’re holding them to be.
Morgan,
What will happen is that you’ll eventually have enough of a chasm between the two sides until there’s a Civil War. No, I’m not advocating it, but if you look at what occurred (political and societal) in the 1850’s leading up to the firing of Fort Sumter, there are some disturbing similarities. When neither side can find any common ground whatsoever (which is definitely occurring) and when one side decides that it’s backed into a corner (and has nothing to lose) that’s when it will happen. I really do think it’s a question of when, rather than if (no, I’m not saying it’ll happen soon). And make no mistake, it’ll be far uglier than 1861-65.
Cassy: How can you expect Obama to go through an entire speech without contradicting himself? His teleprompter has had a lot on its mind lately!
BobV says: I guess bi-partisan doesn’t have any more meaning to him than post-racial, or constitutional law.
Just a catch word for the commoners to latch on to.
8 Comments