Search This Blog

Monday, October 25, 2010

Obamaphobia: What's Really Behind It?

Jack Neely in the Knoxville, TN Metropulse asks the question: Obamaphobia: What's Really Behind It? and comes up with some really, really silly reasons.  Here is my "Fisking" of his article.

No president since the Civil War was so hated so much from his inauguration. Even before he was inaugurated, people were complaining to me about his being elected, as if I could offer some solution.

Not true. Obama had a 79% approval rating in December 2008. He was spectacularly popular.

I have a suspicion that Obama isn’t being judged just on what he’s actually done, or even what he’s actually said he wants to do. Not on the government bailouts, a continuation of Bush policy, during a major economic crisis already in progress, to throw a lifeline to capitalism. How Obama can be labeled a socialist by bailing out Wall Street and Detroit, the capitals of capitalism, bewilders real socialists everywhere. Another crash is what real socialists have predicted and dreamed of since the days of Eugene Debs. And maybe Obama spoiled it.

Not true. First of all, while Bush was still president, congress passed an emergency bill to absorb the toxic waste that was the mortgage backed securities market. Following that we had a government takeover of two auto companies, bondholders were dispossessed, and the assets divided between the government and the United Auto Workers. If that’s your definition of a “lifeline” to capitalism, you are clueless about capitalism. And that famous Wall Street “bailout” was another example of government ownership of private corporations. Are you totally unaware that the Federal government is in the process of selling a large chunk of Citibank? Ask yourself how they acquired that and if government ownership of a bank is an example of free enterprise.

Is it the recession? Unemployment’s worse than when Obama took office, true, but the Dow’s about 3,000 points higher. That’s what cynical liberals used to call a Republican Recovery.

Perhaps southerners and northerners alike are unhappy about the fact that a trillion dollars has been spent and about 20% of working-age Americans are either unemployed, underemployed or have given up looking for work.

Health-care reform? As finally passed, it’s a patchy and conservative shadow of what Harry Truman was pushing in 1945—and comparable to what Teddy Roosevelt proposed in 1912. And hardly the public-option health-care plan Obama himself promised to cheering crowds during the campaign.

Perhaps southerners and northerners alike are unhappy because they don’t want the government running the health care system. Perhaps they are satisfied with their current doctor and insurance provider and consider their medical care is their business and not the government’s. Perhaps they know that when the federal government sets the rules there’s no escape from its stupidity by switching doctors or insurance providers.

Is it the fact that he hasn’t yet closed Guantánamo, criticized as an unprecedented and unconstitutional oddity in our justice system? Or that he’s backed off some of his claims of pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan? Or his surprise pro-drilling environmental policy? My disappointed liberal friends call Obama “Bush Lite.”

Perhaps most people in the country are not upset by imprisoning terrorists in Guantanamo, or they believe that having won the battle of Iraq they don’t want to throw their hard-won victory away. And that vaunted “pro-drilling” policy? Tell that to the people of Louisiana who are being thrown out of work thanks to Obama’s drilling moratorium. And are those new drilling sites “shovel ready” because if they are, like the “shovel ready” construction jobs, they don’t exist.

By any standard you want to measure him, Obama, the president, is much more conservative than Obama, the candidate, whom American voters elected by a bigger margin than any president in 20 years.

Laughably false. Obama campaigned as the one who would bring the races together, who would transcend politics, as a straight-down-the-line centrist. He glossed over his radical roots with eye-glazing platitudes. His platform was “HopeN’Change.” He threw his “God Damning America,” racist, anti-Semitic pastor under the bus when his radicalism threatened his image. And he succeeded because the MSM wanted him as president; especially Liberal Southern members of the MSM because electing a black man – even a black man with no experience and no skills other than oratorical – was so important to them. It certified their Liberal credentials. It made them feel good about themselves; they were good people for helping a Zero over the finish line as long as his skin was the right color.

And we hate him.

Actually Obama -the man - is more popular than Obama’s policies so, no, we don’t hate him. We despise his policies. We're still thinking about the hate part.

No comments: