Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Personal Aside: The Verdict’s Almost In: Obama’s Most Dangerously Inept than All Other Presidents. 8 Failures—Count `em—8.


That low rumble you hear is the beginning of an electoral earthquake which is going to bring Barack Obama’s house down around his ears in 2012.

After a fantastic love affair with the media, starry-eyed youth, idealistic liberals, love-smitten white independents and 97% of the black vote, almost everyone (except the blacks) is turning sour on the Mystery Man Messiah.

Why? Because, my dear friends, all his perfumed puffs of rhetoric have dissolved in the grey morning and these folks (with the exception of the blacks) have seen that this guy is so inept he can’t deliver a thing on his manifold promises of liberal…even radical…redemption. Furthermore they realize now that the Chicago Squid toughs are as obtuse, naïve and all-thumbs on how to get things done politically in the real world of the presidency.

In short, since the glorious day of his inauguration, everything Obama has touched has turned to ashes. He’s not been in office a full year and there are eight glaring failures to his discredit.
The 8 Obama Failures.

I’ve written before about Failure 1 so I’ll make it short. That’s the rejection of the tried and true concept of trying Gitmo terrorists in military courts which we had set up for this express purpose. This most disastrous decision in the history of the presidency was made because Obama doesn’t understand that his very first job is to protect the peace and safety of the American people. Agreeing to AG Eric Holder’s decision that these murderers deserve the rights provided to all U. S. citizens by the very Constitution the terrorists hate, threatens to turn New York into a deadly theatre for radical Islamic demonstrations.

There is no way the trials can be justified. The pretext for this decision was abjectly political: to allow the terrorists to vilify this country and play into the hands of anti-U. S. sentiment around the world, alleging they were mistreated. It is the most shameful decision ever made by a president—a decision that certifies Obama is unworthy of the office.

Failures 2, 3 and 4 are gross diplomatic ones. 2 involves Iran because inexpertness there may trigger a Middle East war that may detonate us all. We have been lucky that every president (even Jimmy Carter) has understood that a leader of state must enunciate firmness but still as a poker player know “when to hold `em and when to fold `em.” This eludes Obama. He always folds before the game is over.

He began his negotiations with craven obsequiousness. It started with his inaugural where he pleaded that he was ready to extend an open hand of friendship if Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would unclench his fists. Iran mocked him. He showed further weakness by refusing to capitalize on a mass movement from the street against Ahmadinejad’s stealing his reelection—hoping this would win him favor. It hasn’t. In the face of our pleas to end uranium enrichment, Iran last week announced it will build 10 more enrichment facilities. Upshot: thanks to our folding so early, the chance is great that Israel will take matters into its own hands and decide our future for us. If a nuclear bomb is imminent in Iran, the Israelis will likely launch an air-strike and what happens after that…including the strong possibility of all-out Middle East war…is anyone’s guess.

3 has to do with Afghanistan. Obama campaigned on the theme that while Iraq was a failure and the Surge wouldn’t work (he was wrong on both counts), Afghanistan is ‘the right war.” So what does he do? His own handpicked general urges reinforcements of 40,000 troops and…showing abject weakness…Obama takes three whole months to make a decision. He made the right one last week: 30,000 plus NATO’s 10,000 but he gave the game away. How? He says all troops will be gone by 2011 which notifies the populace that they’d better not cooperate with us against the Taliban because after 2011 they’ll be on their own. What does that tell them and the Taliban? Anyone in his right mind would keep mum. Not Obama. He wants to placate the Left.

Failure 4: Canceling the missile defense deployment for Poland and the Czech Republic was disastrous, showing a grievous weakness of U.S. commitment under NATO to the territorial defense and Central and Eastern Europe. Failure 5: Failure to renew the START treaty on reduction of nuclear weapons. The sessions are stuck and it is likely Obama will go to Oslo to receive the fatuous Nobel peace prize with empty hands. The greater danger is that to avoid continuing embarrassment, Obama will goose the negotiations so drastically that we will make concessions harmful to our security—particularly on the number of nuclear delivery vehicles and inspecting weapons facilities.

If START is stuck, the likelihood is that the Russians will deploy their powerful new RS-24 missile which cannot be used under the old expiring treaty. Knowing Obama, he is so eager to get an agreement—any agreement—that he will not utilize the Reykjavik strategy that Ronald Reagan used in 1986 by walking out of the negotiations rather than abandoning our nuclear defense. Is Obama that gutsy? Or that interested in our own nuclear defense when the 5 Leftists in Norway who handed him the Nobel will be angered? Not likely.

Unconscionable Spending.

Failure 6: Spending. This also pertains somewhat to George W. Bush who allowed himself to admit that he temporarily “lost faith” in the free market and panicked at the outset of the recession—so he reverted to outdated Keynesian economics by passing a small version of TARP. History shows that “stimulating” the economy to pump up jobs is folly. FDR tried it and unemployment never decreased lower than 20% until World War II. Panic led Bush to launch the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Obama demanded Congress pass a $787 billion enlargement promising that it would “save or create at least 3.5 million jobs.”

It didn’t work and unemployment is now at 10.2%, a 26-year high and the deficit will top more than $1 trillion through 2011 averaging almost 10% of GDP. Moreover the administration has lied consistently about the jobs it supposedly “produced” and added the outrageous conclusion that thousands of jobs were “saved.” It is not possible to estimate jobs “saved.” The best thing that can happen is that Congress repeal TARP but it won’t.

Failure 7: The foolhardy drive to nationalize health care—especially in this recession. As I’ve written before, even FDR set as his first priority in 1933 putting the nation to work: he didn’t introduce Social Security for two years. What’s happened with Obama is that as a Left-Liberal, he has misread his mandate. He was elected only six weeks after a financial collapse. Until that happened, the likely winner would have been John McCain. The country was tired of war, tired, frankly, of Bush. Even so, Obama won by only 7 points. But he decided his election was a sweeping mandate and the Chicago Crowd, particularly Rahm Emanuel, convinced him that a crisis was a terrible thing to waste and that Obama could implement the most extensive social agenda in the history of the country—starting off with health care.

He doesn’t understand that it’s insane not to reform our malpractice system. The United States is spending up to $200 billion a year on defensive medicine, doctors ensuring that they will not be sued. None other than Howard Dean, the recent Democratic National Chairman—and a medical doctor—for once in his life became candid. When asked why there is no tort reform in the Democratic proposals, he said recently that the Democrats don’t want to antagonize the trial lawyers who contribute so much money to their party.

Obama’s plan is not only a failure but ironically, if it is passed, it may well be the political end of him and his party for decades. Less than a fifth of the voters—19% of a recent Quionnipiac University poll of a national cross-section—think that he will keep his word made in the campaign that the plan “will not add a dime to the federal deficit.” By a margin of four to three, Democrats believe this as well. A majority of those polled—by a 16-point margin—say they oppose the legislation that has moved in the House and is being considered by the Senate.

While the Congressional Budget Office says it is “revenue neutral,” even David Broder of The Washington Post, a liberal, said last week that “every expert I have talked to says the public has it right. These bills are budget-busters.” Many single out the gimmicks in the Senate bill—including Harry Reid’s ploy to postpone the start of subsidies to help the uninsured buy policies from mid-2013 to January, 2014, long after the taxes and fees would have begun. It’s this gimmickry that makes it possible for Reid to announce with a straight face that his bill would reduce federal deficits by $130 billion by 2019.

The gross increase would be almost $1 trillion—mainly to subsidize the uninsured. But two questions remain: (1) will a future congress actually cut $420 billion from Medicare to make the numbers square? They never have. And (2) will it place an excise tax on high-premium insurance policies (the so-called Cadillac policies) that is called for in Reid’s bill? Obama hasn’t endorsed this nor have many Democrats who react to union pressure.

Failure 8: Obama’s blind acceptance of the Global Warming fraud. Not content with the fact he couldn’t even deliver the 2016 Olympics for his hometown despite winging all the way to Copenhagen with a covey of Chicago billionaires in tow, by the time you read this he will have gone to Copenhagen once again. Why? To participate in the greatest bust thus far in the 21st century: the world Climate Change parley. Earlier it was decided to scrub any attempt to come out with a unified declaration of global warming. In fact the whole thing is a bust due to the fact that the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia near Norwich, England has been a gigantic con job from the start.

Up to now the CRU has been a central dissemination point of data that has supplied Al Gore and everyone else with what they believed was un-refutable truth that there is dangerous man-made global warming that threatens the world. Gore convinced five Norwegian leftists on the Nobel Prize committee to give him the Nobel Prize in 2007 as they did Obama this year—but it is clear now that the basis for global warming has been a hoax, manufactured through cooked books.

A full 16 megabytes of e-mails and documents from the CRU were made public last week by a computer hacker which showed the “scientists” at the climate unit engaged in distorting the numbers to justify greater international control over the production and utilization of energy. Examples of the hoax:

“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change),” wrote one scientist. “Kevin and I will keep them out somehow—even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years [from 1981 onwards] and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline,” wrote another.

“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it’s a travesty we can’t” confessed still another.

A scientist plaintively asks: “Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re AR4?”

“I’m getting hassled by a couple of people to release the CRU temperature station data,” writes a panicky scientist. “Don’t any of you three tell anybody that the UK has a Freedom of Information Act!” Italics mine.

The disclosures have been stifled in the mainstream press but just as in the case of the Acorn scandal has exploded on the Internet, Fox News and talk radio. The electrifying leakage has thunderously shaken the dinosaur liberal print press’s credibility. The New York Times, for instance, reported the story only slightly and self-righteously declared it would not reprint the e-mails because they were divulged extra-legally.

That’s the same New York Times that leapt at the chance to publish the Pentagon Papers which Daniel Ellsberg stole and gave to the paper’s Neil Sheehan in 1971, which Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) entered in full in the Congressional Record and which was published for general consumption by Beacon Press, an arm of the ultra-left wing “Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations.” Meaning that it was highly okay for the newspaper to print purloined documents which interfered with the Vietnam war effort of the Nixon administration but it’s not okay to publish hacked documents which destroy the credibility of a cherished liberal goal—to subordinate the energy industry to control of a world government.

As result any chance of Obama’s getting his Cap and Trade bill through the Senate has evaporated. Left holding the bag (in addition to every liberal Democratic senator) is South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham who had announced his support of Cap and Trade just as the e-mails were disclosed.

The leaked e-mails have made mockery of Obama’s repeated excitable statements including this one: “…[G]lobal warming is not just the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind.” Also of John McCain’s campaign declaration “[T]he overwhelming majority of scientific opinion in America today and in the world is that climate change is real. The fact is that the solution to it is the development of technologies—and a cap and trade proposal—the debate is over.” [Italics mine]. The only Republican candidate for president who dismissed the issue was Ron Paul who said correctly it involved “fear-mongering.” Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr also ridiculed the proposition.

Upshot: Obama will go to Copenhagen for the end of the conference to try to salvage something from it. He can’t let go of the fact that his belief in global warming notwithstanding that everyone knows now it’s a fraud. His Cap and Trade bill isn’t going to pass the Senate anyhow so he’s going to make a “voluntary” commitment to have the U.S. cut its emissions to satisfy a liberal cause that has already proved to be a charade.

If Obama Survives These Failures…

…well, first of all: if the Democrats don’t lose the House as result of these failures in 2010 I’ll be very surprised. Then if Obama is able to overcome these failures in 2012, I’ll be stunned. I don’t think even the Republicans…called by some The Stupid Party…can goof this up. We’ll see.

No comments:

Post a Comment