Charles Krauthammer: "It will be rude."

>> Thursday, March 26, 2009

Writing in the WashingtonExaminer columnist Noemie Emery, has an honest critique of the "Messiah." Even Democrats are turning on the man.

Excerpt...

In short, the idea of Obama, the eloquent, elegant, trans-racial hero, able to inspire his way around anything, ran into reality and was dissolved by it, revealing a not-well-prepared neophyte politician with an embarrassing penchant for gaffes.

The markets are down, the price tags are up, the British are piqued, and the independents are heading back to the Republicans, who now have a (slight) lead in the generic ballot, for the first time in nearly three years.

Obama’s teleprompter has its own blog, its own code name---Totus--- and is building a following. One laughs with it, and at him, which cannot be promising. For a would-be Messiah, this is hardly good news.

Way back last year---it was called the campaign--- some people, John McCain and Hillary Clinton, to name only two of them, seemed to suggest that something like this might happen, that there were risks to electing someone with no record or background to speak of, who had never done anything well except talk. They were dismissed as too old and too cranky, jealous that they too did not have a fan base of cult-like intensity.

This was probably right---at least about jealousy---but it doesn’t mean they were wrong on the rest. They were waiting for the bubble to burst, which it did, but too late for their benefit.


How I wish America would wake up and blunt the trauma this man will impose upon this country. Even some democrats are beginning to see this not as Obama's presidency, but Carter's second term.

What a disaster.


19 comments:

Dan Trabue March 26, 2009 at 9:41 AM  

After years of Bush (ranked 36/45 in a presidential ranking by historians), a jump up to Carter (ranked 25/45) would be a vast improvement, no?

source

Dan Trabue March 26, 2009 at 9:49 AM  

What a disaster, is right. I mean, it's been nearly 100 days and he hasn't fixed the world of crap that Bush dumped on the US over eight years. What's going on?

After all, we all expected everything to turn around right away.

Is that what you're suggesting?

I think the majority of the US recognizes that change does not come overnight.

Al-Ozarka March 26, 2009 at 11:05 AM  

Historians who put Carter ahead of Bush?

There might be a credibility problem here.

Unless, of course, you are a liberal.

Dan Trabue March 26, 2009 at 12:48 PM  

Yeah, historians, huh! Who can trust them, with all their hi-falutin' book-learning and study and research and all that, it's enough to raise suspicions...

Eric March 26, 2009 at 1:41 PM  

Let's allow some years under that bridge before we start debating what "historians" think about the two presidencies.

As to the comparison to Carter's 2nd term, don't be a goob, Dan. Anyone with some personal perspective about Carter's term knows all about the "misery index" that HIS presidency inspired. And Carter didn't have a war to fight.... only a hostage crisis to pass on the next president.

Dan Trabue March 26, 2009 at 3:03 PM  

Yes, by all means, let's allow a few years to roll by. I suspect Carter will remain solidly in the middle or increase slightly in ranking as the years go by. He was a visionary who was ahead of his time and honest and, as a result, not as effective a president.

But, I'll take a leader who is honest and has the right ideas who fails over a leader who successfully implements bad plans (see Reagan/Bush/Bush and, to a lesser degree, Clinton) every time.

And, I further suspect that Bush's ranking will only get more and more dismal with the passing of time and perhaps recognition of just how bad he was for the US and the world.

Time will tell.

Eric March 26, 2009 at 3:05 PM  

Yes, time will tell and demonstrate what a poor judge of character you are.

Eric March 26, 2009 at 3:07 PM  

Now, does anyone want to talk Obama? What a dismal failure HE has been thus far? Granted, it's only been some 67 days or so, but... he's managed to plunge this country into an unconscionable level of debt.

Dan Trabue March 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM  

Ummm, no. Bush did that. Obama merely inherited the vast problems left behind by Bush. Years of neglect of infrastructure and basic governmental function as well as poor economic planning would have required whoever inherited this mess to spend some money to clean it up.

What remains to be seen is whether Obama will be true to his word and to the tradition of the Democrats and reduce the debt that he is now forced by Bush's policies to incur. I suspect he will begin to reduce the debt in the coming year or so and that things will even out and this Democrat will leave office (as Clinton and Carter did before him) with something closer to a balanced budget than the previous three Republican administrations left behind (Reagan/Bush/Bush all left in their wake VAST debt and MASSIVE gov't).

It remains to be seen.

And, Eric, I'll have you know I have excellent taste in character. I like you, after all.

Eric March 26, 2009 at 4:00 PM  

Sorry, Dan. Bush didn't add 3 Trillion to the national debt, nor is he trying to make sure that number climbs to 9 trillion over the next 10 years WHILE CLAIMING he's going to cut the deficit IN HALF by his first term. The man is a lunatic, and a liar. Imagine that... near 10 TRILLION added to the deficit in the next ten years unless he can and a whole lot of democrats get booted out of office and all the damage he is doing can be rescinded and reversed.

And your good judgment of MY character only proves the adage that even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then....pun intended.

Jim March 26, 2009 at 10:33 PM  

Bush didn't add 3 Trillion to the national debt.

Indeed he did not. He added over $4 Trillion:

On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department [as of Sept 2008] shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion.

Marshall Art March 27, 2009 at 1:18 AM  

That bastard Bush. Getting pretty tired listening to that lame refrain. Here's a little perspective regarding what Bush left behind. Let's see, in eight years Bush dealt with an attack on the World Trade Center, Pentagon and possibly the White House, sent more money than any bleeding heart lib ever did for AIDS relief in Africa, dealt with a hurricane or two as well as a tsunami, oversaw the overthrow of a despot. After all that, Jim and Dan think that justifies Obama's expenditures to "clean up" Bush's mess? Yeah, that makes sense.

With logic like that, it's no wonder Dan considers Carter a visionary. I can't wait to hear how he explains that one.

SIDEBAR: I've finally come across something for which we can no longer say that Carter was totally worthless. It seems that he altered some regulation, the result of which has been the proliferation of more breweries, both private and commercial. If you brew beer at home, you can thank Jimma Carter!

And one can't forget that it was the Republican Congress that balanced the budget during the 90's. If you'll recall, Clinton spent eight years campaigning for president. Sorta like Obama seems to be doing now.

Dan Trabue March 27, 2009 at 6:17 AM  

Jim said:

Indeed he did not. He added over $4 Trillion:

Thanks for the messy little facts, Jim. And this is my point: The last several Republican administrations have all run on smaller gov't/more fiscal responsibility and yet have all created BIGGER gov't and LESS fiscal responsibility. You've been sold a lie, fellas. Reagan/Bush/Bush were not small gov't advocates nor fiscally responsible. Their words don't matter if their actions don't match.

Eric March 27, 2009 at 8:32 AM  

Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures

Whatever Bush added to the deficit pales in comparison to what Obama's administration of this government will add over the next ten years. He will more than double what Bush had done.

Seeing as how Obama ran on the idea of "Change," "Hope," and a new era of "Responsibility" he has shown himself to be little more a liar, a thief, and the KING of irresponsibility.

Carter was a failed and beaten president. Nothing visionary about that except as a warning to others. Obama is working feverishly to reshape this country into something the US Constitution, nor its writers, would not recognize. And that far too many still support this very dangerous man and his dangerous ideas and policies shows me that America is propped up by ignornants, and their ignorant perceptions of how this country is supposed to work under the direction of the Constitution.

You claim to love Freedom, but you embrace, and call brother, Tyranny. Democrats complained about Republicans destroying America? Democrats are hacking away at the Constitution and the rule of Law-- making it up as they go along --all in an effort to create some pathetic banana-republic stylized utopia.

You Democrats HATE free speech, you hate gun-ownership rights, you hate private-property rights, you hate the unborn, you hate FREEDOM. Which makes every single one of you an enemy of Freedom, and an enemy of the Untied States of America... because you support and defend those who actively seek to subvert, warp, and ultimately change the face of America into something it was never designed to be.

Dan Trabue March 27, 2009 at 10:20 AM  

Thanks, Eric, for letting us know what we think. Imagine our surprise!

If it's all the same to you, though, we'll continue to think that WE know what we think and disagree with your voodoo strawmen.

Thanks.

Dan Trabue March 27, 2009 at 10:21 AM  

You getting enough sleep, brother?

Bubba,  March 27, 2009 at 2:23 PM  

Dan, it's simply not the case that Bush was responsible for years of "neglect of infrastructure and basic governmental function."

As Jonah Goldberg recounts, "Education spending under Bush rose 58 percent faster than inflation. Medicare spending, thanks largely to Bush’s prescription-drug benefit (the largest expansion in entitlements since the Great Society), went up 51 percent during the Bush years. Spending on health research and regulation rose 55 percent. Spending on highways and mass transit went up by 22 percent."

It seems to me that you want to have your cake and eat it, too: you want to gripe about the deficits that Bush accumulated while giving him no credit for the programs that benefited from his spending sprees.

The inaccuracies don't stop there: neither President Bush ran as a true fiscal Reaganite, as George H.W. Bush's call for a "kinder, gentler" nation was an implicit repudiation of Reaganism (as Nancy immediately noticed) and as George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism" was an explicit repudiation of small-government conservatism, built on the notion that, when people are hurting, "government has to move."

Bush didn't run as a Republican alternative to Clintonian triangulation: he ran as a Republican version of it.


Your tenuous grasp on political realities apparently extends to politicians you support.

You "suspect" that Obama will begin reducing the debt -- not just an annual defecit, but the debt itself?! -- "in the coming year or so" when his own office projects deficits, as far as the eye can see, that are larger than any of Bush's deficits.

That's pollyanna thinking, Dan, particularly when Obama's projections would be much worse, except for the absurd optimism about the economy in the next few years. And, for all your carping about Republican dishonesty, let's not forget that Obama couches as "cuts" reductions from a baseline that assumes we're staying in Iraq at current troop levels for all time.

(A few historians with all thar book-learnin' rank Carter ahead of Bush and you tout those numbers. Strangely, you apparently think the numbers generated from vague Google searches are worth pondering. But when Obama's own office projects defecits that are, in some cases, multiple times larger than Bush's, those numbers have no impact on your suspicion that budget surpluses are just around the corner. Funny how selective you are about the importance of quantitative data. It reminds me of how inconsistently you appeal to, say, civility or philosophical conservatism.)

(Or the Bible.)

If anyone has been sold a bill of goods, it's the Obama supporters who thought that he is honest and competent.

Reality is sinking in, and if this is the kind of guy my politics lead me to defend, I too would be tempted to slander his predecessor, and -- oh, yeah -- continue to harp on the fact that Obama's black.

Never let it be said that people support the guy because of his race, right?

Jim March 28, 2009 at 12:00 PM  

You Democrats HATE free speech Guess I better put down my protest signs, stop writing my letters to the editor, stop blogging and stop reading this one.

you hate gun-ownership rights Guess I better melt down my two pistols.

you hate private-property rights Guess I better donate my house to the city.

you hate the unborn Yep, should have killed off my two sons when I had the chance.

you hate FREEDOM. Uh huh.

Michele Bachman rules!

Post a Comment

Your First Amendment right to free speech is a privilege and comes with a measure of responsibility. You have the right to exercise that responsibility here but we reserve the right to inform you when you've used that right irresponsibly.

We are benevolent dictators in this regard. Enjoy.

Barry Obama : The Young Turk


Young Turk:
Date: 1908
Function: noun
Etymology: Young Turks, a 20th century revolutionary party in Turkey
:an insurgent or a member of an insurgent group especially in a political party : radical; broadly
:one advocating changes within a usually established group.





Photos: 1980 Taken by, Lisa Jack / M+B Gallery

Labels

"House Negro" "No One Messes with Joe" "O" "The One" 08-Election 1984 2009 Inaugural 2012 Election 9/11 abortion abortionists Air Obama Al Franken Al Gore Al-Qaeda American Youth Americarcare Assassination Scenario Atheism Barry O Bi-Partisanship Biden Billary Birth Certificate Border Security Bush Bush Legacy Change Change-NOT child-killers Christians Christmas Civilian Defense Force Clinton Code Pink Congress Conservatism Constitution Creation Darwin Del McCoury Democrat Hypocrisy Democrats Dick Morris Dr. Tiller Dubya Earth Day Elian Gonzalez Ends Justify Means Evil Evolution Evolution-Devolution Failure in Chief Fairness Doctrine Feodork Foreign Relations Free Speech Frogs Fuck America - Obama Has Gates George Orwell Gestapo Global Cooling Global Idiots Global Warmong God GOP Descent Graphic Design Great American Tea Party Gun-Control Guns hackers Harry Reid hate haters Heath Care Heretic Hillary Howard Dean Hussein ident in History identity theft Illegal Immigration Iraq Jackboots Jesus Jihadist-Lover Jimmy Carter Joe Biden Jon Stewart Kanye West Karl Rove Katrina Las Vegas Left-Wing Media Leftists Liar Liberal Media liberal tactics Liberals Liberty Lying Media Marriage Penalty Martyr Marxism McCain Media MSNBC/Obama Administration murderers Norm Coleman Obama Obama 2012 Obama Administration Obama Dicatorship Obama Lies Obama Wars Obama's Army Obamacare Obamists Olympia Snowe Partisanship perversion Piracy Police State Political Hell Political Left Populist Rage Pragmatist Prayer Proof of Citizenship Proposition 8 Racism Regime Change Revolution Ronald Reagan Rush Limbaugh Second Amendment Separation of Powers Slavery Socialist Government Tea-Bagging Tea-Parties terrorists The Raw Deal Thuggery Tom Tancredo Traitors War Criminal War on Weather War-Crimes Worst President in History

  © Blogger template Werd by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009

Back to TOP