Is Obama’s bait and switch a surprise?
Clive Crook reflects on Obama’s hard tack to the Left [emphasis mine]:
Mr Obama came to the presidency uniquely equipped to command and retain the confidence of the country—not just his own party. He was elected because he was a hit with centrists…The US wanted to come together and Mr Obama looked the most intent on making that happen.
To a surprising degree, Mr Obama is failing to play to that strength…[H]is budget made no effort to keep centrists on board: it enchanted the left of the Democratic party and might have been calculated to infuriate moderate Republicans. Some of the White House’s recent political stunts…are old-fashioned Washington politics at its worst: polarising, juvenile and unserious.
Mr Obama was supposed to be above all that. This perception was his greatest asset. He has let it depreciate in recent days and the prospects for his ambitious and mostly admirable agenda are diminishing with it.
Shorter Crooks: what we saw is not what we got.
My response: it depends what you think Obama’s agenda was, and is.
The apparent change in Obama should be surprising only to those who failed to look closely at him during the election, and to examine his record. I, along with so many others, was always worried about Obama’s actual plans versus his stated ones, and wrote many posts about what I saw as the large number of troubling signs that he was far more of a Leftist (as well as more hypocritical, misleading, and historically ignorant) than his lofty rhetoric would indicate. This notion didn’t require a perception of him as a Manchurian candidate, just as a politician with a gap unusually vast (even for politicians) between rhetoric and truth.
But still, I preferred to hope that I was wrong, and that his more centrist side was sincere. I was determined to give him the benefit of the doubt, and to wait to form a judgment until he started actually doing things.
Now Obama has done quite enough, thank you, to bring me to the reluctant conclusion that the explanation for his behavior is actually rather simple: the old bait and switch.
Obama’s centrism was necessary to get elected. Now that he is president he can shed the mask and try to use the remaining goodwill and trust he garnered during the campaign, as well as the traditional tendency of the American voter to give new presidents a honeymoon, in order to hurriedly advance causes and proposals that are sharply to the Left, and to enlist the hugely Democratic Congress to pass bills codifying them into policy before most of America—or the press—wises up to the game.
Am I wrong about this? It’s always possible, but the evidence has become overwhelming. The tipping point was reached with Obama’s budget proposal, which seemed designed to outspend the Great Society—and swell our debt to gargantuan proportions, as well as “skyrocket” (his words during the campaign) energy costs—at a time when growing the economy and reassuring the markets and the public should have been his focus.
Is the bait and switch working so far, or have there been enough speedbumps along the way to slow the process down in time? Will Obama feel the need to damp down his Leftist ardor in order to reassure the American people and get his bills past the Republicans and their allies among the more moderate Democrats in Congress? Or will Pelosi and Reid succeed in whipping those recalcitrant Democrats into line?
Well, his con may be coming to an end.
The Chinese just made him do an about-face on his rhetoric talking down the economy. Turns out the old Marxist governments know the value of a market economy and they need one to keep going.
Not to mention all those governments and enemies he was going to make nice to are praying on that
nicenessnaivete.It is my opinion that Pelosi and Reid will help him to ram through, as quickly as possible, pretty much everything they and the President want. Anyone who thinks that he will be held up by the all but three Republican senators and the Blue Dog Democrats in the House really needs the smelling salts.
Why would a man whose familial pedigree is thoroughly Marxist, with a CPUSA high school mentor, and friends and allies none of whom would ever get even close to a security clearance, and the voting record he has tack to the center? His comfort zone is not the center. It’s not where his imagination roams. I think that people who believe he can go in a centrist, pragmatic direction are more impressed with his Chicago Machine background and give more weight to the cynical worldview that prevails there.
But I don’t think Obama is a cynic. I think his expediency serves ideology. That’s why I am not surprised at all by his tack further to the Left. I expected it to happen, although I hoped he would be tempted to do a Bill Clinton and think more about longevity in office. But it’s clear to me that he holds contempt for Clinton’s kind of ambition.
This guy really wants to remake America into something more like a Euro-socialist state. And Dick Morris, the former strategist for Bill Clinton agrees with my view.
All grownups appreciated that Obama was a con artist. The question was who were the marks – Americans, or leftists/liberals?
Now we know. Americans had a glimmer of hope early on that Obama might not be as hard left as we feared, but that hope is gone.
Mitsu, over to you, with that nonsense about Obama always being a centrist. In North Korea, maybe.
It is interesting in talking to the “non-political” people.
I was reminded on Friday morning how the non-political person thinks when she said, “The Obama’s are such a huge change in the White House. He is so athletic and good looking. It’s quite a change from the old generation that used to be in there.”
Style not substance.
Almost NOTHING that Obama does seems to matter to a very large segment of the population.
It reminds me of the race between Tom McClintock and Arnold in CA. Tom was SOOOO right on the issues.
Arnold was incredibly popular.
At the last minute many Republicans switched their vote to Arnold because they feared Cruz Bustamante would win.
IMAGE is EVERYTHING.
STYLE trumps substance to most people.
We need a candidate unlike Newt.
More like Bobby and Sarah.
But somebody that can’t be ripped apart by the idots in the drive-by legacy media.
Somebody who ignores the media and carries their message to the people. Let the drive-by legacy media snivel and whine that they aren’t getting interviews… they are irrelevant !!!
Geez, but I wish that people who disagree with him didn’t feel the need to be nasty. That’s what we have (them other guys) for. Civil discourse, okay?
I submit that the MSM was complicit in Obama’s deception. A planned form of affirmative action through positive exposure.
“somebody that can’t be ripped apart by the idots in the drive-by legacy media.”
Hmmmm…Whom might that be?
Look, it doesnt matter who we run. The MSM doesnt mind going after private citizens or making up reasons why people shouldnt vote for conservatives. We’re just going to have to try to work around them, which is going to be tough, as neo points out, many people arent going to look past the cosmetic.
I will say, as I have anticipated, that I’m enjoying the increasingly strained smiles on O’s supporters who are seeing what they were told would happen happen despite insisting it wouldn’t.
It would be different if this were all out of the blue, but they were told what would happen and sneered at the message and messenger.
I like the idea that they’re finding it takes an increasing amount of effort to continue to justify their support and votes.
What a hoot. Got to have a bit of fun in dark times, I guess.
http://dissentingjustice.blogspot.com/2009/03/fundamentals-of-economy-are-sound.html
Are the fundamentals of the economy sound? 😉
Well well..
Let’s just jump on whoever says that the fundamentals of the economy are sound and pummel them into the ground for saying that?
I’d say the democrats are on this blitzkrieg because elections are 2 years out. Americans have notoriously short memories and 2010 will see a much more centrist democrat tone.
Of course centrist by then will be anybody who declares hes not a communist.
Nope, not bait and switch. What you are getting is what some of us saw all along. A man with roots as a Socialist and ‘Uncle’ Frank of the CPUSA.
We were told by our ‘betters’ from the Left and Right coasts that us hicks were just alarmist and oh so very wrong, he was NOT anything but a centrist. We said that you were wrong and you shouted us down.
Now you have buyers remorse. Too frakkin’ bad, sparky. You got what you voted for! Good and hard!
Baklava, ya gotta stop hangin’ out with high school girls, and other deep thinkers.
We’re not picking a prom king here, a new male model, or a minor league prospect, but a President, a subtle distinction that has been lost on too many.
Obama made over 500 promises during the campaign (see following source)
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Yeah, I pretty much had him pegged as a commie from the get-go.
Style definitely does trump substance in the minds of a lot of people. I have no idea how many people voted for him for no other reason than he was younger and better-looking than McCain. I’ll bet that number was in the millions.
The thing that I find most troubling is the statistic that 70% of single women voted for him. I only spoke to a handful of them during the campaign, but all of those I spoke to got visibly agitated and angry when I mentioned Sarah Palin. They really hate her. They would invariably say something like, “She would send women back to the Dark Ages.”
I don’t know how to get around that.
I am no genius, nor do I have psychic x-ray vision. But Obama is exactly like I thought he would be. Really, is anyone surprised?
Reid, Pelosi, Dodd, and Frank need to go. Hopefully they will be rousted next cycle. And Obama the cycle after that.
The above has been said many times. I plan to say it many more times in many places, in the hopes it sinks in and actually happens.
BO still has the momentum of the media and the majority Democrat Congress to hide behind. At least for a while yet. He will inflict as much damage to Republican ideals and principles as he can safely get away with. Watch for some form of the Fairness Doctrine under a new name. Despite the slight dip in his popularity I believe he’ll have a good two years to inflict massive damage to this economy and impress a Socialist template over it. Voters don’t listen to the Dick Morrises, Glenn Becks, Buckleys, Brooks, etc. Most are too uneducated to listen and too stubborn recognize their mistake. They won’t until after the ‘tsunami’ has washed over them. We’ll probably regain some seats in Congress in ’10 but I doubt we’ll see much traction in the Senate.
Easy. Repeal the 19th Amendment. Let’s face it, there’s a strong selection pressure on women to be gullible. /kidding, sorta
“Obama’s centrism was necessary to get elected. Now that he is president he can shed the mask and try to use the remaining goodwill and trust he garnered during the campaign”
Give that woman a cigar!
“The thing that I find most troubling is the statistic that 70% of single women voted for him. I only spoke to a handful of them during the campaign, but all of those I spoke to got visibly agitated and angry when I mentioned Sarah Palin. They really hate her. They would invariably say something like, “She would send women back to the Dark Ages.”
I don’t know how to get around that.” posted by rickl
I have heard similar comments about the degree of vitriol that single women in this country had for Sarah Palin and for conservatives in general.
If this is so, then the women of our nation are very determined to see “progressivism” move forward until all of its aims are a done deal. And I know what’s going on with the Palin hatred. Everyone knows what it is.
The only way we are going to dismantle some of this opposition from women is to take our cultural conservative values and go underground with them. The Republican Party is going to have to put them on the back burner. And it isn’t as if Roe v. Wade is going to be overturned anyway. Most guys I know who do not like abortion are pro-choice, like me. My wife does not like abortion in most cases, because, as she says, it’s often used as a means of birth control. And she says it’s disgusting. I agree with her. But she and I are in agreement that it should remain legal because there are a few very narrowly defined circumstances when it is the right choice, because it most likely saves the woman’s life.
However, the complex ethical musings of educated and sensitive people are not going to be interpreted for what they are. Instead, the single women will say that the views of my wife and I are retrograde and would send women “back to the Dark Ages.” We no longer live in a society where the views of these women would be seen as monstrously immoral. And I’m willing to bet that most of the single guys who agree with these women are themselves morally retarded too.
In order to save the nation in the long run, we who are ethically traditional, conservative, or even moderate are going to have to swallow our pride and our principles and bury this. We will have to do this, because the media will never cease labeling the Republican Party as anti-abortion. And we may have a hard time keeping it under wraps, because now the single gals are going to be able to clean the fetus out of themselves on the government’s tab. Nice bennie for them. It won’t be easy to get past these gatekeepers, but we have to play possum. Lay low for awhile.
It may be generations, if our country and our civilization manage to survive, before a more learned and ethical consensus emerges on this issue. Just like the slavery issue, it was going to take generations before a critical mass of people understood that it was wrong. The fetus is not “property” and it is not a “parasite.” Eventually we may see a countercultural trend away from Euro hedonism. Maybe even our young men will rediscover manners, virtue, and self-restraint too.
Women is that they’re too socialized, too concerned with social status and conforming with the herd, too reluctant to buck the received wisdom. (Presumably this is evolutionary in origin, because until recently in human history a woman on her own had zero chance of survival.)
IMO, it’s why they’re fascinated with things such as the Academy Awards, fashion, and celebrity gossip, all 100% socially-defined phenomena that most men don’t give a rat’s ass about.
The problem is that the urge to conform makes women into a voting bloc for whoever can sway the herd. No prizes for guessing whether collectivists or individualists are better at pinging the herd instinct.
Sorry, that should have read “Women are too…
Commies aren’t cool.
Occam wrote, “Baklava, ya gotta stop hangin’ out with high school girls, and other deep thinkers.”
But alas… it was a 47 year old… Bleh ! 🙁
It reminds me tha after 9/11 there were swooning women who were in love with Donald Rumsfeld and polls were reported on showing how Donald Rumsfeld was a hearthrob.
Whatever.
Donald cares about America people.
He is who he is.
But it didn’t take long for the press to go into attack mode.
It didn’t take long for Donald to make mistakes (omg – he isn’t perfect)
And guess what – the drumbeat of fire Donald had him ejected.
Arnold’s popularity went through the same cycle.
What am I saying?
I’m saying we have to quit putting our faith in men or women and teach the principles of conservatism.
I like Neo’s blog because it’s a way for men and women (humans 🙂 ) to such an intelligent and well written alternative viewpoint to the dominant and lazy press.
Fred,
We must never betray our principles or morality. Never compromise or show weakness. The media will always label us falsely but that doesn’t excuse us from treading the rough waters of morality. We are pro-Life. Stay pro-Life and never hide or shade it. Let uneducated single women support state sponsored executions. Just let them know that’s what it is and that’s what they condon. If they have a problem with that then let them know it’s their problem not yours. This isn’t a facist country yet so don’t hide or shade your beliefs. Going underground isn’t how martyrs win fame. Just remember, these people will always disagree/hate you. Nothing changes except how you confront such hate and bigotry. You don’t need to go on crusades but don’t surrender to your neighbors, coworkers, or even bosses. They will NEVER vote with you, but they at least will have to respect you.
I agree, Baklava. We’re choosing a CEO – literally – not a model, not a hearthrob, not a Messiah, not a guru, not a new American Idol, not a shrink, not a spiritual figure who will give empty lives meaning.
Does the CEO of a Fortune 500 company fulfill any of those roles for anyone? No. Why should the CEO of the country be any different?
Speaking of buyer’s remorse…here in Minnesota I’m perceiving an interesting phenomenon: the disappearance of Obama bumper stickers.
During the election season I saw 20 or 30 cars or more on the highways each day sporting Obama stickers in various permutations.
Since the bailout season began, the number has been dropping. Today I saw 5. Total. Plus several Kerry/Edwards stickers, a bright green Wellstone sticker, and one that read “Bush’s Third Term: McCain.”
My 16 year old son and I agree that having an Obama sticker on your car these days is as good as driving around with the word “Moron!” spray-painted on your six.
I am not surprised in the least. I don’t know how anyone could’ve seriously thought he was a centrist.
Generally, women who hate Palin are single and unattractive. I mean hate her, not just didn’t vote for her. I generally find that the women who scream the loudest about women’s rights (AKA abortion) are those who have the least chance of ever getting knocked up.
Sorta like who yells the most at pro athletes? The uncoordinated losers who never actually played the game.
I love Palin. And I’m not an attractive woman. I’m an attractive flaky and nutty pastry.