Another Failed Presidency

Another Failed Presidency

An article from American Thinker by Geoffrey P. Hunt

Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson. In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out. Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China 20.

But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.

But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of unprecedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on?
No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, and Reagan.

But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, and is historically illiterate and woefully small minded for the size of the task--all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience.

In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012: "For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too."

Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.

---

Dr. Hunt is a social and cultural anthropologist. He has had nearly 30 years experience in planning, conducting, and managing research in the field of youth studies, and drug and alcohol research. Currently Dr. Hunt is a Senior Research Scientist at the Institute for Scientific Analysis and the Principal Investigator on three National Institutes on Health projects. He is also a writer for American Thinker.

.

Dan on Veteran's Day

As we approach another Veterans’ Day I would like to take the opportunity to expound on a few thoughts related to our service men and women past and present.

The Founders understood the necessity of having an army and a navy. Provision for these protectors of our freedoms was set down in the Constitution. Since the early days of the Republic we have, at times, revered and vilified those protectors.

My service was lack-luster at best but I am proud to have served with true heroes who fought selflessly to protect all of us from those intent on denying us our freedoms as set down in the Constitution. That document is unique to the United States. No other country can boast of its like. For that reason it is incumbent upon all of us to work diligently in its defense; but those who work the hardest are the brave men and women who lay their lives on the line every day. To them it is just a matter of doing what is right; it’s no big deal.

We have all received the emails about the Marine escorting the remains of a fallen comrade, or the stories about a soldier charging down the murderous barrage of gunfire to save his down buddy, or fighting house to house to free a town from the thugs trying to impose their warped ideology on the populous. As Admiral Nimitz said of the Marines on Iwo Jima, “Uncommon valor was a common virtue.” Countless stories of valor have come from Iraq and Afghanistan over the past eight years. These humble warriors simply have a job to do and they do it – better than anyone else in the world.

I would challenge all of you to stop and say “Thank you” whenever you see one on the street, in the grocery store or at a gas station. Chances are they will be embarrassed or surprised when you say it, but they will appreciate the thought.

Last week, a friend sent a You Tube link to a recording of The Ten Tenors singing “Here’s to the Heroes.” If you haven’t watched it, I highly recommend it. Even if you have, it is well worth watching a couple of dozen times.

To all of you young men and women who now constitute the new “Great Generation” I say Thank You.

As always, your comments and discussion are welcome.

Daniel C. Lanotte

Going forward with a mandate!!!

---

By Kent Clawson - Posted on 04 November 2009

What a night for D-49!!!

After months of manufactured turmoil, in the shadow of an apparent recall effort, and with so much alleged support, the Recall detractors lose big (and almost completely). With the election of Danielle Lindorf, Chris Wright, and almost Donahue Quashie, the mandate has been delivered. For the Harold family and Jackie Vialpandos, it must be crushing to go from a Spring lined with almost unenviable political traction and fodder full of apparent success finally waiting to be harvested, ready to take over the Board, to instead placing only one of the their endorsed candidates (and that one by such a narrow margin that it must have been a sigh of relief to have the final votes counted).

Ms. Lindorf in particular should feel greatly emboldened since spurious statement challenged her commitment, experience, even her religion!!! Instead on this night she finds herself as the new record holder for District 49 candidates after securing a place on 2 out of 3 ballots delivered.

Will this silence the detractors? No, but their shrillness will be tempered by the fact that they failed in their bid and DO NOT represent the majority of District 49 voters. They DO NOT embody the principles that the average District 49 voter embraces.

This election was a defining moment in District 49. It will be reviewed in the not to distant future as the election that empowered the candidates of change. The detractors will no longer be able to pass their conspiratorial vagaries' as those of the silent majority.

It is a great day in District 49 and I wish all of the candidates my best, and I wish all of the victors (including Tammy Harold) success on their new journey.

Kent

Why the Peaceful Majority is Irrelevant

by Paul E. Marek

History lessons are often incredibly simple.

I used to know a man whose family were German aristocracy prior to World War II. They owned a number of large industries and estates. I asked him how many German people were true Nazis, and the answer he gave has stuck with me and guided my attitude toward fanaticism ever since.

“Very few people were true Nazis,” he said, “but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories.”

We are told again and again by experts and talking heads that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unquantified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars world wide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behea
The fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.
d, murder, or execute honor killings. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard, quantifiable fact is that the “peaceful majority” is the “silent majority,” and it is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people. The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a war-mongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across Southeast Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians - most killed by sword, shovel and bayonet. And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery? Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were “peace loving”?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt; yet, for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by the fanatics. Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because, like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.

Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Bosnians, Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians and many others, have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late. As for us, watching it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts: the fanatics who threaten our way of life.

----------------------------------

Democrat Jackie Vialpando and Tammy Harold, run together for D49 Falcon school board

It's Time for School Board Elections in Falcon D49

I was asked to get some facts on what is known on the public record about each of these candidates. These two Liberal activists generate the most questions from D49 voters.

Jackie Vialpando (D)

Registered Democrat.

Works for school district 11. Has served on many D49 committees. Has a Daughter at Sand Creek HS. Handed out flyers to students and parents in front of a D49 high school that resulted in a mass protest and a partial shut down of the school.

Advocated for and helped organize the failed Recall attempt of Director Kent Clawson.

Received the Largest single contribution in D49 history from the FTEA (TEACHERs UNION) in her unsuccessful bid for school board in 2005.

Has publically stated that Christmas Break is unconstitutional.

Candidate information:

http://district49.blogspot.com/2009/09/democrat-jackie-vialpando-answers-to.html

---------------------------------------------------------

Tammy Harold (U)

Tammy Harold, wife of former Democrat activist Tom Harold, are both now registered Unaffiliated.

Former member of the D49 DAAC. Has children at Skyview Middle school, and Stetson Elementary.

Advocated for and helped organize the failed Recall attempt of D49 Director Kent Clawson. (Kent Clawson was endorsed and supported by the Republican Club of Falcon.)

Tammy and Jackie are like minded "progressives" who support each other 100%.

“Tammy stands behind me 100% and I stand behind her 100%; and we both stand behind Jackie 100%” Democrat community organizer Tom Harold - Gazette 8/1/2009.

http://www.csindy.com/colorado/dems-miss-an-opportunity/Content?oid=1327992

------------------------------------------

Does OBAMA Lie ?

Return to the Article

September 18, 2009

Does He Lie?

By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON -- You lie? No. Barack Obama doesn't lie. He's too subtle for that. He ... well, you judge.

Herewith three examples within a single speech -- the now-famous Obama-Wilson "you lie" address to Congress on health care -- of Obama's relationship with truth.

(1) "I will not sign (a plan)," he solemnly pledged, "if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future. Period."

Wonderful. The president seems serious, veto-ready, determined to hold the line. Until, notes Harvard economist Greg Mankiw, you get to Obama's very next sentence: "And to prove that I'm serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don't materialize."

This apparent strengthening of the pledge brilliantly and deceptively undermines it. What Obama suggests is that his plan will require mandatory spending cuts if the current rosy projections prove false. But there's absolutely nothing automatic about such cuts. Every Congress is sovereign. Nothing enacted today will force a future Congress or a future president to make any cuts in any spending, mandatory or not.

Just look at the supposedly automatic Medicare cuts contained in the Sustainable Growth Rate formula enacted to constrain out-of-control Medicare spending. Every year since 2003, Congress has waived the cuts.

Mankiw puts the Obama bait-and-switch in plain language. "Translation: I promise to fix the problem. And if I do not fix the problem now, I will fix it later, or some future president will, after I am long gone. I promise he will. Absolutely, positively, I am committed to that future president fixing the problem. You can count on it. Would I lie to you?"

(2) And then there's the famous contretemps about health insurance for illegal immigrants. Obama said they would not be insured. Well, all four committee-passed bills in Congress allow illegal immigrants to take part in the proposed Health Insurance Exchange.

But more importantly, the problem is that laws are not self-enforcing. If they were, we'd have no illegal immigrants because, as I understand it, it's illegal to enter the United States illegally. We have laws against burglary, too. But we also provide for cops and jails on the assumption that most burglars don't voluntarily turn themselves in.

When Republicans proposed requiring proof of citizenship, the Democrats twice voted that down in committee. Indeed, after Rep. Joe Wilson's "You lie!" shout-out, the Senate Finance Committee revisited the language of its bill to prevent illegal immigrants from getting any federal benefits. Why would the Finance Committee fix a nonexistent problem?

(3) Obama said he would largely solve the insoluble cost problem of Obamacare by eliminating "hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud" from Medicare.

That's not a lie. That's not even deception. That's just an insult to our intelligence. Waste, fraud and abuse -- Meg Greenfield once called this phrase "the dread big three" -- as the all-purpose piggy bank for budget savings has been a joke since Jimmy Carter first used it in 1977.

Moreover, if half a trillion is waiting to be squeezed painlessly out of Medicare, why wait for health care reform? If, as Obama repeatedly insists, Medicare overspending is breaking the budget, why hasn't he gotten started on the painless billions in "waste and fraud" savings?

Obama doesn't lie. He merely elides, gliding from one dubious assertion to another. This has been the story throughout his whole health care crusade. Its original premise was that our current financial crisis was rooted in neglect of three things -- energy, education and health care. That transparent attempt to exploit Emanuel's Law -- a crisis is a terrible thing to waste -- failed for health care because no one is stupid enough to believe that the 2008 financial collapse was caused by a lack of universal health care.

So on to the next gambit: selling health care reform as a cure for the deficit. When that was exploded by the Congressional Budget Office's demonstration of staggering Obamacare deficits, Obama tried a new tack: selling his plan as revenue-neutral insurance reform -- until the revenue neutrality is exposed as phony future cuts and chimerical waste and fraud.

Obama doesn't lie. He implies, he misdirects, he misleads -- so fluidly and incessantly that he risks transmuting eloquence into mere slickness.

Slickness wasn't fatal to "Slick Willie" Clinton because he possessed a winning, near irresistible charm. Obama's persona is more cool, distant, imperial. The charming scoundrel can get away with endless deception; the righteous redeemer cannot.