The Reasons Behind Obama’s Failures

In early October, President Obama warned his supporters to “make no mistake: these policies [of mine] are on the ballot. Every single one of them.” After the November elections, he probably wishes he hadn’t said that. The scale of the liberal defeat is remarkable, as are its causes.

In 2008, Obama had long coattails: When he took office in 2009, the House of Representatives had 256 Democrats. In 2015, it probably will have 188.

But the underlying reasons for Obama’s failure run deeper than the normal swings of the political pendulum. Four of them are vital. The first is that a good part of Obama’s appeal in 2008 was that he was supposedly above politics. He was compared to Abraham Lincoln, a canny politician we now misremember as being above the partisan fray.

This was nonsense. If you want to get anywhere in politics, you have to be a politician. And the essence of politics has not changed since Aristotle’s time. That doesn’t mean that politicians are all liars. But it does mean that anyone who looks for salvation in a politician is going to be disappointed. Obama was hyped so high in 2008 that he had nowhere to go but down.

Another reason for Obama’s failure was that he sought, in his words, to begin “the work of remaking America.” The entire American political system was designed by the Founding Fathers to frustrate his plans. The Constitution, with its checks and balances and its separation of powers, was intended to limit the government and prevent transient majorities from having their way.

Within those limits, Obama has actually – and from a conservative perspective, regrettably – done a lot: Obamacare itself is proof of that. But inevitably, having set out to, as he claimed, fundamentally transform the United States, Obama has come up short. He has increasingly resorted to unilateral executive actions precisely because he resents the system’s constraints, but that just feeds the narrative that he’s more emperor than president.

The third reason for Obama’s failure is that most of his ideas were wrong. There were no shovel-ready jobs waiting for the stimulus spending. Fixing health care did not require ripping apart the insurance market. The answer to a weak economy was not expensive green energy.

Iran was not waiting for an outstretched hand of friendship. Russia wanted a reset for malicious reasons of its own, not because it wanted to be our friend. Al-Qaida was not on the run. The Arab Spring was not a new democratic dawn. The European Union was not a force for prosperity. Israel was not the reason the Middle East is so troubled.

Everyone makes mistakes. But it’s hard to bounce back from so many fundamental errors, especially when – and this was Obama’s fourth error – the administration has been terrible at the boring business of being competent.

The fiasco of Obamacare was bad enough. But then there was the Veterans Administration scandal, the Secret Service’s prostitute parties, the Internal Revenue Service targeting of conservative groups, Ebola and the Justice Department’s gun-running into Mexico, to name only a few of the screw-ups that have tainted the administration.

We should never attribute to malice what can plausibly be explained by incompetence. And conservatives aren’t shocked when governments make mistakes: It’s what we expect them to do. But incompetence wears more heavily on liberals, because they are the ones who always want government to do more. The evidence is overwhelming that government can’t do it well.

Obama came into office wanting, in his words, to make government cool again. But as respected U.S. political analyst Michael Barone points out, since Watergate and with the exception of the 9/11 aftermath, trust in government peaked under Ronald Reagan, precisely because Reagan sought to limit government. Under Obama, it has fallen to near-historic lows.

The conservative triumphs in 2010 and 2014 have not irrevocably set America’s destiny: there are no permanent victories in politics. But there was a fundamental contradiction between the apolitical fantasy that Obama embodied and the real-world desire of the American people to support liberal policies, especially when incompetently administered.

Once the fantasy wore off, reality set in. And for liberals, reality is often bad news.

Originally appeared in the Yorkshire Post.

 

America On The Edge of a Second Revolutionary War

What an editorial piece from a Canadian.

Marc Patrone,
December 04, 2014
Sun News network:
America is on the edge of a second revolutionary war. It may not be bloody like
the first one, but it will be hugely important. Some might suggest it’s more a
civil war, but with liberty and the constitution hanging in the balance,
revolution seems a more appropriate comparison.

There are no British troops or monarchy to fight this time. The ‘shot heard
around the world’ wasn’t fired from a musket, it came from the ballot box.
Americans have taken a long hard look at the kind of fundamental transformation
promised by Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrat party and they want nothing to
do with it.

The Republican victory suggests Americans are more than just unhappy with the
direction the country is headed. Such was the devastating scope of the
electoral debacle for the Democrats that it appears Americans are mobilizing for
war against the Obama agenda. They are only now truly beginning to
understand the threat to liberty he presents.

What’s so deeply troubling, albeit not entirely unexpected, is the disdain, arrogance
and contempt with which this president dismissed the results.
“So to everyone who voted, I want you to know I hear you. To the two-thirds of voters
who chose not to participate in the process yesterday, I hear you, too,” he
said. Meaning what? He seems to be suggesting that by not voting,
the majority of Americans agree with what he’s doing. Terrifying? You
bet.

It’s taken six years, but the ugly truth about Obama’s contemptuous
attitudes toward the people who elected him twice is becoming all too evident.
Lame duck? Guess again. The man probably realizes that a chance to remake
the U.S. according to his far left view of the world may not come around
again. His time is running out. Obama’s ‘nuclear’ option is amnesty for
millions of illegals.

He expects those illegals will become dependents of the state, thus stacking the
electoral deck in favour of Democrats by promising the new ‘wards of the state’
a suite of entitlements.
The depth of this destructive agenda is clear, rip off trillions in wealth (which
Obama believes was stolen anyway) and give it to those whom he considers
‘victims’ of capitalism. The beneficiaries will naturally reward the
progressive left with voter support into perpetuity. Viola, the progressive
dream of a one-party state is realized.

This has been decades in the making. The left has infiltrated, corrupted, and
subverted the institutions that had, up to now, served as pillars supporting
freedom, democracy, and prosperity. The bulk of what was once a free and
independent media has been reduced to little more than an arm of the
Democrats. That tens of millions of Americans are flocking to Fox News,
Conservative talk radio and online news sites is heartening but doesn’t change
the fact most TV, print media outlets are in an advanced state of putrid,
cancerous liberal rot. The same cancer has undermined the school system,
‘big labour,’ the environmental movement, and the Hollywood culture
machine. Even capitalism itself has succumbed to the lure of easy
government money, power and cronyism.

So who is left to fight for freedom? The rest of America. Obama will attempt to
ram through amnesty, climate change, wealth redistribution and he will ignore
the constitution to do it. Republicans have assured Obama impeachment is off the
table. And so the battle lines are drawn. Fasten your seatbelts Canada,
we’re about to get a front-row seat to the battle for the soul of America and
indeed the free world. Let’s hope that, as in the first revolutionary war,
that the right side wins. If it doesn’t, we all lose.

Is Loretta Lynch the New Gatekeeper?

By Dr. Orly Taitz, ESQ

I started investigating Loretta Lynch, Obama’s pick for Attorney General and immediately could see an interesting connection. I read an article stating that when Loretta Lynch started Harvard, she co-founded an African-American sorority. There was only one other girl in this sorority, Sharon Malone. The name rang a bell..

The name of the wife of AG Holder is Sharon Malone, she is the sister of a known civil rights leader Vivien Malone -Jones (one of 2 black students who enrolled in all white University of Alabama).

I checked the age: both were born in 1959 and both went to Harvard at the same time. There were very few African American students in Harvard in 1977-1981, so I am rather certain that Loretta Lynch is an old college friend of Sharon Malone, the wife of the current AG Eric Holder.

Why this connection is important? Holder will be investigated by Congress for totally lawless gun trafficking to Mexican drug cartels in Fast and Furious, IRS scandal, VA scandal, DOJ, NSA, EPA, FEC and other scandals. Most importantly, Holder covered up Obama’s use of a stolen CT Social Security number of Harrison J. Bounel 042-68-4425 and Obama’s use of bogus IDs.

It seems that a long time college friend of Holder’s wife was picked up as a gate keeper to continue all of the cover up by Holder and shield Holder and Obama from criminal prosecution.