It reminds me of the oft quoted statement from Casablanca “I’m shocked, shocked, that there is gambling in this establishment.” Or in this case that people are pissed off at the incumbents. Hello! Is anyone home?! Have you been listening? You’re surprised? What planet are you from?
The truth is Obama was elected because people wanted change in Washington and he has given them more of the same. He has let Pelosi and Reid run the political ship and they have done so in typical we-have-the-power-now fashion. Americans dislike polarization. Americans dislike arrogance. Americans dislike it when the party in power rides roughshod over everyone and ignores the voice of the minority, whomever they may be. That was the message when they brought the democratic congress and Senate in and that was the message when they voted for “change you can believe in.” Unfortunately its turned out to be “change that doesn’t exist” and the electorate is angry. The truth is the emperor has no clothes no matter what his advisors tell us about all the “changes” that have occurred.
Democrats have shown their arrogance by ignoring these facts, and the political climate will punish them like the desert sun punishes a traveler with no water. Obama and his posse believe that “getting things done” is all that is required. Pass the health care legislation, pass financial reform and that shows that we can get things done. Uh…hey…Pres…guess what, if my party was in power with an unassailable majority, I could “get things done” too. Especially if I let the congressional leadership dictate what gets done.
The dems need to realize they are going to get crushed in the election in November. And its their own fault. All Obama had to do was show some leadership, rein in his own party, make some compromises from the very beginning to unify the country by getting things done on a consensus basis. It would have been harder and there would have been a lot of whining from the extremes, but his popularity would have endured and congress would have been much better regarded. He would have strengthened his power and widened his base. Instead he chose the easy way – the usual political way – the way of the Washington status quo – the way its always been done. He chose political expediency over the good of the country. And now he’s surprised that the country is pissed off? He’ll probably blame it on Wall Street or the media or bloggers or anything but his own ineptitude where the blame truly lies, just as it did with his predecessor who made all the same moves. The country didn’t like George Bush and they don’t like Barack Obama, for the exact same reasons. People believed and are now disappointed. The emperor had no clothes when Bush was in office, and Obama has the same tailor.
The scenario the author paints is basically accurate. However, I must take exception to the contention that Mr. Obama has given us "change that doesn't exist." I propose instead that what Mr. Obama has changed is the rate of change. In other words, the US was well on its way to perdition before Mr. Obama took office. Under his able ministrations, the country is moving much more quickly down the aforementioned path.
If nothing else, it will be interesting to see what form the "crushing" alluded to takes. If it amounts to voting the other party's candidates back into power then it will be a clear sign that the electorate has still not learned its lesson. If we start to see non-lawyer, independent candidates and third party candidates being elected to high office in significant numbers, then we can assume that the fever has begun to break.
If the compulsive ping-ponging of Democratic and Republican administrations continues unabated for too long, I expect to see increasing civil unrest and ultimately civil war. Whatever happens, it will be an extremely interesting, albeit extremely expensive, to show to watch.
Posted by: Richard Bartholomew | June 02, 2010 at 11:38 PM