If you want to gain a better appreciation for the fantasy world that President Obama is trying to create in order to win re-election, you couldn’t do much better than to read this New York Times story. The thrust of the article is that the president is planning to step up his offensive against an unpopular Congress, concluding that he cannot pass any major legislation in 2012 because of Republican hostility to his agenda. He intends to “hammer the theme of economic justice for ordinary Americans rather than continue his legislative battles with Congress,” said Joshua R. Earnest, the president’s deputy press secretary, previewing the White House’s strategy.
But here’s where things get interesting. “In terms of the president’s relationship with Congress in 2012,” Earnest said at a briefing, “the president is no longer tied to Washington, D.C.”
True enough. Obama isn’t tied to Washington, D.C.; it’s more accurate to say he embodies it. He is, after all, the nation’s chief executive. He lives in the White House. His desk is located in the West Wing. And his home and work area code is 202. Obama is primus inter pares of the political class.
Moreover, Obama, during the first two years of his presidency, was enormously successful in getting his agenda enacted into law. He got almost everything he wanted, which some of us believe is precisely the problem. And to the extent that we’re facing a “do-nothing” Congress today, the responsibility lies with the Democratically-controlled Senate, not the GOP House. These days the Senate (which has not passed a budget in more than 900 days) is the place legislation goes to die.
But to really enter the Twilight Zone, consider these two priceless sentences from the Times story: “Winning a full-year extension of the payroll tax, Mr. Earnest said, will still be a top priority. He noted that House Republicans were now also arguing that it should be extended for a year, after some initially opposed extending it at all.”
Come again? On December 13, the GOP House passed a full-year extension of the payroll tax cut – and was promptly criticized by – you guessed it — the president. Obama favored a much shorter, two-month extension. House Republicans, under intense political pressure, eventually agreed to the two-month extension. Now the White House is declaring a full-year extension is a “top priority.” Yet as recently as three weeks ago the opposition to the president’s “top priority” came not from House Republicans but from Obama himself.
We are now reaching the point in which the president is running a truly post-modern campaign, in which there is no objective truth but simply narrative. Obama’s campaign isn’t simply distorting the facts; it is inverting them. This kind of thing isn’t unusual to find in the academy. But to see a president and his campaign so thoroughly deconstruct truth in order to maintain power is quite rare. The sheer audacity of Obama’s cynicism is a wonder of the modern world.
Peter, are you afraid of Obama? You must be, because you keep referring to his lying as "cynicism" Being a cynic in our culture is not at all a bad thing. It is neutral at worst, positive to some. A liar is a much more accurate word to describe Obama.
The word cynical has two meanings:
1. Like or characteristic of a cynic; distrusting or disparaging the motives of others.
2. Showing contempt for accepted standards of honesty or morality by one’s actions, especially by actions that exploit the scruples of others.
The first definition is what I believe you had in mind; the second fits Obama’s actions to a T.
The Republicans are opposed to passing the payroll tax cut. You also didn't mention any of the other items attached to the year long extension they did pass. Why not? Cynicism is a way of life for Republicans. They talk about reforming Social Security and Medicare, not eliminating them they way they want to. If Republicans talked realistically about what they believe, they would never win an election. Listen carefully to the Ayn Rand fan Paul Ryan. He's a rich boy who thinks he knows how this world works, that there will only be takers if we keep any New Deal programs. Simplistic stupidity from a silver spooner. Keep exposing them Obama.
Were you trying to be funny because the only thing you got right was your name if that really is yours? Bye, I have to go count my money.
Interesting. You understand that the only reason SS will not go broke is eventually it comes down to that the US prints it's own money. If it didnt it would be a ponzie. You're arguing for a continuation of a unsustainable program. Your comment is the poster child for simplistic stupidity.
Opposed to the same payroll tax cut that funds the already underfunded social security program and the other item attached to the year long extension that was passed was the requirement to make a decision on the keystone pipeline project. If you dummycrats talked realistically about what you believe you scum would never get elected. Why are you so opposed to me having control over my wealth and income? nFurthermore jackass when you talk about silver spooners the name at the top of the list should be the bastard who has never held a job that you voted for.
if you truly believe this and are not a piad shill for the libertards, then may i suggest a stay at Baltimore famous Sheppard-Pratt hospital, they work wonders with deluisonal problems.
All this stuff the President is prepared to go to the mat for is funded by borrowed money siphoned from other borrowed money. It's one thing to take from Peter to pay for Paul, bur when Peter is already a dollar short to John those transfers look even less impressive.
Obama was raised in a parallel universe and has lived in it ever since. Unfortunately it isn't real and we are the ones to suffer. n
So a quicker way to say that is that our President is a lying POS.
Mr. Wehner – The only way O gets away with this narrative is with a compliant press that leaves unmentioned anything that doesn't fit its own views of the news. The NYT's motto on its masthead should be: All the news that fits our views.
I've been saying and expecting this characterization to become commonplace since before he was elected. My prediction in early 2008 was that it would happen before the election — that the Axelrod/Chicago chutzpah would become evident before the election. Boy was I wrong about that. America took a bit longer to figure it out. They needed to see how devastating the chutzpah can be when cut loose nationally as much as it long has been locally here in Chicago. n nChutzpah is the Chicago way. To quote Bogart, "When I slap you you'll take it and like it." You slap the citizens and see how many roll over and pee for you. If most do, then you exponentially harden the next slap. n nWhat Obama may not have counted on, IMO, depends on my theory of Illinois voters. I strongly suspect that many are secretly — or openly, in some cases — admirers of corrupt pols. "Man, he sure got his. Lucky dog." And they keep voting for 'em because they share they same aspiration, they're cut of the same cloth. Is that a cynical view of Chicagoans? Yep. But what's the alternative? To posit their sheer stupidity? Whatever. It's hard to explain a people who so seem to deserve the leaders they have. Emmanuel as mayor seems to have inherited a double spirit of Daley's capacity to broach risible non sequiturs when pressed by the press (rare enough). And these are merely accepted and reported — doubtless to the mere nods of Chicago voters. n nSo. Weird. n nMy hope is that Americans at large are not as quick to roll over and pee when the Obama machine slaps them and expects them to like it. He's done that to his leftist base, because he expects they'll do nothing but vote for him anyway. He's done that to the right because, as the touted post-partisan uniter said a mere couple days after inauguration in ostensible negotiations with Republicans, "I won." n nAnd now Dems don't dare primary the guy because they backed themselves into a corner by characterizing opposition to Obama as racist. It'd be to laugh if it weren't to cry for how far we've plummeted on this guy's watch as he's politicized federal agencies, destroyed the DoJ, etc. n nMust . . . stop . . . ranting
Our situation is also a reflection of the divide in society between liberal and conservative thought. I struggle with whether conservatives could ever be as DIRTY as Chicago politics requires.
Things that make me go Hummmmmm…. n nOne thing the author of this piece seems not to want to admit, but rather wants to call the "audacity of Obama’s cynicism" – it is that the POTUS is nothing more than a liar. I guess in a postmodern world being a liar is really nothing more than being cynical. I find that conclusion rather cynical!
Thank God for the internet. nIts unblinking eye and its prodigious and unfailing memory will – from this point forward – expose rank political hypocrisy unfiltered and without "spin" be they donkey or elephant. n nLook into past comments and video speeches by the President Obama. nHis Icarus rhetoric and demagoguery are there for anyone – and everyone to see and hear. n nNo longer can Newt & Nancy (or Tom Cruise) ever claim couch amnesia syndrome. n nThe web-based all seeing political eye will forever change democracy – be it for both good – and bad. n nAnd the good news for now is this: nthe noisy and shrinking sycophant Obama journ-0-list water-boys and girls are being drowned and consumed. n nThat alone is worth celebrating. n
Barokeydoke thinks he's king of the $h!thouse….which may yet turn out to be the case.
What do you expect from a community organizer? Obama's meaningless career as an agitator among the poor had little or no results. Oh, I take that back, he acted as an attorney in Chicago to make bank give home loans to people who were not creditworthy or could not afford to make payments. So, his grand idea of community reinvestment was the reason for the bundled bad loans that led to Fannie/Freddie failure. What a leader.