During a question and answer session with House Republicans on January 29, 2010, President Obama expressed his frustration with how issues get framed in American politics:
That’s why I say, if we’re going to frame these debates in ways that allow us to solve them, then we can’t start off by figuring out A, who’s to blame; B, how can we make the American people afraid of the other side? And unfortunately that’s how our politics works right now. And that’s how a lot of our discussion works. That’s how we start off – every time somebody speaks in Congress, the first thing they do, they stand up and all the talking points … it’s all tactics. It’s not solving problems. So the question is, at what point do we have a serious conversation about Medicare and its long-term liability, or a serious … conversation about Social Security, or a serious conversation about budget and debt in which we’re not simply trying to position ourselves politically? That’s what I’m committed to doing. We won’t agree all the time in getting it done, but I’m committed to doing it.
These are such high-minded words. What’s worth noting is that they come from a man who actually has done everything in his power to impede a serious conversation about Medicare and its long-term liability, to say nothing about the deficit and the debt — including unleashing a flood of misleading charges and savage accusations against the Ryan budget. Not only has the president not done anything to address our entitlement crisis; he’s slandered those who are willing to show the courage he lacks.
Bear in mind, too, that Mr. Problem Solver has made what every serious person knows is a gimmick (the so-called Buffett Rule), what the New York Times calls the “centerpiece” of his re-election campaign. He is doing everything he can to distract and divide Americans in order to keep the focus off his record and his failure to address our deep structural problems (see everything from Obama weighing in on the Rush Limbaugh-Sandra Fluke matter to demanding that Mitt Romney release a dozen years of his tax returns).
I must say, it’s particularly (if unintentionally) comical to have Obama complain about those who blame others – as this splendid new RNC ad makes clear. Has any president ever blamed so many of his failures on others — whether it’s his predecessors, acts of nature, world events, news outlets, advances in technology, or just plain bad luck?
As for not making the America people afraid of the other side: how does that square with Obama’s claims that the other side (in this instance, the GOP) is comprised of members of the “Flat Earth Society” and have embraced a budget that demonstrates their “Social Darwinism”? Or that Republicans are indifferent to the suffering of autistic and Down syndrome children? Or that Republican members of Congress are always putting “party ahead of country”?
What we’re seeing with Obama is a complicated game of what psychiatrists refer to as projection – in this case, the president projecting on himself an imaginary set of qualities that he not only doesn’t possess, but to which his actions and words are antithetical. The president seemingly cannot keep from projecting his failures onto others.
What the last three-plus years have shown us is that Obama has a remarkable capacity to avoid unsettling thoughts. In this case, Obama has the chronic habit of lecturing others about the importance of civility and intellectual seriousness even as he contributes so much to rank partisanship and intellectual dishonesty.
The president envisions himself as a statesman even though he often conducts himself like a political hack. Is it possible the president is blind to all this? Is the cognitive dissonance simply too much for him to bear? Or does he know exactly what he’s doing and just doesn’t care about his layer upon layer of hypocrisy and cynicism?
Whatever we’re dealing with, it’s not particularly comforting.
So now Peter Wehner thinks that Obama is either afflicted by "projection" or more cynicism? Can we have a ban on calling someone a "cynic"? It is a compliment in our culture. Hypocrisy isn't much worse–which politicians can't be described as hypocrites? Can you please just call Obama what he is: a liar.
Yep, he's a liar. I'm good with that too. The amazing thing is that the divisive polarization that Obama peddles has insulated him from the criticism he deserves. With such division, his "side" has simply ignored valid criticisms. The sheer volume of pettiness, demagoguery, angry rhetoric coupled with the pathetic "recovery" and failing legislation, along with the scandals that should dominate news cycles, all should point to a rout in November. I think we might still have it as I do have faith in the American people, but if the election is as close as some are suggesting, then I my faith in people to make the right decision, when they are by themselves behind the voting curtain will be surely startled.
cognitive dissonance is the phrase, for sure. and it's not just Obama: it's the people who support him as well. I work with one woman who literally cannot talk about Rush Limbaugh's "slut" slur without hyperventilating…but Bill Maher is just fine with her. n nObama has a very high opinion of himself. I wouldn't be surprised if he truly believed he was being "civil" and everyone else was wrong. indeed, not comforting at all.
When I read about Obama's comment about his being a scout for good vacation spots for Michelle, I thought he was being ironic re the St Louis interview but when I saw the video he wasn't. So there's the dilemma. Could he be that tone deaf? n nThe simple answer is that his words have no meaning. He says whatever sounds good at the moment. Truth or lies are irrelevant. He answers questions with 10 minute word salads which have no meaning. Since everyone just wants him to shut up no one cares. n nHe has some kind of mental illness that seems to go beyond severe narcissism. I've been following him for years and I can't figure him out.
It isn't just that Obama is the issue, but that he is a liar and unethical. I hope Romney's campaign staff aren't just thinking that people will vote for Romney if they explain how Obama's policies aren't as good as Romney's BECAUSE THAT GIVES HIM A PASS on being an unethical liar. Quotes like those in this article need to be part of what the campaign puts forth and then the facts of what the Democrats have done instead. It isn't even so much that Republican plans are so much better than Obama's plans (although they are), it's that any plan at all, any action at all, is better than doing absolutely nothing so that you can get the MSM to put the blame on a fantasy of Republican gridlock. Campaign against Obama — not his policies (because he lies about them and the MSM calls his lies facts).
Rmoney's very first campaign video concerning Obama used the President's words and dishonestly portrayed them as the very opposite of their context, and when confronted with the blatant fraud, said that it was okay to do it when campaigning. Yet you and the other commenters here are more than willing to ignore that instance and the many others where Romney and his primary opponents lied through their teeth, because you simply don't care anymore, as long as a Dem. is in a leadership position, you're willing to use any means at all to gain power. How despicable.
You don't have to YELL. We could hear you just fine in lower case.