Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

Now the true Obama can shed his skin.....

Posted by on Jan. 25, 2013 at 6:55 AM
  • 132 Replies
2 moms liked this
Rush was right
  
Rush Limbaugh (left) and President Barack Obama (right) are shown in this composite photo. | AP Photos

Obama's an unabashed liberal determined to shift our politics, the author writes. | AP Photo

By RICH LOWRY | 1/23/13 10:56 PM EST

There should have been something for everyone in President Barack Obama's second inaugural address. For liberals, a full-throated call to arms. For conservatives, vindication.

Obama settled once and for all the debate over his place on the political spectrum and his political designs. He's an unabashed liberal determined to shift our politics and our country irrevocably to the left. In other words, Obama's foes - if you put aside the birthers and sundry other lunatics - always had him pegged correctly.

If you listened to Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, you got a better appreciation of Obama's core than by reading the president's friends and sophisticated interpreters, for whom he was either a moderate or a puzzle yet to be fully worked out.

Rush, et al., doubted that Obama could have emerged from the left-wing milieu of Hyde Park, become in short order the most liberal U.S. senator, run to Hillary Clinton's left in the 2008 primaries and yet have been a misunderstood centrist all along. They heeded his record and his boast in 2008 about "fundamentally transforming the United States of America," and discounted the unifying tone of his rhetoric as transparent salesmanship.

They got him right, even as he duped the Obamacons, played the press and fooled his sympathizers. David Brooks, the brilliant and winsome New York Times columnist, has been promising the arrival of the true, pragmatic Obama for years now. In his column praising the second inaugural address, he appeared finally to give up. "Now he is liberated," Brooks wrote. "Now he has picked a team and put his liberalism on full display."

Paul Krugman, also of The New York Times, wrote blog posts over the past few years titled "Obama the Moderate" and "Obama the Moderate Conservative." For Krugman, Obama could never have proved himself a liberal short of an order to liquidate the kulaks. Even he, though, wrote of the second inaugural: "Obama has never been this clear before about what he stands for."

After years of portraying Obama as cautiously picking through warmed-over Republican ideas, an Eisenhower Republican miscast by his opponents as a liberal ideologue, Obama's allies exulted in his open embrace of liberal ideology.

The media, as a general matter, loved the speech. They praised Obama's post-partisanship and now they praise his post-post-partisanship. They aren't strictly contradicting themselves because the content is the same. In his old post-partisan phase, the president passed a nearly $1 trillion stimulus, a universal health care bill sought by the left for decades and a massive regulation of Wall Street. All prior to his "liberation."

One theory is that Obama has been forced into his unabashed liberalism by the irrational recalcitrance of Republicans. But you don't advance a philosophically cogent view of American history in an inaugural address in a fit of pique. It wasn't Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell who made Obama believe that progressivism somehow represents the logical outgrowth of the American founding. It wasn't House Speaker John Boehner who made him weave Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security into the flag as the 51st, 52nd and 53rd stars.

Yes, Obama would have preferred to pass his agenda with Republican votes. That wouldn't have made the agenda any different or changed his conviction that History with a capital "H" runs in one direction - toward more government and social liberalism. If anything, it would have re-enforced his belief that his remaining opponents were outside the mainstream and deserving only of his pity or his scorn.

Obama is making his play, as the newest cliché goes, to become the liberal Reagan. As soon as he won reelection, we went from the Obama administration to the Obama years, and that is no mean feat. Becoming an enduringly transformational figure like Reagan, though, is a different proposition. He will have to leave office adored. He will have to cement his legacy by winning a de facto third term. His big policies will have to work, as Reagan's did in winning the Cold War and reviving the economy.

For all of the ideological ambition of his second inaugural, the policy agenda was thin or unachievable. Reducing wait-times at the polls isn't a major item. At the federal level, gay marriage is largely up to the courts. He will get much less on guns than he wants and probably nothing significant from Congress on climate change. His best chance for a breakthrough is on immigration, which divides Republicans.

The virtue of the address was making his intentions unmistakable, although Rush Limbaugh never mistook them in the first place.

Rich Lowry is editor of National Review.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/rush-limbaugh-was-right-86641_Page2.html#ixzz2IzGWteo3

by on Jan. 25, 2013 at 6:55 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
pvtjokerus
by Gold Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM
13 moms liked this

Those that have had their finger on the pulse have known this was the true Obama and his inaugural speech pretty much spells it out. Now there is no denying the facts but then again, there are those that don't believe in facts.......

Nysa
by Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:12 AM
10 moms liked this

I have always known he was very liberal. That is why I have always liked him... I don't think it was ever a secret.  I don't think he was elected because people didn't know who he was. I think he was elected because the majority of the population leans more liberal than conservitive now.  Also the fact that while many people see themselves as fiscal conservitives/social liberals, and the rights stance on social issues is so unmovable those who see the current  social issues as basic human rights issues will place more importance on those than fiscal stances. Until the right moves to a more center position on social issues they are not going to win again.  The republican party as portrayed by fox news/ rush limbaugh is over. I personally am not sad to see it go. 

pvtjokerus
by Gold Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 7:23 AM
10 moms liked this

 What I don't understand is why the left has to move America towards the failed European policies?  If they want them so badly why don't they just live there instead.  Let American stand for what it was built on instead of what it was not built on.


Quoting Nysa:

I have always known he was very liberal. That is why I have always liked him... I don't think it was ever a secret.  I don't think he was elected because people didn't know who he was. I think he was elected because the majority of the population leans more liberal than conservitive now.  Also the fact that while many people see themselves as fiscal conservitives/social liberals, and the rights stance on social issues is so unmovable those who see the current  social issues as basic human rights issues will place more importance on those than fiscal stances. Until the right moves to a more center position on social issues they are not going to win again.  The republican party as portrayed by fox news/ rush limbaugh is over. I personally am not sad to see it go. 


 

tnmomofive
by Silver Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 9:04 AM
11 moms liked this

 

It's been YEARS in the making.Younger generations have been indoctrinated by the liberal agenda through our public school and colleges.Then there are those who had never lived through a conservatives president besides GWB.I say let them have their progressive experiance find out the grass is not greener on the other side ..let it fall..and then us sensible ones can begin to rebuild in a proper fashion.

Quoting pvtjokerus:

 What I don't understand is why the left has to move America towards the failed European policies?  If they want them so badly why don't they just live there instead.  Let American stand for what it was built on instead of what it was not built on.

 

Quoting Nysa:

I have always known he was very liberal. That is why I have always liked him... I don't think it was ever a secret.  I don't think he was elected because people didn't know who he was. I think he was elected because the majority of the population leans more liberal than conservitive now.  Also the fact that while many people see themselves as fiscal conservitives/social liberals, and the rights stance on social issues is so unmovable those who see the current  social issues as basic human rights issues will place more importance on those than fiscal stances. Until the right moves to a more center position on social issues they are not going to win again.  The republican party as portrayed by fox news/ rush limbaugh is over. I personally am not sad to see it go. 

 

 


 

mikiemom
by Gold Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 9:13 AM
7 moms liked this

OH my fucking God, so saying we are going to work for equality for all is a bad thing now? SMDH

tnmomofive
by Silver Member on Jan. 25, 2013 at 9:17 AM
8 moms liked this

No ignoring the big picture is the bad thing.Equality wont matter when the country cannot stand.We will all be equally fucked.

pvtjokerus
by Gold Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 9:36 AM
8 moms liked this

 No.  Basically we are saying that the ones that have sat on the street corners slinging crack and/or became a baby producing machine w/out financial stability and/or decided to milk the welfare train.  But hey....keep punishing those that work their @'s off to work their way thru college and made ends meet in order to get to where they are at....that gravy train will run dry soon.


Quoting mikiemom:

OH my fucking God, so saying we are going to work for equality for all is a bad thing now? SMDH


 

Tiff_R_92
by on Jan. 26, 2013 at 9:38 AM
8 moms liked this

Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
trippyhippy
by Silver Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 9:47 AM
Thanks for the laugh.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
mikiemom
by Gold Member on Jan. 26, 2013 at 9:56 AM

 but these are the same people who are anti-choice


Quoting pvtjokerus:

 No.  Basically we are saying that the ones that have sat on the street corners slinging crack and/or became a baby producing machine w/out financial stability and/or decided to milk the welfare train.  But hey....keep punishing those that work their @'s off to work their way thru college and made ends meet in order to get to where they are at....that gravy train will run dry soon.

 

Quoting mikiemom:

OH my fucking God, so saying we are going to work for equality for all is a bad thing now? SMDH

 

 


 

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)