Introduction. Now that the mid-terms are over and the American public has spoken, I feel free to speak up as well. It appears that millions of folks, as bystanders, have quietly felt as I do; they see that this country is spinning out of control; the world is upside down, with wars and rumors of war; there is a leadership vacuum in the White House, from top to bottom. Something needs to be done. Perhaps now is the time.
For the past six years it has been my firm belief that following the election of President Obama in 2008, the leaders of the Democratic Party, reveling in his huge popular mandate, privately agreed [either expressly or implicitly – we’ll never know] that they would support him, his policies, his beliefs, and his agenda, come hell or high water. In effect, they would give him a political carte blanche. And a necessary corollary of this arrangement was that anyone who questioned his actions or motivations, would be branded “a racist.”
The result was that with the exception of a few brave souls, mostly found on talk radio and Fox News, everyone walked on eggshells. Public discussion became muted, and words were carefully chosen so as not to invite invectives from the left. Public dissent was rebuffed, often quite vocally, either by the Administration’s sycophants in the press, blue state politicians like Harry Reid, Hollywood’s low-information glitterati, or the left-wing media, such as MSNBC, à la Al Sharpton.
This arrogance of power came crashing down as a result of the seismic 2014 mid-term elections. Until the electorate delivered its message on November 4, the United States, as a country, was on the fast track to becoming a de facto monarchy, unrestrained by constitutional limitations, and aided and abetted by a complicit and compliant Democratic party. Like lemmings, they followed Mr. Obama for six years, and over a cliff that was the Nov. 4 elections. It seems that the public’s frustration with what they were witnessing had suddenly bubbled over.
Remarkably, when members of the fawning press, such as Chris Mathews [who, following a December 2008 speech, confided on the air, that Mr. Obama gave him “chills up my leg”– whatever that means] – now criticize him, the race card is no longer played. The President, as a president, may now be fairly critiqued. This should make for an interesting couple of years….
Over the past six years, this country has witnessed a litany of examples of political arrogance, that until Mr. Obama’s election, most of us had never experienced in a U.S. President or administration.
The Apology Tour. Almost before he had settled into the oval office, Mr. Obama promptly boarded Air Force One, and did what he could to diminish America’s stature abroad. Lest anyone suggest Mr. Obama was right to do what he did, let me remind them that what we are seeing today is the diminished stature of the U.S. – not only in the eyes of our enemies, but of our friends. We are now regarded as a paper tiger:
- Putin has invaded the Ukraine with impunity;
- Assad blatantly crossed the “red line” Mr. Obama figuratively threatened if he once again used chemical weapons against his people;
- China is replacing the U.S. as the world’s powerhouse, and has tried to extend its tightfisted rule across the South China Sea to Hong Kong;
- The administration’s efforts at peace in the Middle East have been an abject failure – the best that can be said is that Hillary Clinton now has enough air miles to travel to the Moon and back – and the worst is that Israel no longer trusts the White House, and calls Secretary of State John Kerry “obsessive and messianic.”
The result today is a world in tatters, where the political vacuum that the U.S. once filled, is now as void as deep space. Mr. Obama was more interested in being liked on the world stage, rather than feared. Today he is neither.
Obamacare. As we spiraled into the Great Recession in 2009-2010, President Obama ignored the economy, and instead barnstormed the country touting his signature health care law, which was passed without nary a single Republican vote.
The law will likely be best remembered for three Kodak moments:
- When Nancy Pelosi urged her democratic lemmings colleagues to vote for the bill so they could find out what was in it;
- When the Obamacare website went live, it unceremoniously crashed for the next several weeks, in what an administration official described as a “glitch;”
- After Mr. Obama had famously repeated the mantra that “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor,” we now learn it was never true.
And now we have just learned the one of the chief architects of Mr. Obama’s healthcare law, MIT economist Jonathon Gruber, admitted that passing the law required deception:
(L)ack of transparency is a huge political advantage and basically, you know, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically, that was really, really critical to getting this thing (Obamacare) to pass. [Nov. 13, 2014 Chicago Tribune]
A Conga Line of Scandals. Scandal after scandal erupted that would have staggered prior administrations, but with the help of the Dems who played the race card with the fervor of Las Vegas blackjack dealers, and a heretofore compliant and complacent national media, Mr. Obama continued marching onward, unthreatened, undeterred and unrepentant.
- Fast and Furious was stonewalled by Eric Holder, who now has the dubious distinction of being the only U.S. Attorney General to have been found in contempt of Congress.
- Our ambassador in Libya, J. Christopher Stephens, and three others, were brutally murdered in a premeditated attack on the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi. And since the massacre occurred right before the 2012 presidential elections, in an effort to deflect criticism of poor security at the American compound, the White House sent out National Security Advisor Susan Rice to disingenuously claim, with a straight face, that the whole affair was a spontaneous response to a right wing whacko video that had insulted Islam.
- The IRS’ efforts to stifle tax exempt status for the Administration’s political opponents have been swept under the carpet, even though Lois Lerner, director of exempt organizations, had refused to answer Senate committee questions, citing her 5th amendment privilege against self-incrimination. And if that wasn’t enough to raise eyebrows, we now learn that all of her emails mysteriously disappeared when her computer hard drive failed.
- Mr. Obama, without congressional knowledge or consent, secretly authorized Bowe Bergdahl, the serviceman who intentionally left his army base in Afghanistan [an act normally described as “desertion”] and into the waiting arms of the Taliban, was quietly returned to the U.S. in exchange for the release of five battle-hardened and unrepentant terrorists. Ms. Rice, again speaking for the Administration, described Mr. Bergdahl as having served his country “with honor and distinction.”
- In May of this year, the V.A. scandal broke, revealing unacceptable waits and poor medical treatment for our veterans. Although it’s hard to hold Mr. Obama personally responsible for the shortcomings, it was on his watch, and he had not escaped the political blowback.
The Racial Divide. Notwithstanding the President’s soaring campaign promises of healing the racial divide, Mr. Obama has only widened it:
- Rather than remaining silent on the Trayvon Martin shooting, early on, he weighed in, saying that if he had a son, “he would look like Trayvon.” Notwithstanding this not-so-subtle effort to influence the outcome of the upcoming murder trial, George Zimmerman was summarily acquitted.
- Mr. Obama has publicly partnered with Al Sharpton, of Tawana Brawley fame, apparently believing the optics strengthens his base, yet giving legitimacy to perhaps this country’s most incendiary race baiter.
- He sent Attorney General Holder to Ferguson immediately following the shooting of Michael Brown and days of riots, stoking further racial tension, in which he shared his own youthful run-ins with white police officers.
- Meanwhile, in Chicago, Mr. Obama’s hometown, double digit black-on-black homicides every weekend have been routinely ignored by the White House.
Iran and Israel. After having telegraphed to the world that his “red line” for Syria was a false threat, Mr. Obama has emboldened our enemies and outraged our friends. The message of weakness and feckless indecision was heard loudest by the Mullahs in Iran. Mr. Obama and his Secretary of State appear to be laboring under the same self-delusion as Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, who, after meeting with Adolph Hitler in 1938, believed he had achieved for Europe, “peace in our time.” Five months later, the Der Fürher had invaded Poland, and the Second World War was underway.
Almost any sentient human even remotely familiar with the current regime, knows three things about Iran: (a) They are lying about not developing weapons grade uranium; (b) They are willing to dissemble and stall as long as it takes, since they are not halting production during these talks; and (c) Nothing short of severe sanctions, force, or the threat of force, will stop them.
Which brings us to Israel. Almost since he set foot in the White House, Mr. Obama has had strained relations with Israel. I will not venture a guess as to why this is. But, as the only viable democracy in the Middle East, and a valuable friend and intelligence resource in the area, we can ill-afford to ignore them – which is what Mr. Obama has done.
So now, Mr. Obama’s policy of Chamberlain-like appeasement has done nothing to make our country safer from a nuclear Iran, and has marginalized Israel to the point that they no longer trust our motives.
Bad Optics. In what the press has delicately called “bad optics,” Mr. Obama is routinely found on the golf course in DC, the Hamptons, or Martha’s Vineyard, while the world burns. In the most recent example of presidential insouciance, immediately following a short somber eulogy for American Chris Foley, who was beheaded by Islamic thugs, Mr. Obama departed immediately for the fairway.
Shortly thereafter, in what may be described as the Mother-Of-All- Non-Sequiturs, he assured the American public that the Islamic State is not Islamic.
While the Ebola scare cannot be laid directly at the president’s feet, his response has been characteristically political, tardy, and behind the curve. After weeks of dithering, and while the CDC claimed the disease was “difficult to transmit” [as fully cladded nurses and doctors continued fall ill] he appointed as Germ Czar a political hack, Ron Klain, who was V.P. Biden’s former chief of staff. Medicine takes a backseat to politics, even in life and death matters. Immediately thereafter, Mr. Klain went AWOL, and missed a series of Ebola meetings he was to attend.
Doubling Down On Amnesty. Now, barely a week after the sweeping Republican victory, rather than accept any personal responsibility for the results, Mr. Obama opined that it was because the American people had rejected political gridlock. He stated:
The American people sent a message, one that they’ve sent for several elections now. They expect the people they elect to work as hard as they do,” Mr. Obama said in a press conference the day after the election. “To everyone who voted, I want you to know that I hear you.
But he really didn’t hear them. Mr. Obama doesn’t just have a tin ear – he has two of them. Rather than extend an olive branch across the aisle, or roll up his sleeves and commit to work with Sen. McConnell or Rep. Boehner, the President, imperiously, is doubling down. It now appears that by political fiat, he is resolved to issue an executive order granting some form of amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants.
The ironic part of this act of defiance is that the Republicans are likely willing to come to the table to negotiate the issue. But since Mr. Obama does not want to be in a position of perceived weakness, as he would be next year, when the Republicans tighten their grip on the House and take control of the Senate, he insists it be done now – it’s his way or the highway. This, even though the mid-term exit polls showed that voters were overwhelmingly opposed to executive amnesty.
The difference today is that some members of his own party may begin breaking formation. Perhaps they realize that their dogmatic adherence to a party line that was soundly rejected on November 4, may be harmful to their political health and well-being. In other words, the political carte blanche may be gone, and with it, the lock-step protection guaranteed to Mr. Obama by the Democratic party of 2008.
The result of course, is that Republicans will fight Mr. Obama on this, as they have no choice; they had campaigned against his threats of executive action before the election, and ironically, it may have contributed to the size of the Republican victory on Nov 4.
What does the President have to lose? Nothing himself. In fact, some may suspect that he’s just marking time to 2016; that he’s going to continue to poke his finger in the eyes of Republican leadership, simply because he can. Perhaps a more cynical view – and one likely being discussed in the Republican cloakroom, is that Mr. Obama is taunting his opponents to file articles of impeachment against him. What better way to improve the poll numbers on your way out the door, right?
What is apparent is that Mr. Obama does not know how to be gracious in defeat, as that is not something he’s ever seen up close and personal. But in following this act of petulance, he will likely alienate moderate and red-state Democrats who have read the election tea leaves. He will also embolden those voters who sent their mid-term message to the Dems, and help pave the path for a Republican Administration in 2016. Given the present state of the country and the world, one can only hope….
Conclusion. The mid-term elections served up some large doses of humble pie for the Democratic party. However, Mr. Obama has declined to partake. For those Democrats who rigidly hewed to the party line and survived the mid-terms, they are likely chastened – perhaps akin to having a near-death experience. Not so with Mr. Obama. He still suffers from the arrogance of power he brought to the office of the presidency in 2008. And as long as he encircles himself with people willing to tell him what he wants to hear – rather than what he needs to hear – that arrogance will continue unabated.
As I said earlier, it should make for an interesting next two years. ~PCQ
 While some might say that this is what the Republicans had agreed upon when Mr. Obama was elected in 2008. But the problem with that retort is that the Dems had both houses for the first two years of his presidency. They controlled the Executive and Legislative branches of government! Besides healthcare, a dubious resume’ builder, nothing of consequence was accomplished. The country continued limping along, with lots of hope, but little change.
 The last time such critical evidence suspiciously disappeared was during the Watergate investigation, and we know how that story ended.
 Riddle me this: If the Administration is so opposed to paying money for the release of hostages for fear of the message it will send, what kind of message has Mr. Obama sent to our enemies by repatriating the five known terrorists we captured? For my money, I’d much sooner have seen cash quietly paid to ISIL to save the heroic American aid workers who were executed on video tape as a recruiting tool for terrorist wannabes.
 Ms. Rice’s statements, confidently repeated in the face of incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, are remarkable for their robotic tenacity. They invite the listener to mentally ask, “Is she crazy, or am I?”
 According to RealClearPolitics: “He’d (Mr. Obama) learned of it from news reports, said White House Press Secretary Jay Carney. That’s also how the president learned the Obamacare website was a mess, the IRS was targeting conservative groups and security at the Benghazi consulate was lax, aides said.”
 Following the invasion, Chamberlain resigned and Winston Churchill became the prime minister, and the rest, as they say, is history. Is it too soon to hope that the United States might elect a true statesman in 2016?
 While I acknowledge the heartbreak that accompanies children without parents and vice versa, that is not the issue here. We all acknowledge the problem and the difficulty of a collaborative solution. What is unacceptable is the use of imperial fiat to accomplish Mr. Obama’s singular view of that solution.