Chris Adamo
Liberal posturing reveals flagrant hypocrisy
By Chris Adamo
Sanctimony from Democrat Senator Charles Schumer of New York never plays well with the public despite media efforts to cast it in a good light, and his latest blunder is true to form. In an effort to go on offense in the ongoing Obamacare debate, Schumer came up with what he undoubtedly considers a brilliant strategy, blissfully unaware of how completely it highlights his elitism and hypocrisy.
Brad Dayspring, spokesman for Representative Eric Cantor (R.-VA) the new House Majority Leader, informed the press that the House Republicans plan a vote to repeal Obamacare on January 12. Given the sizable GOP majority in the new Congress, the bill is certain to pass. Over in the Senate, the Democrats remain in control. So it is just as certain that any efforts to truly undo the impending damage of Obamacare will be completely stalled there.
Nevertheless, liberals in both houses of Congress know full well how much political damage can be inflicted on them by repeated associations with the nightmare of socialized medicine which they imposed on the nation through scurrilous means last year. Thus they are determined to craft and implement an effective means of dodging such a fate. And Schumer, clearly unaware of how poorly this ruse is being perpetrated, is front and center.
Desperately hoping to put Republicans on the defensive, he has challenged them to prove their sincerity by foregoing their own medical insurance. In a January 4 statement to the "mainstream" media website Politico, Schumer asserted "It was a central value to us when we passed health care, and a central value to the American people, that members of Congress should get the same health care as everyone else" which sounds good, but as is typical of such Democrat pronouncements, is starkly contradicted by the facts.
It was not so long ago that Americans engaged their liberal senators and representatives at townhall meetings across the nation, hounding and excoriating them for daring to meddle with private health care plans with intentions to eradicate them, after which they would then be supplanted by the nightmare of socialized medicine. Time and again, common citizens challenged liberal public officials to prove their confidence in the worthiness of government run "healthcare" by agreeing to forego their own abundant coverage and participate in the squalid government imposed version that they intended for the rest of us. Of course none would dare to do so.
Now Schumer wants to make the case that the bureaucratic monstrosity of federally controlled and rationed medical treatment is equivalent to the "Cadillac plan" that he and his cohorts still enjoy. While such a "bait and switch" routine might have served him well in the distant past, before the alternative media existed and he could count on the sympathetic monopoly of a liberal press to cover for him, things are starkly different now.
The illusion of "free medical coverage," relentlessly proffered and propagandized by the Democrats from late 2009 through March of 2010 when it became law, never sat well with the mainstream of America. Since then however, as its grim realities become increasingly apparent to the public, any meager degree of support that it may ever have had has significantly dwindled. Overwhelmingly Americans are fervently opposed to it, and demand that it be fully repealed. Regularly, new details of its grim implications rouse Americans to vehemently insist that Washington permanently butt out of their doctor-patient relationship, which despite its shortfalls has historically worked far better in this country than any attempt among socialist states to "improve" things elsewhere.
With Senate Democrats barely maintaining their majority, it is obvious that they nevertheless intend to remain indifferent to the concerns of the American people. Rather than considering the public sentiment, they hope that by some miracle they can posture and pander sufficiently between now and 2012 to turn the tide on the Republicans. But their disingenuousness glares back at them and mocks them in plain view of the public.
In response, Eric Cantor derided Schumer for descending to such a level rather than addressing the legitimate apprehensions of the American people. And in a brilliant move, he turned the tables on Schumer by suggesting that if he really believes in such an absurd philosophy, he and his Democrat cohorts who opposed extending the Bush tax cuts will prove their "sincerity" by paying their income taxes at the higher rates that would have ensued, had the extension not been implemented.
Elsewhere, other examples of brazen hypocrisy from leftist icons are too numerous to count. Yet a few notable examples give the big picture. In each case, they solidify the reality that the liberal political machine cares neither for the integrity of the nation, nor the plight of its citizens, but seeks instead to exploit such circumstances to enhance its own political fortunes.
In a news item from the Hawaii Reporter, outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent exorbitant sums on her lavish vacation in the Aloha State, costing taxpayers dearly for security, support, and transportation. As someone who flagrantly distorted the effect of extending the Bush tax cuts, decrying them as "giving bonuses to the rich," this incident puts the lie to any concern she might have expressed for the condition of the federal treasury. And it is only the latest outlandish indulgence of herself, her family, and her friends from the public trough.
Previous trips have included family members ferried on Air Force jets, expensive meals while en route, and a generally lavish lifestyle exceeding every other public figure except, perhaps, Michelle Obama. It is no wonder that she was so unconcerned by the flagrant corruption of Congressman Charles Wrangel that she made a mockery of the censure imposed on him by the House of Representatives.
Of course nobody has made a more pious appeal to the American people to scale back their lifestyles than Barack Obama and his wife Michelle who exhort them not to seek gainful private sector employment but to engage in community service, while chiding them on their excessive use of the world's resources. But no first-couple in the nation's history has been more excessive in their exploitation of the office as a means to pamper themselves with food and frolic as they travel the globe at taxpayers' expense. And the Obama's recent vacation, also to Hawaii, is no exception.
In an era in which the Washington "Ruling Class" has been exposed as an ugly gaggle of self-serving frauds, the exuberance with which such individuals as Schumer, Pelosi and the Obamas preach frugality and thrift to America on the nightly news only highlights the contempt with which they regard common citizens. The backlash from those "little people," expressed so stridently last November, clearly did not register among the elite. It is time for the grassroots to begin preparations to make known their anger and disapproval even more loudly in the next election.
© Chris Adamo
January 6, 2011
Sanctimony from Democrat Senator Charles Schumer of New York never plays well with the public despite media efforts to cast it in a good light, and his latest blunder is true to form. In an effort to go on offense in the ongoing Obamacare debate, Schumer came up with what he undoubtedly considers a brilliant strategy, blissfully unaware of how completely it highlights his elitism and hypocrisy.
Brad Dayspring, spokesman for Representative Eric Cantor (R.-VA) the new House Majority Leader, informed the press that the House Republicans plan a vote to repeal Obamacare on January 12. Given the sizable GOP majority in the new Congress, the bill is certain to pass. Over in the Senate, the Democrats remain in control. So it is just as certain that any efforts to truly undo the impending damage of Obamacare will be completely stalled there.
Nevertheless, liberals in both houses of Congress know full well how much political damage can be inflicted on them by repeated associations with the nightmare of socialized medicine which they imposed on the nation through scurrilous means last year. Thus they are determined to craft and implement an effective means of dodging such a fate. And Schumer, clearly unaware of how poorly this ruse is being perpetrated, is front and center.
Desperately hoping to put Republicans on the defensive, he has challenged them to prove their sincerity by foregoing their own medical insurance. In a January 4 statement to the "mainstream" media website Politico, Schumer asserted "It was a central value to us when we passed health care, and a central value to the American people, that members of Congress should get the same health care as everyone else" which sounds good, but as is typical of such Democrat pronouncements, is starkly contradicted by the facts.
It was not so long ago that Americans engaged their liberal senators and representatives at townhall meetings across the nation, hounding and excoriating them for daring to meddle with private health care plans with intentions to eradicate them, after which they would then be supplanted by the nightmare of socialized medicine. Time and again, common citizens challenged liberal public officials to prove their confidence in the worthiness of government run "healthcare" by agreeing to forego their own abundant coverage and participate in the squalid government imposed version that they intended for the rest of us. Of course none would dare to do so.
Now Schumer wants to make the case that the bureaucratic monstrosity of federally controlled and rationed medical treatment is equivalent to the "Cadillac plan" that he and his cohorts still enjoy. While such a "bait and switch" routine might have served him well in the distant past, before the alternative media existed and he could count on the sympathetic monopoly of a liberal press to cover for him, things are starkly different now.
The illusion of "free medical coverage," relentlessly proffered and propagandized by the Democrats from late 2009 through March of 2010 when it became law, never sat well with the mainstream of America. Since then however, as its grim realities become increasingly apparent to the public, any meager degree of support that it may ever have had has significantly dwindled. Overwhelmingly Americans are fervently opposed to it, and demand that it be fully repealed. Regularly, new details of its grim implications rouse Americans to vehemently insist that Washington permanently butt out of their doctor-patient relationship, which despite its shortfalls has historically worked far better in this country than any attempt among socialist states to "improve" things elsewhere.
With Senate Democrats barely maintaining their majority, it is obvious that they nevertheless intend to remain indifferent to the concerns of the American people. Rather than considering the public sentiment, they hope that by some miracle they can posture and pander sufficiently between now and 2012 to turn the tide on the Republicans. But their disingenuousness glares back at them and mocks them in plain view of the public.
In response, Eric Cantor derided Schumer for descending to such a level rather than addressing the legitimate apprehensions of the American people. And in a brilliant move, he turned the tables on Schumer by suggesting that if he really believes in such an absurd philosophy, he and his Democrat cohorts who opposed extending the Bush tax cuts will prove their "sincerity" by paying their income taxes at the higher rates that would have ensued, had the extension not been implemented.
Elsewhere, other examples of brazen hypocrisy from leftist icons are too numerous to count. Yet a few notable examples give the big picture. In each case, they solidify the reality that the liberal political machine cares neither for the integrity of the nation, nor the plight of its citizens, but seeks instead to exploit such circumstances to enhance its own political fortunes.
In a news item from the Hawaii Reporter, outgoing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spent exorbitant sums on her lavish vacation in the Aloha State, costing taxpayers dearly for security, support, and transportation. As someone who flagrantly distorted the effect of extending the Bush tax cuts, decrying them as "giving bonuses to the rich," this incident puts the lie to any concern she might have expressed for the condition of the federal treasury. And it is only the latest outlandish indulgence of herself, her family, and her friends from the public trough.
Previous trips have included family members ferried on Air Force jets, expensive meals while en route, and a generally lavish lifestyle exceeding every other public figure except, perhaps, Michelle Obama. It is no wonder that she was so unconcerned by the flagrant corruption of Congressman Charles Wrangel that she made a mockery of the censure imposed on him by the House of Representatives.
Of course nobody has made a more pious appeal to the American people to scale back their lifestyles than Barack Obama and his wife Michelle who exhort them not to seek gainful private sector employment but to engage in community service, while chiding them on their excessive use of the world's resources. But no first-couple in the nation's history has been more excessive in their exploitation of the office as a means to pamper themselves with food and frolic as they travel the globe at taxpayers' expense. And the Obama's recent vacation, also to Hawaii, is no exception.
In an era in which the Washington "Ruling Class" has been exposed as an ugly gaggle of self-serving frauds, the exuberance with which such individuals as Schumer, Pelosi and the Obamas preach frugality and thrift to America on the nightly news only highlights the contempt with which they regard common citizens. The backlash from those "little people," expressed so stridently last November, clearly did not register among the elite. It is time for the grassroots to begin preparations to make known their anger and disapproval even more loudly in the next election.
© Chris Adamo
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
