Michael Gaynor
Countering the Obama re-election strategy
By Michael Gaynor
Obama is a sly stealth socialist, not a centrist, and his idea of "fundamental transformation" would substitute American unexceptionalism for American exceptionalism.
As President Obama prepares to read his State of the Union Address for this year, it behooves us to look back to his opening remarks at the Republican Caucus meeting in 2009 and his State of the Union Address in 2010.
Sam Blumenfeld, in "One Step Back, Two Steps Forward" (www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/opinion/sam-blumenfeld/2874-one-step-back-two-steps-forward) analyzed it brilliantly.
Blumenfeld:
"If you saw or heard President Obama's opening remarks at the Republican Caucus meeting in Baltimore, you witnessed an expert leftist taking that one step backward in order to later take two steps forward. That's straight out of Lenin's communist strategy book. When you are faced with a strong opposition, you take a step back. And so, Obama sounded very conciliatory, urging Republicans to join with him in pushing legislation that both could agree on, particularly on matters of defense and veterans' benefits.
"But the simple truth is that he doesn't need Republican support to do anything. The Democrats control both houses of Congress with large majorities. The problem is that there is disagreement among Democrats about their leader's socialist agenda. So his plea for Republican help and cooperation in enacting socialized medicine fell on deaf ears. He knew it would, but he had to convince his base that he was not giving up on the revolution.
"In his often angry State of the Union message, Obama revealed a great deal more about his own state of mind than the state of the Union. He referred to himself almost a hundred times because he sees himself in confrontation with a nation reluctant to accept his socialist agenda. And so he is not only angry at Republicans but especially at the American people with their Tea Parties."
Blumenfeld also described Scott Brown's election in Massachusetts as "nothing less than a political earthquake shaking every Democrat legislator in Washington" and "shout[ing] a resounding 'No' at national socialized medicine.
As to Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address, Blumenfeld observed:
"...when Obama took the podium before Congress...he was not in the best of moods. He chided Democrats for their reluctance to take national healthcare over the top. Stop running to the hills, he said. He then scolded the Supreme Court for favoring the First Amendment rights of corporations....
"Obama's rambling speech attempted to respond to all of the problems now besetting the nation. Jobs. He was going to enact a jobs program. Exports. He was going to double American exports. Taxes. He was going to lower taxes, but not for millionaires. Spending. He was going to enact a spending freeze next year, with exemptions."
"After enjoying the fantastic smooth sailing of the election campaign with adoring mobs of Americans young and old ready to kiss his feet, he now faces an opposition he never dreamed of. Yes, like every good leftist radical he knew there would be opposition, but not on the scale that it has grown into.
"He did advocate building more nuclear power plants and removing restrictions on off-shore drilling for oil and gas. That did please conservatives. But everything else was a reaffirmation of his basic socialist agenda. He made it clear that he was not a quitter and would continue on the road to socialism."
Blumenfeld was right when he wrote this:
"One must admit that Obama is a masterful leftist politician who understands revolutionary strategy. He believed that the American people were ready for the transition to socialism. At the huge rallies during the campaign, they gave every indication that they were ready for fundamental 'change.' They were ready to tear up the Declaration of Independence , the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution and accept the embrace of total government. And Obama thought he was clever enough to pull it off.
"But he gravely misread the American people, and that is why in the first year of his administration his socialist agenda is nowhere near enactment. He blames it on Congressional gridlock even though his own party controls both houses. He blames it on conservative radio talk-show pundits. He blames it on Republican extremists who have called his program a 'Bolshevik plot.'
"But while he has not been able to get Congress to enact national-socialist healthcare, he is still the President with enormous power to make changes requiring nothing more than the signing of an executive order. Thus, while he has taken one step back, it is still to be seen how and when he takes the next two steps forward."
Since then, Obama took a huge step forward: he forced through Obamacare, constitutionality and popular opinion be damned.
For that, and failing to generate jobs, the predominantly center-right voters delivered what Obama acknowledged was a "shellacking" on Election Day.
So Obama proceeded to pretend that the voters' message was to compromise and compromised on taxes.
For apparently moving toward the center, Obama has been rewarded with a rise in his approval rating.
But the reality is that Obama remains a stealth socialist.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann are not fooled by the supposed transformation of Obama into a centrist. They not only saw through the facade, but also formulated a strategy to expose the pretense.
In "WILL 'CENTRIST' OBAMA WIN?" (January 21, 2011), they noted that "President Obama is clearly showing a determination to change his image, replacing his hard left dogmatism with a seeming flexibility and openness to the views of the center" and warned that "[i]f the Republican Party wimp[s] out and embraces a moderate agenda, trying to meet him in the middle, Obama will succeed and will be with us for six more years."
Unfortunately, they are right. The same liberal media establishment that promoted and protected Obama in 2008 will stay with him as he adjusts to political reality, knowing his real views remain the same, and "Me too Republicanism" is not a path to the White House.
Morris and McGann:
"Obama hopes we forget his past liberalism. After all, in 1996, who remembered Hillarycare? Who voted against Clinton because of his 1993 tax hikes? Nobody. So we need to force these issues to the fore again in 2011 and 2012. We must make Obama run on his record of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and forcing him to fight again the same battles that cost him the House in 2010. That is the path to victory."
"The key to winning the election of 2012 is to force Obama to defend his agenda of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and rollback. Republicans need to make him spend 2011 and 2012 defending the programs that brought him down in 2010. And we must also enact budget riders blocking his attempts to jam through by executive orders (even as he postures about cutting federal regulation) carbon taxation, FCC regulation of talk radio, and card check unionization. These issues are all winners."
Sound advice as far as it goes, but there is more to undo Obama: Obama is a stealth socialist, not a "liberal," and character still counts. Obama lied to the American people about his relationship with ACORN and has gotten away with it. But the truth has not changed and he cannot change it. See especially Michelle Malkin's Culture of Corruption.
Morris & McGann: "The key is to test Obama's centrism by confronting him with bold demands to rollback health reform, undo his massive spending, deregulate community banks, enable state bankruptcies, and block pending executive orders to impose carbon taxes, card check unionization, and FCC regulation of talk radio and the Internet."
That's a key, but exposing the truth about Obama may be even more important that exposing the flaws of his policies.
Morris & McGann: "We have got to make the gentile and lulling waves of Obama's new-found moderation crash up against the rocks of Republican demands. Then the leftist rib tide that lurks underneath the seemingly calm waters will be exposed and, in the ensuing surf, he will flounder."
That's a good plan, but presuming that Obama is a man of integrity is not.
Morris & McGann: "Obama's moderation is only tone deep."
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE! It's a pose prompted by political reality.
Americans must not be fooled again. Obama is a sly stealth socialist, not a centrist, and his idea of "fundamental transformation" would substitute American unexceptionalism for American exceptionalism.
© Michael Gaynor
January 24, 2011
Obama is a sly stealth socialist, not a centrist, and his idea of "fundamental transformation" would substitute American unexceptionalism for American exceptionalism.
As President Obama prepares to read his State of the Union Address for this year, it behooves us to look back to his opening remarks at the Republican Caucus meeting in 2009 and his State of the Union Address in 2010.
Sam Blumenfeld, in "One Step Back, Two Steps Forward" (www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/opinion/sam-blumenfeld/2874-one-step-back-two-steps-forward) analyzed it brilliantly.
Blumenfeld:
"If you saw or heard President Obama's opening remarks at the Republican Caucus meeting in Baltimore, you witnessed an expert leftist taking that one step backward in order to later take two steps forward. That's straight out of Lenin's communist strategy book. When you are faced with a strong opposition, you take a step back. And so, Obama sounded very conciliatory, urging Republicans to join with him in pushing legislation that both could agree on, particularly on matters of defense and veterans' benefits.
"But the simple truth is that he doesn't need Republican support to do anything. The Democrats control both houses of Congress with large majorities. The problem is that there is disagreement among Democrats about their leader's socialist agenda. So his plea for Republican help and cooperation in enacting socialized medicine fell on deaf ears. He knew it would, but he had to convince his base that he was not giving up on the revolution.
"In his often angry State of the Union message, Obama revealed a great deal more about his own state of mind than the state of the Union. He referred to himself almost a hundred times because he sees himself in confrontation with a nation reluctant to accept his socialist agenda. And so he is not only angry at Republicans but especially at the American people with their Tea Parties."
Blumenfeld also described Scott Brown's election in Massachusetts as "nothing less than a political earthquake shaking every Democrat legislator in Washington" and "shout[ing] a resounding 'No' at national socialized medicine.
As to Obama's 2010 State of the Union Address, Blumenfeld observed:
"...when Obama took the podium before Congress...he was not in the best of moods. He chided Democrats for their reluctance to take national healthcare over the top. Stop running to the hills, he said. He then scolded the Supreme Court for favoring the First Amendment rights of corporations....
"Obama's rambling speech attempted to respond to all of the problems now besetting the nation. Jobs. He was going to enact a jobs program. Exports. He was going to double American exports. Taxes. He was going to lower taxes, but not for millionaires. Spending. He was going to enact a spending freeze next year, with exemptions."
"After enjoying the fantastic smooth sailing of the election campaign with adoring mobs of Americans young and old ready to kiss his feet, he now faces an opposition he never dreamed of. Yes, like every good leftist radical he knew there would be opposition, but not on the scale that it has grown into.
"He did advocate building more nuclear power plants and removing restrictions on off-shore drilling for oil and gas. That did please conservatives. But everything else was a reaffirmation of his basic socialist agenda. He made it clear that he was not a quitter and would continue on the road to socialism."
Blumenfeld was right when he wrote this:
"One must admit that Obama is a masterful leftist politician who understands revolutionary strategy. He believed that the American people were ready for the transition to socialism. At the huge rallies during the campaign, they gave every indication that they were ready for fundamental 'change.' They were ready to tear up the Declaration of Independence , the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution and accept the embrace of total government. And Obama thought he was clever enough to pull it off.
"But he gravely misread the American people, and that is why in the first year of his administration his socialist agenda is nowhere near enactment. He blames it on Congressional gridlock even though his own party controls both houses. He blames it on conservative radio talk-show pundits. He blames it on Republican extremists who have called his program a 'Bolshevik plot.'
"But while he has not been able to get Congress to enact national-socialist healthcare, he is still the President with enormous power to make changes requiring nothing more than the signing of an executive order. Thus, while he has taken one step back, it is still to be seen how and when he takes the next two steps forward."
Since then, Obama took a huge step forward: he forced through Obamacare, constitutionality and popular opinion be damned.
For that, and failing to generate jobs, the predominantly center-right voters delivered what Obama acknowledged was a "shellacking" on Election Day.
So Obama proceeded to pretend that the voters' message was to compromise and compromised on taxes.
For apparently moving toward the center, Obama has been rewarded with a rise in his approval rating.
But the reality is that Obama remains a stealth socialist.
Dick Morris and Eileen McGann are not fooled by the supposed transformation of Obama into a centrist. They not only saw through the facade, but also formulated a strategy to expose the pretense.
In "WILL 'CENTRIST' OBAMA WIN?" (January 21, 2011), they noted that "President Obama is clearly showing a determination to change his image, replacing his hard left dogmatism with a seeming flexibility and openness to the views of the center" and warned that "[i]f the Republican Party wimp[s] out and embraces a moderate agenda, trying to meet him in the middle, Obama will succeed and will be with us for six more years."
Unfortunately, they are right. The same liberal media establishment that promoted and protected Obama in 2008 will stay with him as he adjusts to political reality, knowing his real views remain the same, and "Me too Republicanism" is not a path to the White House.
Morris and McGann:
"Obama hopes we forget his past liberalism. After all, in 1996, who remembered Hillarycare? Who voted against Clinton because of his 1993 tax hikes? Nobody. So we need to force these issues to the fore again in 2011 and 2012. We must make Obama run on his record of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and forcing him to fight again the same battles that cost him the House in 2010. That is the path to victory."
"The key to winning the election of 2012 is to force Obama to defend his agenda of 2009-2010 by demanding its repeal and rollback. Republicans need to make him spend 2011 and 2012 defending the programs that brought him down in 2010. And we must also enact budget riders blocking his attempts to jam through by executive orders (even as he postures about cutting federal regulation) carbon taxation, FCC regulation of talk radio, and card check unionization. These issues are all winners."
Sound advice as far as it goes, but there is more to undo Obama: Obama is a stealth socialist, not a "liberal," and character still counts. Obama lied to the American people about his relationship with ACORN and has gotten away with it. But the truth has not changed and he cannot change it. See especially Michelle Malkin's Culture of Corruption.
Morris & McGann: "The key is to test Obama's centrism by confronting him with bold demands to rollback health reform, undo his massive spending, deregulate community banks, enable state bankruptcies, and block pending executive orders to impose carbon taxes, card check unionization, and FCC regulation of talk radio and the Internet."
That's a key, but exposing the truth about Obama may be even more important that exposing the flaws of his policies.
Morris & McGann: "We have got to make the gentile and lulling waves of Obama's new-found moderation crash up against the rocks of Republican demands. Then the leftist rib tide that lurks underneath the seemingly calm waters will be exposed and, in the ensuing surf, he will flounder."
That's a good plan, but presuming that Obama is a man of integrity is not.
Morris & McGann: "Obama's moderation is only tone deep."
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY TRUE! It's a pose prompted by political reality.
Americans must not be fooled again. Obama is a sly stealth socialist, not a centrist, and his idea of "fundamental transformation" would substitute American unexceptionalism for American exceptionalism.
© Michael Gaynor
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.)
