I have an article at Pajamas Media today in which is discuss how President Obama favors some of the American people over others and in doing so seems to be working in their interests, and their interests alone. We see that a lot in his treatment of those Americans who are trying to express their concern regarding a government takeover of health care. Instead of acknowledging these concerns and slowing down the process to make sure those concerns are addressed, the president instead chose to marginalize those constituents in order to serve his idolaters:
The Democrats introduced Barack Obama to the nation and the world at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. He gave a keynote address in which he said “we are more than a collection of red states and blue states — we are the United States of America.”
With this line, Barack Obama sold himself to the Democratic base who were in a sort of political wasteland after a hard-fought election in 2000. He seemed like a true uniter, someone who could win the hearts and minds of Democrats, independents, and moderate Republicans. Since coming into office, however, he has proven that this image of Barack Obama the uniter and the post-partisan was an abject fraud. Over the past few months, he has shown a propensity to antagonize those with the effrontery to oppose his policies. Obama’s hostility has reached a boiling point over the past few weeks and finally culminated in his comments on Friday where he essentially told those who oppose his radical takeover of health care to shut their mouths.
His intent is clear: the real Barack Obama isn’t interested in being president of the United States; he wants to be president of an exclusive group of Americans made up of sycophants who parrot the party line.
Read all of it and feel free to leave a comment here or at the column.
Update: David Karki addresses a similar theme in that he has chosen sides and is now pitting American against American. This, once again, illustrates how Obama and the Democrats have a scorched earth mentality toward their own country and citizens:
We have holders of national office, when faced with widespread opposition to their proposals, whose first instinct is to openly slander the America people, view the people as an enemy to be defeated by any means necessary, and tacitly endorse violence to repress them. (None of these town halls, as vocal as they were, turned the least bit violent until the day after the White House said to “punch back twice as hard” and the SEIU union goon squad started showing up. Coincidence?)
Think about how radical and extreme this is. This sort of thing was supposed to only happen in third-world banana republics in far-flung corners of world. Thanks to Obama and Pelosi, it now happens in America. It’s like they’re channeling Sean Connery in The Untouchables:
“They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That’s the Chicago way!” (Obama actually did say this on June 14, 2008: WSJ: Obama – ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun’)
This is a reckless and dangerous escalation of the conflict. It raises the stakes to where one fractious event could cause things to quickly spiral out of control. It actually increases the chances of such an event occurring, as someone who’s been given the finger by his own government figures he has nothing left to lose. And once that Rubicon gets crossed, it may be impossible to go back.
A president with real experience and real leadership skills would know better than this. But all Obama has to fall back on is his rabble-rousing, radical Marxist street thug past. Excuse me, I meant “community organizing.” (Funny how he despises the community organizing against him.) Thus you get exactly the arrogant words he spoke and reckless actions he took. And with them, gasoline may well have been poured on the dry tinder. All that’s left is the spark to set it ablaze.
Think about that as well: He’d rather risk America coming apart than not get his way. Instead of temporarily accepting political defeat and regrouping, he’d rather take us down a path of conflict wherein the end must necessarily be one side defeating the other, cost and damage incurred in the process be damned. The closest comparison to this I can think of is an abusive husband who’d rather kill his wife than have her escape his control.
This is spot on. We’re approaching the perfect storm where Obama’s arrogance, inexperience, and selfishness collide. Read all of David’s piece.
