While I found much to praise in the president’s speech in Strasbourg, one line stood out as defining the hypocrisy and hubris of his young Administration.Â It shows his hypocrisy because he says one thing while governing in a different direction.Â The hubris lies in his belief that his rhetoric defines the world’s reality, that if he says a noble quality defines his Administration, then it must be so.
That line, one which echoes the title of his budget, “We are ushering a new era of responsibility, and that is something we should all be proud of.”
How presumptuous of him to say we should be proud of era that has not yet begun, of something not yet achieved!
And to use the term responsibility to define his work is the height of hypocrisy.Â In the third debate, he echoed a point he had made during the campaign, implicitly faulting the supposedly spendthrift policies of the Bush Administration:
But there is no doubt that we’ve been living beyond our means and we’re going to have to make some adjustments.
Now, what I’ve done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.
Instead of giving us a net spending cut, his self-described responsible budget gives us a severe spending explosion.Â No wonder the tea party movement is burgeoning.
How can he, after contending we’ve been living beyond our means and campaigning on a “net spending cut,” offer a budget under which the government spends far, far beyond its means with deficits and treble those he decried under his predecessor’s Administration and call that an “era of responsibility”?
Does he understand that his very actions undermine his rhetoric?