As Jim Geraghty has pointed out on numerous occasions, all Barack Obama promises comes with expiration dates. We in the gay community have seen how quick he is to break (though the obsequious Joe Solmonese might say “slow to fulfill”) his campaign promise to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT), the ban on gays serving openly in the military and the Defense of Marriage Act.
Now, one of his closest advisers won’t rule out a middle class tax hike. Obama’s even willing to consider taxing employer-based health care plans, something which he excoriated his Republican opponent for supporting in last fall’s presidntial campaign and promised himself not to do (unless, of course, the person taxed earned over $250,o00 a year).
Even the New York Times notices that he has broken his promise of transparency, reneging on his pledge to post bills online for five days before signing them. But, in typical Times fashion, the headline reads that the Democrat has only changed “the terms of a campaign pledge“. If he were a Republican, he would have broken faith with the American people.
In order to reach out to independent voters (and even some Republicans), candidate Obama knew he had to play to the center to keep scrutiny off his past left-wing activities and rhetoric and his (very,) very liberal voting record. Moreover, aware that voters (especially libertarian and conservative Republicans) were upset with the GOP for not holding the line on domestic spending, he sensed an opening and cast himself as a fiscal disciplinarian. And a lot of people bought it.
Once elected, however, he faced a dilemma, keep faith with his left-wing base which (one of my past posts notwithstanding) seems to be where he finds his political heart or staying true to the promises he made in the general election. Given the opportunity that crises afford, he thought he could get away with veering to the left on domestic issues, thinking that under cover of a perceived crisis, he could get away with it.
The mainstream media being what it is, he may well succeed. Americans may be turning away from his big-spending initiatives, but they have not yet lost faith in Barack Obma as a leader. But, should the economy continue to falter, people will not not only fault him for his failed economic policies, but also his betrayal of the trust he had gained in the course of the presidential campaign, during the better part of the transition and in the first few months of his Administration.
I am used to the predictably biased reporting (or the failure to report at all) of the NYT. Usually, the bias is evident from the stories the Times pretends don’t exist, or if they actually do report on something detrimental to the Democratic Party, the bias can be seen from the key facts that are omitted from the story (which often completely negates the significance of the story anyway). But, I’m sorry, the headline that you linked regarding Obama failing to post the entire text of bills online for five days just takes the cake. Even the insulated liberal elites at the NYT (most of whom haven’t even SEEN a conservative in the flesh, much less spoken to one) have to know deep down that they are nothing but robotic, partisan Obama sycophants when they write a headline like this:
“White House Changes the Terms of a Campaign Pledge About Posting Bills Online”
“Changes the terms of a campaign pledge”?! Are you f-ing kidding me?! Bwhahahahahahaha! Seriously, how could someone come up with such an embarrassingly twisted headline without seeing it in actual print and thinking, “Wow. I REALLY AM A COMPLETE F-ING TOOL.” That headline should go in the media bias hall of fame right next to the first sentence of a story that a NYT reporter phoned in from Martha’s Vineyard the day after Ted Kennedy killed Mary Jo Kopeckne at Chappaquiddick: “Tragedy has again struck the Kennedy Family.” (True story, the reporter didn’t even mention the victim until the 4th paragraph–even the editors at the Times knew that was too much and rewrote the article).
What’s the thinking behind all of this? That the economy will eventually recover and Obama and his tax hikes and increased regulation will get the credit? Do they have an actuarial staff who project each piece of legislation into the future, compare with election seasons, do some histograms and chart the next few days? (“Let’s see, with Cap-and-Trade, we’ll see the markets recover enough to declare philosophical victory in 29 months — call my people to invest in the confetti and balloons futures…”) I can only assume they realize that at some point, the economy won’t recover and that that is precisely what they want.
Speaking of broken promises, have you guys seen this gem yet?
http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/29/obama-to-gays-im-totally-going-to-help-you-out-just-not-right-now/
I wonder how long it will take the Times to realize that they are being played by the Obama administration. Eventually the paper will become so weak that it loses all relevence. Obama will flick them away like an old cigarette butt and move on to some more effective form of media. I keep thinking that they’ll realize the error of their ways and begin acting like journalists before they run their paper into the ground. Nothing seems to make sense anymore though, so I don’t have high hopes.
I just saw a really good production of Macbeth at Omaha’s Shakespeare on the Green. The only change I’d make is to try it in modern dress with a young, black couple. The man would have big ears and speak really well and the woman would wear dresses with big straps. The witches would be David Axelrod, Rahm Emmanuel, and Oprah Winfrey.
Sean,
Altering the terms of a campaign promise… And Jon Stewart calls Dick Cheney Darth Vader?
I think that’s not the chief executive he’s looking for.
The Teleprompter Last Week: “We *will not* meddle in Iran to oppose the anti-democratic thug regime.”
The Teleprompter This Week: “We *will* meddle in Honduras to support the anti-democratic thug regime.”
Note, the two positions are not necessarily inconsistent.
V is absolutely correct; the one consistency is that Obama will always do what it takes to perpetuate the anti-democratic thug regime.
I wonder why boob and his latest sockpuppet Jeff aren’t over here to tell us why Obama’s support of a President who overstepped his constitutional authority and was rightly removed for it is a bad thing. Perhaps they don’t want to tip off the Obamamessiah’s plans for himself.
Wow!!! My ancestors would be amazed to finally admit that the Black Man now speaks with “forked tongue” in the 21st Century. Black people are finally, trully equal with the White Man. Obama has accomplished something significant in his Presidency!!!