At least since the 2004 the then-state Senator delivered his paean to national unity at the Democratic National Convention, there have been two Barack Obamas, the inspiring orator aspiring to transcend partisan politics and the bare-knuckled Chicago politician seeking to advance his own partisan interests.
On the one hand, the Democrat claims he’s “trying to break [that] pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame.” On the other, he’s always looking for someone to blame for his failures. It’s as if George W. Bush were still pulling the political strings and Democrats had not had overwhelming majorities in the 111st Congress–Barack Obama’s first two years in the White House.
Yesterday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney blamed Republicans for the increase in demand for food stamps since Obama’s inauguration:
Carney turned Newt Gingrich’s description of President Obama as the “food stamp president” around on Republicans, whom Carney blamed for the increased need for food stamps. “The economic policies that helped create [the recession],” Carney said about Gingrich, “are the kinds of policies that he advocates to this day.”
Now, he’s blaming the GOP for his decision to reject the Keystone Pipeline:
Obama said he was not acting on the merits of TransCanada Corp.’s plan, but instead was forced to make the decision based on the “arbitrary” deadline mandated by GOP provisions in December’s payroll tax cut extension deal.
Oh, and, one more thing: James Taranto offers some interesting statistics:
In the three-year period CBS ascribes to Obama, the food-stamp rolls have increased by 18 million people, or 6 million a year. In the seven years attributed to Bush, the increase was 10.9 million, or 1.6 million a year. Almost four times as many Americans have gone on food stamps every year during the Obama years than during the Bush years, and the percentages are not increasing as quickly precisely because the numbers are.
I’m pretty sure that’s Bush’s fault.
If predictions of $5 per gallon gasoline come to fruition this summer, and Republicans can pin the blame on Obama for failing to approve the pipeline, it could be a potent campaign issue.
Maybe some of the one-issue voters can waive their gay marriage licenses at the gas station attendant and see if he’ll give them a discount.
It also sounds to me like the SCOAMF is throwing a tantrum. “I’ll show those Republicans, by cancelling their pipeline!” Not caring how many jobs he destroys in the process.
Wasn’t that “arbitrary deadline” in fact a requirement to decide whether or not to approve the pipeline in a timely fashion so the administration couldn’t drag this out through the election season? God, these people are idiots!
On the bright side, the pipeline decision was not blamed specifically on Bush, so that is progress I suppose.
I think we need this little reminder of what we used to be able to do here in this country. The irony is rich, isn’t it?
I guess the pipeline isn’t a “human project”, whatever that means!
Republicans have to make 2012 a referendum on Obama. With the long term high unemployment, job stagnation, & inflation, all Obama has is mud. People want solutions–not mud. I think Obama is toast.
Obama throws a temper tantrum & destroys real jobs in process; the Keystone Pipeline also would have lowered gas prices, despite Obama’s closing off the Gulf with regulations. He’s cut his nose off the spite his face just to one-up the Republicans. Obama needs a diaper change. Quick, someone call Valeria Jarrett!
I’ve tried for three years now to convice myself that Obama was incandescently incompetent and/or misguided… it’s getting harder to maintain the blinders. I think the man is evil.
Aside from the fact we’ve told Canada, a friend and ally, to push off and sell their damn oil to China, we’ve dumped a large, job-making infrastructure project that provides tangible value (unlike, say, California’s railroad to nowhere).
They must be dancing a jig in Riyahd (assuming they dance there) and in Caracas.
I can see the response already.
“My opponent is such an awful candidate that even his ‘supporters’ refer to this election as a referendum on my performance rather than a choice of who would make a better President.”
So if Mitt Romney gets nominated, the best thing you can say about him is “He’s not Barack Obama”? Sounding more and more like John Kerry every day…
Apparently Amy wasn’t around in 1979.
Or in the 2010 election, which Barack Obama insisted was a referendum on his governance.
That is, until the Republicans took the house in a landslide and nearly recaptured the Senate.