Earlier today, Jim Geraghty linked a video in which the Republican National Committee (RNC) contrasted the Obama as candidate in 2008 against his rhetoric in office today:
Don’t think someone who compares those who oppose his policies to Social Darwinists or members of the Flat Earth Society can run as a post-partisan healer. Linking the same video, Ed Morrissey offers this sbout the incumbent’s reelection strategy:
This is not a campaign that relishes running on the so-called accomplishments of the incumbent; almost 70% of voters wanted the Supreme Court to partially or completely overturn his signature legislation, and the economic stagnation of the last three years means he can’t run on pocketbook issues. The only way he can win is if the election becomes another referendum on George W. Bush, which is exactly the message that Obama’s ads try to send.
No wonder he and his supporters have been spending so much time bashing the man who has long since retired to Texas–and who has largely absented himself from public life.
NB: Tweaked the title to make it a question.
I sure hope the leadership in warshinton gets out of it’s “low key” rut.
Obama doesn’t go around referring to himself as a post-partisan healer. Conservatives label him that way because it sets him up to fail. All politicians talk about unifying the country, and partisans in the opposing party to be bouncing around talking about how bad of a job their primary political adversary is doing is less than meaningless. ‘Unifying the country’ is a pipe dream and I don’t give two squirts if Republicans aren’t on board with the agenda that I’d like to see implemented.
I mean, if you’re going to complain, complain about something that matters, maybe? Just a suggestion.
Wow. What a concept. Dismiss all the hope and change promises as typical campaign BS that fools the dummies and doesn’t count with the cynics.
Here, I’ll send this on to your Obama:
I hate that Levi has to come here and defend The Won. That means he is using his small calibre ability to defend the indefensible all because he is an ideologue without ammunition. The Won should provide smarter and better talking points for his parakeets.
Ignoring those pesky facts, of course.
Levi, all you do when you come here is demonstrate that liberal Obama supporters like yourself are lying imbeciles. Do you think that helps?
Hi Dan,
Obama wants to get re-elected, and the post-partisan garments won’t do the trick this time.
Do you think that Obama has a point though–do the “opponents” he is calling out, have viewpoints that are consistent with a Social Darwinist approach?
Just because I criticize the more ridiculous complaints about Obama doesn’t mean I’m a supporter of his. I think he’s a terrible President and am more or less ambivalent about his re-election. Moving in the wrong direction is moving in the wrong direction, and Republicans and Democrats alike are happy to keep us on that course.
When the best that conservatives could come up with during Obama’s first year was ‘He uses a teleprompter!’ and ‘He might be a foreigner!’, I think you’ve forfeit your credibility to comment on how post-partisan or not the President has been. That’s all I’m saying.
In addition to the fact that there are numerous criticisms of the SCOAMF beyond his Teleprompter and suspicions about his past, the actual criticism was that Obama was dependent on his Teleprompter, and without it to feed him lines, he sounds like a complete idiot. As for his origins, he has yet to release any of his college records or transcripts, or details of his travel to Pakistan, which raises legitimate questions about what he is hiding.