The Wall Street Journal has a nice piece reflecting on the hate directed to President Bush by the left.

“The treatment President Bush has received from this country is nothing less than a disgrace. The attacks launched against him have been cruel and slanderous, proving to the world what little character and resolve we have. The president is not to blame for all these problems. He never lost faith in America or her people, and has tried his hardest to continue leading our nation during a very difficult time.”

We agree as those people who vilified and pilloried Bush better bone up and expect nothing less than the same being thrown against Obama: effigy’s of Bush’s head on Hitler’s body? Obama supporters will no doubt be exposed to the same for their messiah. That popular leftist rant: “Fuck Bush” will turn into “Fuck Obama”. Its just what happens when you elect a vapid populist as  your leader.

Importantly, however, we speculate that the let will, indeed, wuickly become disenchanted with Obama. Obama will try to appease those who elected him and the liberal Congress without any clear mandate to govern. The biggest trouble … we have *no idea* how he will actually govern! We have not prior actions or experience to look upon. All we have are his associations and time spent as a “community organizer”.

So, what kind of challenges will Obama face, just look at the morning news: 

Russia deploys missiles in response to the US Missile shield: Fox News. 

The **Taliban** is calling on Obama to bring peace by removing troops from Afghanistan … didn’t Obama promise to increase troop levels in Afghanistan? BreitBart

and Israel is launching missiles into Gaza. BreitBart

Maybe Obama can give the Taliban, the Russians and the Israelis a speech about Hope! No doubt aggressive countries and organizations see Obama as a limp noodle that will do nothing to stop their actions.

America’s run was great while it lasted.

Glad we elected a radical with zero experience? I am, becasue when we have a deep financial crisis and two unpopular wars, the guy with no experience a history of radicalism is exactly what the free world needs!

The New York Post is running a three-part series looking forward the the endo of Obama’s four years. It projects that in 2012 Hillary Clinton will have the democratic nomination (a prediction shared by GOPublius). In an interesting paragraph from the series highlisght exactly why we project that Obama can do nothing but underachieve in his possible Presidency:

A general consensus among political observers is that Obama’s essential problem was that he was oversold and too naive and arrogant to realize he wasn’t as his most devoted fans believed. A senior Democrat on Capitol Hill marveled: “In 2008, this guy promised to send everyone to college, vastly increase foreign aid, create a ‘civilian national security force’ that was just a well-funded as the U.S. military, his wife said he’d fix our ‘broken souls,’ and he said he’d make the oceans stop rising, all without increasing the deficit. The amazing thing is he thought it was all true. He makes Jimmy Carter look like he should be on Mt. Rushmore.”

Oversold and naieve indeed. Like Jimmy Carter you say? We wholeheatedly agree

Update: With this soothsaying in mind, we can’t overlook the fact that Obama wants to bankrupt the coal industry. Read about it here.

The Wall Street Journal today has a *great* piece on Obama. We have believed for a long time that Obama, if he wins, will under-achieve and in at least 24 months after inauguration will be a lame duck – having been unable to pass any legislation related to his policies, bungling any foreign affairs effort, etc. What the WSJ points out is that Obama devotees have projected their own image of the messiah on Obama, and there is no way that Obama can be everything to everyone.

FTA:

On the face of it, there is nothing overwhelmingly stirring about Sen. Obama. There is a cerebral quality to him, and an air of detachment. He has eloquence, but within bounds. After nearly two years on the trail, the audience can pretty much anticipate and recite his lines. The political genius of the man is that he is a blank slate. The devotees can project onto him what they wish

It was no accident that the white working class was the last segment of the population to sign up for the Obama journey. Their hesitancy was not about race. They were men and women of practicality; they distrusted oratory, they could see through the falseness of the solidarity offered by this campaign.

The morning after the election, the disappointment will begin to settle upon the Obama crowd. Defeat — by now unthinkable to the devotees — will bring heartbreak. Victory will steadily deliver the sobering verdict that our troubles won’t be solved by a leader’s magic.

Source

We’ve seen the emphatic cries of adoration and loyalty hurled at the “Dear Leader”, Kim Jong Il of North Korea. We’ve seen the images of Mao and Stalin paraded through the streets of communist China and Russia. We’ve seen posters of Saddam in Baathist Iraq, and are all too familiar with the cult of personality that surrounded Adolf Hitler in NAZI Germany. Such blind worship of political leaders however has always been a hallmark of totalitarian regimes in far flung places, not of America. A free people could never fall under the spell of such ridiculous hero worship. That is, until now. Sadly, some on the American left have lost all sense of reality in dealing with Obama. He has become a cult figure. A man praised in fashions hitherto reserved for God alone. Far from being funny, or merely misguided, it is a truly terrifying statement about the level of political discourse in this country, the mindset of Obama’s most ardent supporters, and the apparent collapse of our educational system. How, can this happen in modern America? Before you go to the polls next Tuesday, please view these videos. Ask yourself if you truly want to be a part of this movement. Ask yourself what kind of America you want to leave to posterity. Ask yourself how it came to this?

Obama: The “alpha & omega” – praises normally reserved for God. A true cult of personality:

Blasphemous Obama church chant:

NAZI/Communist style children’s propaganda  – Obama the Dear Leader:

Obama’s Divine Appointment – The Coming of the One as foretold by scripture:

HotAir blog has a *great* discussion of Obama’s tax plan and who it would affect. Importantly is how the Obama camp has been parsing the english language. read it here

Have The One and his surrogates in fact lied about the tax hike/tax cut distinction in his plan? Saith the RNC’s oppo research team, you betcha:
In July 2008, Barack Obama Said: “If You Make $250,000 A Year Or Less, We Will Not Raise Your Taxes. We Will Cut Your Taxes.” (Barack Obama, Remarks, Powder Springs, GA, 7/8/08)

In August 2008, Obama Economic Policy Adviser Jason Furman Said That Barack Obama “Would Cut Taxes For Almost All Of The Families Making Less Than [$250,000].” FURMAN: “Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the op-ed today makes a very important point that, while Barack Obama would not raise taxes for any family making below $250,000 — in fact, it would cut taxes for almost all of the families making less than that — Senator McCain cannot make a similar promise for his tax plan because, for the first time in history, he would make families pay taxes on the health insurance that they get from their employers.” (Obama For American, Press Conference Call, 8/14/08)

In October 2008, Governor Ted Strickland (D-OH) Delivered The Democrat Radio Response Saying That Those Making Less Than $250,000 Would See Lower Taxes. “He’ll restore the middle class by cutting taxes for small businesses, and for 95 percent of workers and their families, including 5.7 million in Ohio. If you make less than $250,000, you won’t see your taxes go up one single dime. In fact, your tax rates will be lower than they were under Ronald Reagan.” (Governor Ted Strickland, Democratic Radio Response, 10/4/08)

Make no mistake, the domestic and global left are salivating over the prospect of an Obama presidency.  With poll numbers trending their way, the excited, but unusually restrained and disciplined Left believes it has victory within sight. Conspiracy theorists we’re not, but many people can work independently and in a complimentary fashion if they share the same goal, and Leftists around the world are all working in one fashion or another to ensure that in less than one month, America takes a great leap forward into socialism.

As too few Americans realize, Obama is part of America’s hard Left. He is a product of Chicago’s famously dirty political machine. As Investor’s Business Daily noted,

“Obama himself began his career as a Chicago community organizer and worked on projects there influenced by Saul Alinsky. The Marxist Machiavellian of the Chicago scene advised budding revolutionaries in his 1971 book “Rules For Radicals” to conceal their radical affiliations to attain greater power.”

Obama launched his political career in the home of the unrepentant domestic anti-war terrorist, William Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, Pentagon, and tried to murder the family of New York Supreme Court Justice John Murtagh. Obama’s self described “spiritual mentor,” Jeremiah Wright is a hate-spewing, anti-American racist of the first magnitude that peddles in genocidal conspiracy theories and the avowedly Marxist black liberation theology. Wright is a close associate of both the radical left preacher Michael Phleger as well as the virulently racist and anti-Semitic Louis Farrakhan, who has referred to Obama as the “Messiah.” Obama was once counted among the ranks of the New Party, an openly socialist party, and his legislative record is farther to the left than the Senate’s only self-described socialist, Senator Bernie Sanders.

Obama’s endorsees from abroad include Cuba’s communist dictator Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, leader of Nicaragua’s socialist Sandanistas, and the FARC – Colombia’s paramilitary Marxist terrorist organization that has kidnapped and murdered hundreds of hostages including Americans. According to Governor Bill Richardson, there is “enormous support” for Obama in Hugo Chavez’s Venezula, and Obama has also been endorsed by the self-described “Islamic socialist, ” and terrorist Muammar Gaddafi.  Obama has also been endorsed by Islamists, including Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas, who must see an anti-war candidate with Muslim roots as a gift from God following the presidency of George W. Bush. Indeed Obama was forced to return thousands of dollars in illegal campaign contributions from Palestinian donors after an investigation uncovered the fraudulent donations.

At home, Obama remains the centerpiece in a Saul Alinksy inspired movement to place a radical in the maximum position of power. No less an authority than the Communist Party USA editorialized that:

“A broad multiclass, multiracial movement is converging around Obama’s “Hope, change and unity” campaign because they see in it the thrilling opportunity to end 30 years of ultra-right rule and move our nation forward with a broadly progressive agenda.“

The direction and the intention is thus clear, but the Left has learned from its earlier failures and this time is working in a disciplined and at times coordinated fashion to ensure Obama’s election. Cognizant of the backlash that has accompanied past left-wing power grabs, and the tendency of Americans to reject radicalism, the Left is attempting to slip Obama past the American people – a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The ever-quotable Michelle Obama, a woman whose pride in her country appeared with its embrace of her radical husband disappeared from the campaign trail months ago. So did Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright, and other agitators from the civil rights industry. Quiet has been Kweisi Mfume, and restrained has been the NAACP. Gone too are the usual suspects from Hollywood: there have been no rantings from Barbara Streisand, no pronouncements from Rosie O’Donnell or Danny Glover. Absent has been Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins or Rob Reiner. Not a peep from Ben Affleck, Sean Penn, Janeane Garofalo, or Michael Moore.  The anti-war Left is also in hiding. No demonstrations from Code Pink, or media stunts from Cindy Sheehan, and decided restraint from A.N.S.W.E.R. and other groups. MoveOn.org has been uncharacteristically quiet, and we’ve heard nary a mention of George Soros. Academia is also doing its part.  William Ayers is conveniently on sabbatical, Ward Churchill has yet rear his head, and there’s been little opining by Noam Chomsky. Most helpful of all of course has been the mainstream media, which has abandoned all pretense of journalistic integrity and has covered Obama for nearly 20 months without asking any probing questions or investigating any disquieting connections, quietly burying anything negative and suppressing the most basic elements of intellectual curiosity – from missing birth certificates, to terrorist associations, to shady real estate deals, not even a single image of Obama smoking cigarettes. Anything and everything that could prove unpopular with the vast swath of America’s electorate has been left untouched or underreported.  No matter where you look, or in what forum, from Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews to Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter, the great mouthpieces of liberalism have silently left the stage and wait quietly in the tall grass as America heads to the polls.

So, as Obama’s radicalism has been concealed, it has been replaced with evidence of his widespread appeal to ordinary mainstream Americans. Thus, we see prefabricated signs proclaiming support for Obama from Catholics, clergy, and people of faith. Women and moms, and sportsmen…even Republicans have their own “for Obama” sign. Unreported rock concerts immediately precede Obama rallies to create the illusion of massive popular support, and on the Web and in print media, Obama’s team wages an aggressive effort to stifle criticism of Obama while silently but effectively placing positive images and articles about their man at every turn. No, the American Left has learned its lesson. Their man Barack has a better chance of being elected if his radical connections and his appeal to Leftists are concealed. Rather, as would befit adherents of Saul Alinksy, it is more effective a strategy to wrap Obama in a cloak or ordinary, moderate mainstream electability, create a sense of self-reinforcing popular support, and quietly carry him over the finish line. A finish line much easier to attain thanks to coordinated efforts by groups like ACORN, who are attempting to steal the election for their Community Organizer-in-Chief, and aided by well placed Democratic sympathizers in voter sensitive positions such as county registrar offices and even secretary of state positions.

Obama’s campaign has been a textbook example of how to sneak a liberal into power, and should it triumph, it will not only mean the most Left-wing, inexperienced president in our nation’s history, but will evidence a stunning triumph of radical socialism over its heretofore most stubborn adversary – the American people.

John McCain has set a trap for Barack Obama, and its one Obama may find hard to avoid.  Obama owes his current candidacy and his position at the top of 2008 Democratic ticket to his uncompromising anti-war stance. Through the fall and spring, Obama’s position on the war was unmistakable, “Let me be clear: there is no military solution in Iraq and there never was…the best way to protect our security is to immediately begin to remove our combat troops. Not in six months, or one year – now!” As a regular part of Obama’s stump speech, the freshman Illinois senator pledged, “I will end this war in 2009.” Such a position worked well with the left-wing base of the Democratic Party, but over the course of the past year a funny thing has happened in Iraq – the U.S. has employed an increasingly successful military strategy, and its primary public proponent has been Senator John McCain.

The trap laid by McCain was the challenge to Obama to visit Iraq. After all, how can a man running for the commander in chief spot not visit the very theatre of war he has founded his campaign on? Obama had no choice but to take the bait, but in doing so, he’s walked straight into a terrible conundrum. Once Obama arrives in Iraq, he will be faced with a radically different tactical situation and American commanders who are confident about the troop surge strategy and committed to continued U.S. presence.

Obama’s options will be to ignore the professional judgment of America’s top commanders and continue his call for immediate withdrawal despite the progress – an untenable political position that will shred his image and leave him vulnerable to withering criticism, or alternatively to repudiate his central campaign message, embracing the policy of George W. Bush – depriving him of the very essence of his candidacy and infuriating his own base. Will Obama campaign as the man who wishes to singlehandedly snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in Iraq, or the man who flip-flopped on the central issue of his campaign and embraced Bush? Quite simply there is no good option for Obama who today began his attempt to forge a middle path. It is an equally untenable option for Obama, who will cement his growing reputation as a split-personality candidate that has two contradictory positions on every subject and a penchant for politically expedient decision-making. Moreover, in addition to damaging his won credibility, whatever position he takes, will open him up from criticism from either the right, or the left…and most likely both – Obama can neither give ground on withdrawal nor ignore the conditions on the ground.

Today’s dual press conferences from Obama marks the slamming of the door of the McCain trap, and the opening act of what will be a withering fall campaign that will shatter Obama’s credibility and leadership potential.  Obama’s first press conference was an attempt by the Senator to back away from his longstanding commitment to immediate withdrawal, and was met with such withering criticism from both the right and the left, that in an overtly defensive move, Obama called a second press conference to stop the bleeding. His assertion that he will “refine his position” on Iraq after his visit there is the kind of noncommittal, legalistic, and ultimately unpresidential position that will further erode the media-bolstered patina of a new kind of principled candidate. It was a clumsy first step into the political minefield posed by Iraq, and a stark contrast with the steadfast McCain.