U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: They've Lost That Lovin' Feeling Obama still has supporters, but theirs is a grim support.
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/declarations.html
Published: Jul 30, 2011
Author: PEGGY NOONAN
Post Date: 2011-07-30 13:54:48 by Mad Dog
Keywords: FAIL, failure, FAIL
Views: 4981
Comments: 12
The Republican establishment reasserted itself this week, and good thing, too, because the establishment was right. It said Republicans in the House should back and pass the Boehner bill on the debt ceiling because it goes in the right directions, contains spending cuts but not taxes, and is viable. So accept victory, avert crisis, and get it to the Senate. The establishment was being conservative in the Burkean sense: acknowledge reality, respect it, and make the most progress possible within it. This has not always been true of them. They spent the first decade of this century backing things a truly conservative party would not have dreamed of—careless wars, huge spending and, most scandalously, a dreamy and unconservative assumption that it would all work out because life is sweet and the best thing always happens. They were mostly led by men and women who had never been foreclosed on and who assumed good luck, especially unearned good luck, would continue. They were fools, and they lost control of their party when the tea party rose up, rebuking and embarrassing them. Then the tea party saved them by not going third party in 2009-10. And now the establishment has come forward to save the tea party, by inching it away from the cliff and reminding it the true battles are in 2012, and after. As this is written, the White House seems desperate to be seen as consequential. They're trotting out Press Secretary Jay Carney, who stands there looking like a ferret with flop sweat as he insists President Obama is still at the table, still manning the phones and calling shots. Much is uncertain, but the Republicans have made great strides on policy. If they emerge victorious, they had better not crow. The nation is in a continuing crisis, our credit rating is not secure, and no one's interested in he-man gangster dialogue from "The Town." What might thrill America would be a little modesty: "We know we helped get America into some of this trouble, and we hope we've made some progress today in getting us out of it." But that actually is not what I want to talk about. I want to talk about something that started to become apparent to me during the debt negotiations. It's something I've never seen in national politics. It is that nobody loves Obama. This is amazing because every president has people who love him, who feel deep personal affection or connection, who have a stubborn, even beautiful refusal to let what they know are just criticisms affect their feelings of regard. At the height of Bill Clinton's troubles there were always people who'd say, "Look, I love the guy." They'd often be smiling—a wry smile, a shrugging smile. Nobody smiles when they talk about Mr. Obama. There were people who loved George W. Bush when he was at his most unpopular, and they meant it and would say it. But people aren't that way about Mr. Obama. He has supporters and bundlers and contributors, he has voters, he may win. But his support is grim support. And surely this has implications. The past few weeks I've asked Democrats who supported him how they feel about him. I got back nothing that showed personal investment. Here are the words of a hard-line progressive and wise veteran of the political wars: "I never loved Barack Obama. That said, among my crowd who did 'love' him, I can't think of anyone who still does." Why is Mr. Obama different from Messrs. Clinton and Bush? "Clinton radiated personality. As angry as folks got with him about Nafta or Monica, there was always a sense of genuine, generous caring." With Bush, "if folks were upset with him, he still had this goofy kind of personality that folks could relate to. You might think he was totally misguided but he seemed genuinely so. . . . Maybe the most important word that described Clinton and Bush but not Obama is 'genuine.'" He "doesn't exude any feeling that what he says and does is genuine." Maybe Mr. Obama is living proof of the political maxim that they don't care what you know unless they know that you care. But the idea that he is aloof and so inspires aloofness may be too pat. No one was colder than FDR, deep down. But he loved the game and did a wonderful daily impersonation of jut-jawed joy. And people loved him. The secret of Mr. Obama is that he isn't really very good at politics, and he isn't good at politics because he doesn't really get people. The other day a Republican political veteran forwarded me a hiring notice from the Obama 2012 campaign. It read like politics as done by Martians. The "Analytics Department" is looking for "predictive Modeling/Data Mining" specialists to join the campaign's "multi-disciplinary team of statisticians," which will use "predictive modeling" to anticipate the behavior of the electorate. "We will analyze millions of interactions a day, learning from terabytes of historical data, running thousands of experiments, to inform campaign strategy and critical decisions." This wasn't the passionate, take-no-prisoners Clinton War Room of '92, it was high-tech and bloodless. Is that what politics is now? Or does the Obama re-election effort reflect the candidate and his flaws? Mr. Obama seemed brilliant at politics when he first emerged in 2004. He understood the nation's longing for unity. We're not divided into red states and blue, he said, we're Big Purple, we can solve our problems together. Four years later he read the lay of the land perfectly—really, perfectly. The nation and the Democratic Party were tired of the Clinton machine. He came from nowhere and dismantled it. It was breathtaking. He went into the 2008 general election with a miraculously unified party and took down another machine, bundling up all the accrued resentment of eight years with one message: "You know the two losing wars and the economic collapse we've been dealing with? I won't do that. I'm not Bush." The fact is, he's good at dismantling. He's good at critiquing. He's good at not being the last guy, the one you didn't like. But he's not good at building, creating, calling into being. He was good at summoning hope, but he's not good at directing it and turning it into something concrete that answers a broad public desire. And so his failures in the debt ceiling fight. He wasn't serious, he was only shrewd—and shrewdness wasn't enough. He demagogued the issue—no Social Security checks—until he was called out, and then went on the hustings spouting inanities. He left conservatives scratching their heads: They could have made a better, more moving case for the liberal ideal as translated into the modern moment, than he did. He never offered a plan. In a crisis he was merely sly. And no one likes sly, no one respects it. So he is losing a battle in which he had superior forces—the presidency, the U.S. Senate. In the process he revealed that his foes have given him too much mystique. He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
He understood the nation's longing for unity. We're not divided into red states and blue, he said, we're Big Purple, we can solve our problems together. Four years later he read the lay of the land perfectly—really, perfectly. The nation and the Democratic Party were tired of the Clinton machine. He came from nowhere and dismantled it. It was breathtaking. He went into the 2008 general election with a miraculously unified party and took down another machine, bundling up all the accrued resentment of eight years with one message: "You know the two losing wars and the economic collapse we've been dealing with? I won't do that. I'm not Bush." The fact is, he's good at dismantling. He's good at critiquing. He's good at not being the last guy, the one you didn't like. But he's not good at building, creating, calling into being. He was good at summoning hope, but he's not good at directing it and turning it into something concrete that answers a broad public desire. And so his failures in the debt ceiling fight. He wasn't serious, he was only shrewd—and shrewdness wasn't enough. He demagogued the issue—no Social Security checks—until he was called out, and then went on the hustings spouting inanities. He left conservatives scratching their heads: They could have made a better, more moving case for the liberal ideal as translated into the modern moment, than he did. He never offered a plan. In a crisis he was merely sly. And no one likes sly, no one respects it. So he is losing a battle in which he had superior forces—the presidency, the U.S. Senate. In the process he revealed that his foes have given him too much mystique. He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser. *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^* NOONAN? "He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser. NOONAN? "He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser. NOONAN. "He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser. Close enough. "He is not a devil, an alien, a socialist. He is a loser. And this is America, where nobody loves a loser. "In the land of the BLIND the one eyed man is King."
Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.
Peggy, Peggy, Peggy. At your age you should understand that the two-party fraud is not worried about supporters. Both "sides" know that when push comes to shove that Democratic partisans and the majority of left-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Democratic candidate no matter what and Republican partisans and right-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter what. I believe that a prominent member of the two party fraud stated it well when he said, "Where else are they going to go?" The political establishment knows that the voting majority cares more about ensuring that the supposed "other side" doesn't win than they do issues or holding their party responsible for their actions.
Well I'm not, and suspect you're not going to vote for neocon-X either. If there's crap on the ballot again, lots of people will vote third party, or stay at home. No sense in voting for a hObama neolib/neocon, with an R after their name. Peggy's counting her chickens before they hatch. When the debt ceiling hike deal comes down, it won't be the D&R party that loses, but we the people.
Obama's watch stopped on 24 May 2008, but he's been too busy smoking crack to notice.
I didn't vote for the Bush's in 1988, 1992, 0r 2004. I won't vote for Romney next year.
I didn't vote for Dole or McCain...and if the GOP runs another like them in 2012 I won't for for him/her either.
Peggy's counting her chickens before they hatch. When the debt ceiling hike deal comes down, it won't be the D&R party that loses, but we the people. I should have added "the majority of" in front of right-wing independents like I did left-wing independents. My mistake. I agree that there are a small percentage of voters who refuse to be manipulated by the two-party fraud.
I didn't vote for Dole or McCain either.
We find that children and young people often times make rash political statements or say other things of dubious taste in their adolescent quest for their individual identity.
Your fixation with children is noted.
Your ignorance and stupidity is expected.
Well that certainly has been he system so far. BUT in case nobody is watching things have changed. The reason Boner is speaker NOW is because people are trying to save the repukelican't partee as a vehicle to save Constitutional America. In other words, the so called tea partee. And just in case you really haven't been watching, WE aren't just going to vote for a "R". WE will vote for Constitutional CONSERVATIVES and the rest can F OFF. No sane person believes that we can save America in just one election. WE AMERICANS need to win alot of elections. Then it's bye- bye to these lifer political whores who put their self interests before those of this nation and people. In short, the "game" has changed and nobody but we who support the so called tea partee believes or understands that YET. This thread isn't about the two partee fraud. It's about the wee failed man child messiah "king" obammy as an individual being REJECTED by even those who are complete whores for his agenda. But I see your point and understand the confusion. What is happening now to the little failed man child messiah "king" obammy hasn't got a GD' ed thing to do with the two party fraud. It's got to do with what the total PERSONAL FRAUD that the so called "president" IS, of what a complete and total FAILURE, on ALL pro-America/Constitutional basis this vile commie monster is.
Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.
That's OLD pre tea party "thinking". None of us will be dancing to their tune anymore. The way it works NOW any Third partee is a sure FAILURE. We're going to take the repukelican't partee back from the RINOS and commies. Then we're going to take AMERICA back from these wannabe tyrants. And there isn't a F ing thing that the establishment can do that will work to stop us. "Lead , follow, or get the HELL out of the way!"
Spoiled, stupid and ignorant, brain dead phuckwads, libTURD fools, tools, and idiots, are the real sickness; the messiah "king" obammy and his regime are only the symptoms.
Mr. Obama seemed brilliant at politics when he first emerged in 2004.
#2. To: Mad Dog (#0)
#3. To: Fibr Dog, Mad Dog (#2)
Republican partisans and right-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter what
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#4. To: Fibr Dog (#2)
Republican partisans and right-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter what
To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. — Thomas Jefferson
#5. To: jwpegler (#4)
I didn't vote for the Bush's in 1988, 1992, 0r 2004.
#6. To: hondo68, jwpegler, Thunderbird, all (#3)
Well I'm not, and suspect you're not going to vote for neocon-X either. If there's crap on the ballot again, lots of people will vote third party, or stay at home. No sense in voting for a hObama neolib/neocon, with an R after their name.
#7. To: Thunderbird (#5)
To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. — Thomas Jefferson
#8. To: Thunderbird (#5)
#9. To: Gatlin (#8)
#10. To: Thunderbird (#9)
#11. To: Fibr Dog (#2)
Peggy, Peggy, Peggy. At your age you should understand that the two-party fraud is not worried about supporters. Both "sides" know that when push comes to shove that Democratic partisans and the majority of left-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Democratic candidate no matter what and Republican partisans and right-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter what. I believe that a prominent member of the two party fraud stated it well when he said, "Where else are they going to go?" The political establishment knows that the voting majority cares more about ensuring that the supposed "other side" doesn't win than they do issues or holding their party responsible for their actions.
#12. To: hondo68, Fibr Dog (#3)
Republican partisans and right-wing "independents" are going to vote for the Republican candidate no matter what
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]