Barack Obama is one snarky chief executive. Just watch his comments from two days ago.
The President appeared before news cameras, ostensibly to update the nation regarding the horrific shootings that took place last weekend in Orlando. However, he used the opportunity to engage in selfish, disingenuous polemics and attack his critics.
Because he felt personally insulted by Donald Trump, Mr. Obama tried to prop himself up by caricaturing his opponent’s position; as if the only thing that matters is the turn of a specific phrase; as if several unspoken words might be the only thing lacking in Mr. Obama’s failed foreign policy, in his refusal, in particular, to adequately combat radical Islamic jihad during its strategic advance over the past several years.
Mr. Obama’s failure to reference such murderous radicalism for what it is, to honestly label that which threatens western democracy, as well as human dignity, characterises his broader, manifest policy failures. He focuses on polarizing semantics to divert from harsher, more frightening realities.
When a President of the United States cannot rise above disingenuous partisanship in a time of national tragedy, and puts his personal pride ahead of the nation he governs, it is evidence that President is not fit to lead.
Mr. Trump suggested Mr. Obama resign. Is that such a bad idea?
Consistent among liberal politicians is a reflexive use of politicized vocabulary to turn major news events, even tragic ones, to their political advantage. Witness President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s response to the murderous rampage that just took place in Orlando, Florida.
These two Democrat standard bearers lead their legions away from the painfully obvious: radical islamic terrorists are fighting to destroy western democracy. Instead, they promote a diversion: the Orlando attack was a hate crime for which right-wing bigotry and the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms are ultimately responsible.
Falling back on time-worn, poll-tested talking points is what liberal politicians have been trained to do, so as to move any discussion away from areas of perceived liberal weakness (terrorism and homeland security), toward their perceived strengths (hate crimes and gun control). Like Pavlovian drones, with steady backing from liberal media hounds (a.k.a. the ‘mainstream’ media), they salivate at this chance to obfuscate, to pursue a political agenda, as the corpses of innocent victims accumulate.
In the classic baseball poem, Casey at the Bat, when the “mighty Casey” carried his timber and excessive confidence to home plate, it was inevitable he would swing his way to victory and emerge as Mudville’s hometown savior … until he didn’t. Instead, he struck out. And there was no joy to be had in Mudville.
I have never bought into the vastly popular notion of Hillary Clinton being the inevitable Democrat presidential nominee come November. Liberal media hounds (a.k.a. the ‘mainstream media’) seem eager enough, gleefully celebrating Mrs. Clinton’s status as the first female ‘presumptive’ presidential nominee of a major U.S. political party. Even President Obama has chimed in with his endorsement today of Mrs. Clinton, someone he quietly loathes.
The liberal establishment declines, however, to notice another first for Hillary and the Democrats. She is on the verge of becoming the first presidential nominee of a major U.S. political party to achieve such status while under investigation by the FBI, and under serious, perhaps imminent, threat of criminal indictment for espionage and official corruption.
What a first that would be!
It is such an insane notion, in fact, that talk has resurfaced recently of Democrat puppet masters pulling Joe Biden and/or Elizabeth Warren out of their holes in order to deny Bernie Sanders the nomination and, thus, keep the Democrat party from disintegrating.
We shall see. But let us not be gleeful. As America becomes Mudville, there is no joy.