Everybody’s Asking ‘Is Obama Mentally Present?’

Everybody’s Asking ‘Is Obama Mentally Present?’

M Catharine Evans

 


Conservatives aren’t the only ones befuddled
by the President’s Gridiron dinner antics, March madness picks and his strange
Saturday radio address focusing on the Paycheck Fairness Act when a government
shutdown has been looming for weeks.

Daily
Mail’s Max Hastings
calls Barack Obama “cool, cold, cerebral, and arrogant”
in a March 14 lament.

Hastings, like millions of Europeans, fell in lust
with the U.S President back in 2008 and now that the bloom is off the stem, he
wants to break up. Like most of Obama’s star-struck groupies he’s racking his
brain trying to understand what happened to the knight “mantled in a glittering
white cloak…the great speechmaker.”

On the Mideast, Afghanistan, the
debt, unemployment, and myriad domestic and international crises the One appears
“remote” displaying “a curious lack of interest.” Curiously, Hastings cites
Obama’s post-massacre Arizona speech when he “rose to extraordinary heights of
rhetoric” as the single exception to the president’s otherwise glaring
indifference in the face of so much turmoil.

Hastings contention that
Obama is “missing in action” makes us wonder whether the President was ever ‘in
the action’ to begin with. By now, those paying attention know the Chicago
trained community organizer did not come to lead but to act as a mouthpiece for
those who desire to change the founding fathers’ vision of America. And he needs
four more years to finish the job. Hastings all but admits this may be the
case:

While the world welcomed Obama as a transformational figure, he
shows no sign of wishing to fulfil any such grand role.

Indeed, the White
House is obsessed with a single issue: how to get its man re-elected in November
2012.

A Washingtonian who has studied the President at close quarters
said to me: ‘I think I understand him now. He’s a “pol” – a politico – who
learned his business in the Chicago machine.

In trying to
make sense of it all Hastings, being a good liberal Brit, scapegoats the
American people as “nutters” and dutifully bashes Sarah Palin as that “moose
hunting air-headed vice presidential candidate” whose “hick followers still
love” her, but “Lord, be thanked, the White House now seems safe from her.”

The reporter insists that the majority of Americans who live in the real
world reject the “Republican excesses,” and appreciate a “brilliant man” who
never says or acts “irrationally.”

Hastings refuses to speak ill of his
former idol, but by the end of the piece he expresses frustration at the
President’s refusal to man up and “fight tough fights.” But it can’t be the
President’s fault; he “was bound to succumb to the sordid demands of machine
politics.” Was that before 2008 or after?

The reporter can’t seem to
bring himself to admit he was powerless over the Obama machine, taken in by the
phony Axelrodian reality. Instead Hastings blames the “hicks” that did their
homework. Weren’t they the ones who  googled ‘Alinsky;’ were aghast when they
listened to Reverend Wright’s anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-white speeches;
and who discovered the “brilliant man” voted ‘present’ 129 times in the Illinois
State Senate?

A “Washington admirer” urges Hastings to “not lose faith”
in Barack Obama, that he “may still lay claim to greatness.” What a twisted and
doomed love story this presidency is turning out to be.

Read
more M.Catharine Evans at www.potterwilliamsreport.com

Obama’s First Two Years a Disaster for America

Obama’s First Two Years a Disaster for America

By Chad
Stafko

 

Recall the euphoria that surrounded Barack Obama during
the 2008 election season and after he was inaugurated as the 44th
President of the United States.  Life was going to be blue skies and rainbows,
or at least we were told, with hope and change on the way.  The American people
would be better off and so would our nation with Obama in control.  After a
little more than two years as the President, those blue skies have turned gray
with not the slightest hint of a rainbow.

Some professed that with Barack Obama as President, the staples of life
would become affordable if not altogether free.  Surely you remember Peggy Joseph who said, at
a Barack Obama campaign event in August 2008, that she would not have to worry
about paying for her gas and mortgage.  Consider what has happened to those
staples of life during the Obama presidency.
As of March 14, the average price of regular unleaded gasoline was
$3.57/gallon.  When Obama took office in January 2009, the price was
$1.81/gallon.  That represents more than a 90% increase in just over two
years.
To put that in perspective, assume you have a 40 mile round trip commute to
work, your car gets 20 miles per gallon and that prices remain the same going
forward.  Relative to January 2009, you are paying about $18 more per week and
about $72 more per month at the pump.
The pertinent question we might ask is, “What has President Obama done in
the past two years to limit the rise of oil and gasoline prices, if anything?”
The answer is…nothing.  If anything, his policies have contributed towards
rising prices.  Recall the moratorium he enacted on oil drilling following the
BP oil spill that further limited the supply of the commodity from our own
waters.  His failure to support drilling in ANWR and his overt allegiance to the
anti-drilling environmental fringe has also directly contributed to less supply
of oil and therefore higher oil prices.
Ms. Joseph also looked forward to Obama paying her mortgage.  Well, many
Americans don’t have to worry about a mortgage anymore, as they’ve had their
houses foreclosed.  In
2009
, a record 2,824,674 foreclosures took place, while 2,872,892
foreclosures occurred in
2010
.   In other words, 5.7 million families have lost their homes, but at
least they’re not up all night wondering how they will pay their
mortgage.
It just wasn’t supposed to be this way, at least in the eyes of the 53% of
voters who cast their ballot for Barack Obama.  After all, President Obama’s
policies
were going to reignite the economy and keep the unemployment rate
below 8% at least that is what we were told, thereby making those aforementioned
mortgages affordable.  The opposite has occurred.
In December 2008, President Bush’s final full month in office, the nation’s
unemployment rate stood at 7.3%.  From that point until December 2010, a period
in which Obama benefited from accommodative Democratic majorities in the House
and Senate, the unemployment rate rose to 10.1% at one time and remained at or
above 9.5% from July 2009 until November 2010.
This resulted despite unprecedented government spending labeled as
“economic stimulus.”
What happened?  Instead of a surge in America’s economic growth, we’ve seen
a surge in America’s deficit.  Under the direction of President Obama, the
United States has seen its deficit
increase
by more than $3 trillion or by nearly $10,000 for every man, woman,
and child in America.
Then there was the
promise
of “When there’s a bill that ends up on my desk, as President, you,
the public, will have five days to look online to find out what’s in it before I
sign it….” Again, the reality has been the complete opposite.
Rewind to March 2010, when then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in reference to
the ObamaCare bill, said,
“We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”  Really?  I
thought that 2,700 page bill would be posted on the Internet for all to view for
five days.  Instead, it was rushed through and pushed down our throats, despite
most Americans not in favor of it.  Again, Obama failed to deliver, as he has
time after time.
We are now just after the halfway point of the Obama presidency.  Based on
the facts, we are no better off as a nation than we were when Obama took
office.  The average American citizen has failed to see an improvement in his or
her lifestyle versus two years ago.  This is a presidency, up to this point,
that has been an absolute disaster for our nation and our people.
Chad Stafko is a writer and political consultant living in the
Midwest.  He can be reached at
stafko@msn.com

Obama the invisible

Obama the invisible

By JOHN PODHORETZ
Last Updated: 10:14 AM, March 16, 2011
Posted: 11:48 PM, March 15, 2011


Where is the president? The world is beset. Moammar Khadafy is moving
relentlessly to crush the Libyan revolt that once promised the overthrow of one
of the world’s most despicable regimes.
So where is the president?
Japan may be on the verge of a disaster that dwarfs any we have yet seen. A
self-governing nation like the United States needs its leader to take full
measure of his position at times of crises when the path forward is no longer
clear.
This is not a time for leadership; this is the time for leadership.
So where is Barack Obama?
The moment demands that he rise to the challenge of showing America and the
world that he is taking the reins. How leaders act in times of unanticipated
crisis, in which they do not have a formulated game plan and must instead
navigate in treacherous waters, defines them.
Obama is defining himself in a way that will destroy him.
It is not merely that he isn’t rising to the challenge. He is
avoiding the challenge. He is Bartleby the President. He would prefer
not to.
He has access to a microphone 24 hours a day, seven days a week. If he tells
the broadcast networks in the middle of the day that he has a major address to
deliver on an unprecedented world situation, they will cancel their programming
for him.
And yet, since Friday and a press conference in which he managed to leave the
American position on Libya more muddled than it was before, we have not heard
his voice. Except in a radio address — he talked about education legislation.
And he appeared at a fund-raiser in DC. And sat down with ESPN to reveal his
NCAA picks.
He cannot go on like this. Niall Ferguson, the very pessimis tic economic his
torian, wrote the other day that the best we can now hope for is that Obama
leaves the country in the same kind of shape that Jimmy Carter left it in.
That doesn’t do Obama justice. Despite how disastrously he has handled the
crises of the past two months, he can still turn his presidency around on a
dime.
For Obama to save himself, he should be thinking about the example of an
unlikely Republican predecessor: Richard Nixon.
The multifarious crises the president now faces are eerily similar to the
kinds of calamities that greeted Richard Nixon in his first term from 1969-1972.
Then, as now, the world was on fire. Wars erupted between China and the Soviet
Union, India and Pakistan, even El Salvador and Honduras.
Jordan was nearly taken over from within by the Palestine Liberation
Organization. There were humanitarian disasters in Biafra (the result of civil
war), Bangladesh (due to flooding) and Nicaragua (deadly earthquake).
There was more, much more — including a war he inherited in Vietnam, just as
Obama has the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. You get the point.
Nixon in 1968, unlike Obama 2008, was elected as a minority president with
only 43 percent of the vote. Yet, in 1972, he won what, in some measures, was
the most lopsided election in American history with 61 percent.
Nixon achieved it, in large measure, because he appeared to be a serious man
grappling in deadly earnest with the serious problems presented to him by a
world careening out of control.
He demonstrated high competency when it came to matters on the world stage. He and his team (primarily Henry Kissinger) developed coherent policies and strategies for coping with the world. There was no question, to friend or foe, that he was fully engaged, paying attention, deeply involved.
Nixon was an awful president in many ways, including in some of his
foreign-policy choices. But he left no doubt that foreign policy and America’s
leadership in the world outside its borders was of paramount importance to him.
All this had the effect of elevating Nixon during his time in office, so that
when it came to running against George McGovern in 1972, Nixon seemed like a
Titan and McGovern a pipsqueak.
How Nixon conducted himself in office in times of crises made possible his
triumphant re-election. Right now, how Obama is conducting himself in a time of
crisis is having the opposite effect.
He began his presidency as a potential colossus — but if he doesn’t change,
he will finish it as a pipsqueak. Pipsqueaks don’t win second terms.
johnpodhoretz@gmail.com