October 14, 2010

These People Live in a Fantasy World

Yes, I realize I haven't posted much. Yes, there is a good reason. No, I'm not going to go into it here.

Anyway, getting back to politics briefly, there's a ton of blog fodder in this article, and I may touch on more of it over the next couple days, but I wanted to focus on two particular quotes for the time being, because they reveal a lot about the mindset of Obama and his supporters. First, there's this:

In their darkest moments, White House aides wonder aloud whether it is even possible for a modern president to succeed, no matter how many bills he signs. Everything seems to conspire against the idea: an implacable opposition with little if any real interest in collaboration, a news media saturated with triviality and conflict, a culture that demands solutions yesterday, a societal cynicism that holds leadership in low regard. Some White House aides who were ready to carve a new spot on Mount Rushmore for their boss two years ago privately concede now that he cannot be another Abraham Lincoln after all. In this environment, they have increasingly concluded, it may be that every modern president is going to be, at best, average.

First of all, this goes back to my previous post about "poligicians." These fucking morons really believe that success means signing lots of bills. Notice that there's no mention of what's actually in said bills. They seem to think that simply passing any law is a success, just as long as it has a name that's good for PR.

I get the feeling that these retards would be genuinely surprised if they made unemployment illegal and people were still unemployed the next day. They have absolutely no understanding of cause and effect. None.

The part about every president being average is equally revealing. Since they see Obama as successful, they wonder why he isn't getting credit for his historic achievements. There's the usual bloviation about how they didn't talk enough about their accomplishments (which is how liberals explain every policy failure, because they don't understand that they have horrible ideas), but there's something else going on here that just occurred to me recently, and is supported by the second quote that caught my attention:

The view from inside the administration starts with a basic mantra: Obama inherited the worst problems of any president in years. Or in generations. Or in American history. He prevented another Great Depression while putting in place the foundation for a more stable future. But it required him to do unpopular things that would inevitably cost him.

This is similar to the recent Rahm Emanuel quote about Obama being "the toughest leader any country could ask for, in the toughest times any president has ever faced." First of all, it obviously reveals that in addition to not understanding cause and effect, liberals have no grasp of history. But it also reveals the incredibly delusional viewpoint of those still defending the narcissist-in-chief.

Think about it. Why are they so discouraged while still believing that Obama has been successful and is a fantastic leader? Why are they still going on about the problems he "inherited" (ignoring, of course, the fact that he was in Congress while they were wrecking the economy) when he's had nearly half a term to do something, anything to mitigate the disaster instead of making it worse?

There's a connection between their view of Obama and their view of the problems he's facing. Quite simply, they're frustrated because if Barack Obama, the best and most brilliant president EVAR!!!1!!!, can't get the country on the right track, then nobody can.

Again, think about it. They just know that Obama is up to the task (except for the whole "talking" thing, which he clearly hasn't done enough), but the economy is still in the shitter, and his approval rating plummets every day. This is why they believe that he's facing "the toughest times any president has ever faced." Lincoln won the Civil War, Reagan won the Cold War, FDR and Truman won WWII, etc., so if Obama, who is a better leader than any of them, can't solve our current crises, then it must not be possible.

I'm pretty sure Obama himself believes this, as well. His solution to every problem before getting elected consisted of a three-pronged strategy: show up, read a teleprompter, and above all, be Barack Obama. This is why he believed that "you've got me" was a way to reassure Democrats worried about a repeat of '94, and it's why he's puzzled that Israel and Palestine still hate each other despite the fact that he's gotten himself involved in the conflict.

If being Barack Obama, the solution to every other problem, doesn't work anymore, then we must be doomed.

I honestly tried to express this better, but you get what I'm trying to say, right?

Ace makes a point that's kind of in the same vein (probably because I found this article through his post about it) and reminds me of something else I wanted to mention:

The aides continue whining that they misjudged the politics. That's all they see this as. When all you have is a hammer, all the world looks like a nail.

But Reagan didn't become Reagan because of politics. He became Reagan because of tangible success. Not clever arguments or rhetoric; his policies worked, and not just on paper, but in people's actual lives.

This gets back to those fun liberal blind spots that the right doesn't seem interested enough in exploiting. I've actually seen libs argue that because Reagan also inherited a tough economy and wasn't terribly popular his first couple years, Obama just needs more time. He'll be just as successful, really!

Of course, this ignores an incredibly important detail: REAGAN DID THE EXACT FUCKING OPPOSITE OF JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING OBAMA HAS DONE.

But this doesn't matter to the left. They believe that Reagan was a terrible president who was just such an effective communicator that he made people believe his policies were helping them. This isn't just conjecture, incidentally; I had at least one poli-sci professor in college who more or less said that Reagan distracted people from the damaging effects of his policies by talking about how great America was and making them feel patriotic. Seriously.

You can kind of see what this means to the left now. If Reagan, who couldn't possibly have had a positive effect on the country (since conservatives are Bad People™ who only care about rich white men), was able to leave office with such a high approval rating, all Obama needs to do is talk even more about how awesome he is, and people will start to worship him again. After all, as a progressive, his policies are obviously superior!

No understanding of cause and effect.

Reading through the comments of the AoS post, I see that resident window licker "archie bunker" showed up to make my point for me:

30 months into his first term unemployment hit 10.8%, but Reagan still was able to blame Carter for that, he truly was The Great Communicator

Once again, this completely ignores the fact that Reagan didn't implement policies proven to make the economy worse every time they'd been tried before. Because actual results are less important than words.

Posted by CD at 11:13 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack