The Presidency that Saved America

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 2:36 AM GMT
    Thought this would be of interest, mostly to conservatives:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/12/the_presidency_that_saved_amer.html

    December 04, 2010
    By Peter Heck

    In fifty years I have little doubt that we will regard the administration of Barack Obama as the presidency that saved America. No, not in the sense that Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, and all the other media John the Baptists foretold as they proclaimed the coming of our political messiah just over two years ago. Rather, the history of our time will show that it was the radical nature of Obama's dogged devotion to a liberal progressive philosophy far out of the American mainstream that jolted awake a generation of apathetic and passive citizens just in time to save the republic.

    Though that apathy has always been inexcusable, it was at least understandable. Our politics had become more theater than substance. In fact, voters reasonably began to view their choices at the ballot box as something akin to picking between airline food and hospital food: bland, insipid, uninspiring.

    For all their posturing and crowing, the two parties had largely become mere reflections of one another. Seriously, how different was Bill Clinton's "triangulation" and George W. Bush's "compassionate conservatism?" Candidates of either party who showed convictions contrary to the Washington establishment and challenged that establishment's control were labeled radical, and every attempt was made to marginalize them.

    But Barack Obama changed all of that. For the last two years, the President has unleashed the most aggressively left-wing agenda he could muster. When the electorate began a backlash against his revolutionary designs at town halls and tea parties, he ignored them. And when they rejected his ideology by throwing his party out of power by historic proportions in the midterm elections, he pretended not to notice, or that he was misunderstood.

    All this makes little sense to those attempting to view Obama's presidency through the conventional prism of political leadership. But Obama is not a conventional politician. He is a radical ideologue. Obama is not a leader. He is a bitter partisan. And as odd as it sounds, that is exactly what this country needed.

    It has been generations since Americans have been exposed to a more vivid depiction of the significant differences between the left's and the right's views of this country and its future. The delineation between conservative and liberal had grown hopelessly blurred to a majority of citizens. But Obama and his leftist cabal have been successful not only in demonstrating the frightening vision progressive liberals have of making America into a European-style socialist state, but they have also managed to animate a vast conservative majority that has laid painfully dormant since the mid 1980s.

    The distinction is glaring, and even for those who normally avoid politics, impossible to miss.

    While Americans watch conservative Republicans like Eric Cantor explain that raising taxes on any citizens in the midst of a recession (particularly those who are being relied upon to invest and expand businesses to create jobs) is foolish, they see President Obama proclaim that "we can't afford" not to raise taxes on a group of citizens he determines are too wealthy.

    Besides the glaring proof this offers of the left's obsession with using divisive class warfare to gain power, it also reveals a notable difference in philosophy. While conservatives like Cantor believe money belongs first to the citizen and is confiscated by government, leftists like Obama believe money belongs first to the government. That government then lets select citizens keep some of it...if and only if government "can afford" to be so generous.

    Further, when Americans open their newspapers, they are greeted with the wise counsel of Obamabots like Tom Friedman and Paul Krugman. Friedman's recent piece in the New York Times called the Tea Party movement "narrow and uninspired" while touting that, "We need to raise gasoline and carbon taxes to discourage their use and drive the creation of a new clean energy industry." Krugman, meanwhile, laments that the waste of nearly one trillion taxpayer dollars on a government spending bill meant to stimulate a still stagnant economy wasn't enough, and should be followed up with an even bigger second stimulus.

    Everywhere they turn, Americans see that the left is offering higher taxes, less freedom, more debt and regulation. They simultaneously see the right offering lower taxes, freer markets and fiscal sanity.

    Voters' first opportunity to choose between those two visions occurred in the 2010 midterms. Their preference was unmistakable -- to everyone, that is, except Barack Obama. His recent pronouncement that, "It would be unwise to assume [the voters] prefer one way of thinking over another," reconfirmed that the president and his cohorts have no desire whatsoever to alter course, and instead will spend the next two years butting heads with the newly elected conservative majority. This conflict is sure to make the distinction between the left and the right all the more clear to an engaged American public.

    And with a 2012 election cycle that already sees Democrats poised to face even more devastating Congressional losses (they are defending far more Senate seats than Republicans, and could lose upward of 30 House seats due to redistricting), Obama's persistent, unapologetic left-wing crusade is shaping up to be the political equivalent to Pickett's Charge.

    In the end, the era of Obama will do more damage to the progressive left than any Republican presidency could have ever done. For that, posterity will owe him a debt of gratitude.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 2:39 AM GMT
    You're... special... in the "short bus" kind of way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 2:40 AM GMT
    On second thought... that's offensive to retarded people.
  • creature

    Posts: 5197

    Dec 05, 2010 3:10 AM GMT
    Conservatives must be heavy sleepers.

    Obama announced during his campaign that he planned to raise taxes if he were president. He also campaigned on universal health care and other "radical" ideas. Yet, he won the popular vote (and of course, the electoral vote). So the man who presented "liberal progressive philosophy" actually received the consent to enact his beliefs by receiving most of the votes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 3:28 AM GMT
    Dear OP, what caused this great economic crisis that our country is going thru?
    the problem is that this great financial crisis started because conservatives and Republicans took the legal restraints off of our financial sector that kept us save for 60 years and totally abandoned any oversight. It was all rah-rah for business and deregulation. Well, see where that got us. Your position is totally debunked by our recent history. We are in this mess precisely because of what you espouse. The huge spending by the Dems is to try to save our economy after the conservatives, Republicans, and the totally brainless and uneducated citizens of this country wreaked it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 3:38 AM GMT
    Caslon16000 saidDear OP, what caused this great economic crisis that our country is going thru?

    Dear Caslon, Republican administration failed to see the convergence of practices leading to the perfect storm. A main factor was the housing situation motivated by the Democrats and facilitated by Fannie and Freddie.

    Housing situation extensively discussed here:
    http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/1080001/

    Tony Blair in his memoirs also provides a good discussion on the financial crisis. From an editorial in WSJ:

    Britain's former prime minister understands better than most the origins of the financial crisis.

    Tony Blair's memoir, out this week, has so far received attention mostly for the former Prime Minister's judgments about George W. Bush (remarkably admiring) and Gordon Brown (decidedly mixed). But Mr. Blair's clear-sighted views on the financial crisis are arguably more instructive.

    In the last chapter of "A Journey," Mr. Blair writes, "First, 'the market' did not fail. One part of one sector did." Then he adds: "Government also failed. Regulations failed. Politicians failed. Monetary policy failed. Debt became way too cheap. But that wasn't a conspiracy of the banks; it was a consequence of the apparently benign confluence of loose money policy and low inflation."

    Mr. Blair also rightly puts his finger on the bigger picture, saying "the failure was one of understanding. We didn't spot it. You can argue we should have, but we didn't. Furthermore—and this is vital for where we go now on regulation—it wasn't that we were powerless to prevent it even if we had seen it coming; it wasn't a failure of regulation in the sense that we lacked the power to intervene. Had regulators said to the leaders that a huge crisis was about to break we wouldn't have said: There's nothing we can do about it until we get more regulation through. We would have acted."

    This truth hasn't stopped the global rush to throw more power at the regulators who failed to anticipate the panic or diagnose the bubble.

    On stimulus, Keynesianism and re-regulation, Mr. Blair is also astute: "Ultimately the recovery will be led not by governments but by industry, business, and the creativity, ingenuity and enterprise of people. If the measures you take in responding to the crisis diminish their incentives, curb their entrepreneurship, make them feel unsure about the climate in which they are working, the recovery becomes uncertain."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:05 AM GMT
    But didnt a senator from one of the Dakotas predict this 10 years ago when the financial regulations of the Great Depression were removed?

    Do you think the behavior of the financial institutions had anything to do with the crisis?

    Do you think they should had a bit more on the ball and seen where things were headed?

    Now, lets say Blair is right and it is just a result of lack of preception of what was going to happen under the situation. What should the fed govt have done when the financial sector started to crash and during the resultant economic turmoil?
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Dec 05, 2010 4:23 AM GMT
    the USA has survived 8 years of the dubya bush Presidency; we can survive anyone.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:35 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidFor the last two years, the President has unleashed the most aggressively left-wing agenda he could muster.

    Just so much right-wing propaganda, meant to sound factual, but pure lies. Can socialfitness describe in detail the "most aggressively left-wind agenda [Obama] could muster"?

    There is none, a total Republican myth. What they really mean is to call anything not right-wing, anything not complying with their own Republican agenda as radical. Lies & propaganda from the Republican media machine, nothing more.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:59 AM GMT
    SoCal, this writer and Blair the lab dog of bush, are straining so hard to make someone responsible for their conservative mess, that it leaves an observant person speechless and with nothing to do or say but LOL !!!! If you believe this, then your body and mind must be saturated with some kind of really soupy Rovian coolaid, and remember Bush's nickname for him was something like "TURDBLOSSOM", please correct me if I'm wrong on that nickname, I'd hate to undermine him or anything. JUST LOL !!!!!! OH MY GOD !!! LOL !!!!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 5:11 AM GMT
    One feels in many ways this may well belong to President Reagan, at this stage He took over after the weak administration of Jimmy carter. The fact Jimmy was to achieve nothing to have the hostages released, and before President Reagan was even inaugurated, those hostages where released.

    I myself recall having absolutly nothing but fear when President Reagan was elected, and by the end of it all I was so sad to see him go, as one had the deepest respect for him, and it was the birth of my respect for the Republicans.

    I don't think it will take 50 years though with Obama.

    God Bless America!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 6:11 AM GMT
    True_blue_aussie saidOne feels in many ways this may well belong to President Reagan, at this stage He took over after the weak administration of Jimmy carter. The fact Jimmy was to achieve nothing to have the hostages released, and before President Reagan was even inaugurated, those hostages where released.

    I myself recall having absolutly nothing but fear when President Reagan was elected, and by the end of it all I was so sad to see him go, as one had the deepest respect for him, and it was the birth of my respect for the Republicans.

    I don't think it will take 50 years though with Obama.

    God Bless America!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Maybe you should look up Robert Perry's research of fact that Reagans running mate Bush #1 through the CIA was instrumental in making sure that those hostages weren't released to enhance their chances of being elected. Clinton through an Indiana congressman looking into the matter decided to cover up what they'd done "because the country didn't need to know" LOL !!! Now maybe you'll know why Bush has such an affinity for Clinton. No good deed goes unpunished though does it, look what the repubs did to Clinton. Reagan was not what the conservatives build him up to be.
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Dec 05, 2010 8:04 AM GMT
    Republicans are masters of fiction...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 8:52 AM GMT
    Webster666 saidRepublicans are masters of fiction...
    They have been taking lessons from the left. I never had sexual relations with that womanicon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 8:57 AM GMT
    realifedad said
    True_blue_aussie saidOne feels in many ways this may well belong to President Reagan, at this stage He took over after the weak administration of Jimmy carter. The fact Jimmy was to achieve nothing to have the hostages released, and before President Reagan was even inaugurated, those hostages where released.

    I myself recall having absolutly nothing but fear when President Reagan was elected, and by the end of it all I was so sad to see him go, as one had the deepest respect for him, and it was the birth of my respect for the Republicans.

    I don't think it will take 50 years though with Obama.

    God Bless America!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Maybe you should look up Robert Perry's research of fact that Reagans running mate Bush #1 through the CIA was instrumental in making sure that those hostages weren't released to enhance their chances of being elected. Clinton through an Indiana congressman looking into the matter decided to cover up what they'd done "because the country didn't need to know" LOL !!! Now maybe you'll know why Bush has such an affinity for Clinton. No good deed goes unpunished though does it, look what the repubs did to Clinton. Reagan was not what the conservatives build him up to be.


    Funny with all the well educated Americans I have been blessed to communicate with and too sit in their homes, and talk about this but not once has one heard such a wonderful peace of propaganda.. Did not someone here already say the Republicans are masters at fiction matey you just took the prize.

    But you where talking about I never had sexual relations with that women free willy Bill Clinton, who turned the White House in to the dirtiest little whore house in Washington bill, if so nuff said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 12:26 PM GMT
    Caslon16000 said
    Now, lets say Blair is right and it is just a result of lack of preception of what was going to happen under the situation. What should the fed govt have done when the financial sector started to crash and during the resultant economic turmoil?


    The Austrian school (which is a minority position in academic circles, but probably a favorite of the elite 1% of the population) would say:
    Do nothing--it's all business cycles. Credit crunch. Tincture of time.
    Bail out the banks, that's it.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Dec 05, 2010 2:07 PM GMT
    Peter Heck .......

    Hmmmmm .....

    Would this be the same Peter Heck that has written THIS .....

    Persion 101: GLSEN in Our Schools
    Where he states
    But GLSEN is far more sinister than just their hypocritical position on intimidation in schools. They are also disgustingly depraved, and take every opportunity to lead young people into dangerous and sometimes deadly practices.

    .... and goes on to say that young children are indoctrinated into perversions and told how to perform things like fisting through discussions in the Classroom?

    That Peter Heck? icon_rolleyes.gif

    http://www.peterheck.com/columns/2009_articles/view/138/perversion_101__glsen_in_our_schools

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:20 PM GMT
    FACT:.. the economic conditions (national AND international) have changed.. I'm still wondering when those like the OP are going to realize that grandma's era is gone.. history..

    The world evolves, the people evolve, economies evolve cept of course the GOP and its rhetoric.. kinda like the bible thumpers... they want to live in 20AD like the good book says..
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Dec 05, 2010 4:24 PM GMT
    When I read something like this, I really wonder not only if I am in the same country as the author the OP quotes, but the same reality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:46 PM GMT
    GQjock saidPeter Heck .......

    Hmmmmm .....

    Would this be the same Peter Heck that has written THIS .....

    Persion 101: GLSEN in Our Schools
    Where he states
    But GLSEN is far more sinister than just their hypocritical position on intimidation in schools. They are also disgustingly depraved, and take every opportunity to lead young people into dangerous and sometimes deadly practices.

    .... and goes on to say that young children are indoctrinated into perversions and told how to perform things like fisting through discussions in the Classroom?

    That Peter Heck? icon_rolleyes.gif

    http://www.peterheck.com/columns/2009_articles/view/138/perversion_101__glsen_in_our_schools



    What? A homophobic Republican?

    That's REALLY rare!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 4:56 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidFor the last two years, the President has unleashed the most aggressively left-wing agenda he could muster.


    hahaha...

    hahahahhahahahaha

    hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahhaa

    99_problems_3.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 5:04 PM GMT
    Lostboy said
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidFor the last two years, the President has unleashed the most aggressively left-wing agenda he could muster.


    hahaha...

    hahahahhahahahaha

    hahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahhaa

    99_problems_3.jpg



    Ditto.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2010 5:22 PM GMT
    To clarify: Obama has had many weaknesses in his presidency, but being "too left wing" is not one of them

  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Dec 05, 2010 5:50 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]q1w2e3 said....The Austrian school (which is a minority position in academic circles, but probably a favorite of the elite 1% of the population) would say:
    Do nothing--it's all business cycles. Credit crunch. Tincture of time...[/quote]

    didn't work for Herbert Hoover, won't work today.