Publius

The Voice of Reason. A look at contemporary philosophy and politics from outside the Left vs. Right continuum. RSS FEED

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Blaming Bush is all Obama has Left

Over the past several months, the same independent voters who swept Barack Obama into office have been increasingly turning away from him. The tide of opposition has risen to the point that Massachusetts elected Republican Scott Brown to fill a seat held by liberal Kennedy's for over 50 years -- based on Brown's platform of stopping the Obama agenda.

Obama was elected because he told voters that he was a new kind of politician; that he would reach across the aisle and work with both Democrats and Republicans; that he would negotiate a health care bill in public on CSPAN; that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class "by one dime"; that lobbyists for special interests would be exposed and have no say in his administration. And, that he wasn't George Bush.

But Obama is exactly the same kind of politician; he has helped lock Republicans out of every step of the process in every one of his major initiatives, his lip service about a "health care summit" notwithstanding; the payoffs to labor unions and bribery to Ben Nelson of Nebraska were done behind closed doors far away from CSPAN cameras; his cap and trade and excise tax on health benefits plans will dramatically raise taxes on the middle class even though he thinks we won't notice so long as they don't have a big sticker on them labelled "taxes"; and his administration is staffed with lobbyists and insiders of the very Wall Street banking industry he is busy demonizing.

Obama has not simply broken campaign promises. He has actively worked against them with his left-wing allies Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

The only thing he said during the campaign that is still true, is that he is not George Bush.

Even though that alone is simply not enough for independent voters, it's all Obama has left. And that's why all we're hearing from the White House, and from "progressive" apologists for Obama, is more lame blame at Bush.

Friday, February 05, 2010

The Hypocrisy of Liberals Knows No Bounds

In 2005, MoveOn.org and many other leftists vigorously opposed the use of a procedural gimmick by Republicans then in control of the Senate, to approve one of Bush's judicial nominations.
As reported here in 2005:
MoveOn.org says of the "nuclear option":

Their plan is to throw out 200 years of checks and balances in the Senate, by silencing the minority party for the first time in American history. It's a maneuver so outrageous that even Republicans call it the "nuclear option." It will take 51 senators to defeat them, and the vote is probably less than a month away.

If Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist can twist enough arms to get 51 votes in support of Cheney's ruling, the minority party will be completely silenced for the first time ever.
Note the key claim: "the minority party will be completely silenced for the first time ever." In 2005, when they opposed what the Senate was acting on, MoveOn.org cherished the time-honored filibuster, as giving voice to the "minority party".

Yet now, in 2010, liberals/progressives/socialists are waging a campaign to convince the Senate to pass Obama's federal take-over of health care, by using a procedural gimmick called "reconciliation" to pass the bill with only 51 votes, bypassing a Republican filibuster.

So much for the rights of the minority party.

According to the progressives/socialists, it's important to respect the minority's voice when nominating judges, but if what you're after is nationalizing over 17% of the US economy, why, the minority should be ignored.

Shameless hypocrisy. Exactly what I expect from progressives.