President Obama is desperate. I keep telling myself he cannot be desperate since there are seven months left in the general election. Presidential candidates usually become desperate just before they fail or drop out of the race. However, I am now convinced that Obama is beyond worried — he really is desperate. Most of his decisions are irrational; some are self-destructive; and all of his decisions as president now are political. I sincerely believe Obama is beyond worried about facing Governor Romney’s presidential campaign.
Many who supported Mr. Obama in 2008 have gone dark. His fundraising is anemic and is being led by a novice. His campaign, void of his 2008 hope and vision theme, lacks leadership as much as it lacks purpose. There is nothing positive, noble, or patriotic about Mr. Obama’s vision of America. He knows it and he is scared. You can see it in his eyes and demeanor. Simply put, Mr. Obama is desperate and that makes him dangerous.
Latest Irony: Obama started the false war on women, stating in effect that only the Democrats know best what women need/want and that Republicans don’t know or care. When the DNC’s number one adviser Hilary Rosen — as foot soldier — loyally and forcefully conveys the Obama and DNC message, she is immediately discarded like a used paper plate at a picnic. So much for courageous women! The truth is, Obama and Schultz couldn’t care less.
Mr. Obama’s entire campaign strategy right now is obvious and simple. If we could see inside the campaign compound in Chicago, we would likely see the mission statement emblazoned in banners with something like, “Drive the Romney Team off Obama’s record at all costs — spare nothing — truth be damned.”
Obama strategists know that if Romney is able to stay disciplined, and keeps reverting to Obama’s lack of leadership and dismal performance as chief executive, not only will he lose big, Romney could win in a landslide and with a huge mandate.
They know that no incumbent president has ever been reelected with the unemployment above 7.40%. They know he entered office with gasoline prices below $2 and that Obama is completely impotent (and incompetent) to do anything about the rising prices. The biggest hot potato is the deficit and the debt (they know Mr. Obama once promised a “pay as you go” approach to spending).
Karl Rove wrote an Op-Ed in the Journal yesterday titled, “Obama’s Campaign Will Take the Low Road”
My previous mention of the “Obama Obfuscation” refers specifically to Obama’s willingness to use any method to retain power including deceit, misrepresentation, distortion, lies, pretense, and artifice. I happen to agree with Peggy Noonan that Obama does not like his job, for he lacks leadership ability — but I have no doubt he is in love with presidential power. Karl Rove mentions some of these as well in his Journal piece.
Rove begins with an example of an Obama lie:
He will distort beyond recognition his opponent’s arguments. For example, he explained to news executives at the AP that Republicans want to “convert more of our investments in education and research and health care into tax cuts—especially for the wealthy.” Actually, no one has suggested that.
Notice his use of the words “honest,” “fake,” and “phony.”
No honest differences are possible with Mr. Obama. He will impugn the motives of any who disagree with him. As he told the AP, his opponents want to “let businesses pollute more and treat workers and consumers with impunity.” His agenda “isn’t a partisan feeling . . . [it]isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea. It’s patriotism.” To disagree with him is unpatriotic. That’s to be expected from Republicans, whom Mr. Obama says stand for “thinly veiled social Darwinism . . . [that is] antithetical to our entire history.”
Mr. Obama will build entire edifices on top of one fake premise, all dressed up in one big phony assumption. Take the House GOP budget plan. It increases federal outlays from roughly $3.6 trillion this year to nearly $4.9 trillion in 2022. In the AP speech the president called this a “cut” because he wants to increase spending to $5.8 trillion in 2022.
And I thought my description of Mr. Obama was tough!
Among Mr. Obama’s more appealing 2008 campaign lines were his pledge not “to pit Red America against Blue America” and his promise to “resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long.”
Mr. Obama gave into that temptation the moment he was inaugurated. His harsh attacks, angry misrepresentations and outright falsehoods are light years away from the message of unity and post-partisanship that propelled him into the Oval Office.
These final three paragraphs by Rove are illustrative of why the liberals despised him so much over the last 10+ years. He is a brilliant strategist and analyst and he has such a simple way to convey his message.
Mr. Romney will need to tap into the disappointment and regret that many Americans, even the president’s supporters, feel about Mr. Obama. Yet while setting the record straight about the last three dismal years and Mr. Obama’s attacks is important, it is not enough. Winning candidates for the American presidency offer a positive, optimistic agenda that reassures voters about what they will do once in the White House.
Mr. Romney also should remind Americans of Mr. Obama’s lofty words from his 2008 acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention in Denver. There he said, “If you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.”
Mr. Obama attacked such a strategy then. Lacking any fresh ideas or a record to run on, it’s the strategy he’s adopted now.
As you know, there are dozens of radio talk show hosts in America. In my opinion, one of the very best is Dennis Prager. Could you imagine a one on one debate between Thomas Sowell and Barack Obama? Take a moment to read Dennis Prager’s article as to why liberals avoid honest debate with conservatives:
By Dennis Prager (April 3, 2012)
Apparently, many liberals were disappointed in the administration’s performance before the Supreme Court. They felt that the government’s lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, did not respond effectively to the challenges of some of the conservative justices.
The editor of Commentary, John Podhoretz, offered an explanation on his magazine’s blog. “American liberals,” he wrote, “know their own language, but they don’t know the language of their ideological and partisan opposite numbers. … Conservatives speak liberal, but for liberals in the United States, conservatism might as well be Esperanto.”
I have argued this point for many years. In my book to be published later this month (“Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph”), I argue that the left is a victim of its own brainwash. How could they not be? All they hear, see and read from childhood on, from elementary school through graduate school, on TV and in the movies, are leftist ideas.
Yet this is not true for conservatives. One would have to grow up in a silent monastery not to be regularly exposed to liberal and leftist ideas.
For 30 years, I have had leading left-wing thinkers on my radio show, and I continue to be shocked at their lack of awareness of conservative arguments. About two years ago, for example, I asked one of the most powerful Democratic members of Congress — a major force behind every tax increase — what tax rate he thought might be too high. He replied that he had not given it thought. I asked a leading liberal writer who maintained that all American wars since World War II had been imperialist if he thought the Korean War was also imperialistic. He replied that he didn’t know enough about that war to respond.
After interviewing leftists, liberal listeners frequently ask me why I don’t invite the best liberals on to my show.
The answer is that I have had some of the best liberals on my show. They just don’t tend to do well when challenged by thoughtful conservatives.
That may be why the majority of influential liberals refuse to go on conservative talk radio or to debate conservatives.
I bumped into New York Times columnist Tom Friedman at Dulles Airport a few months ago and asked him if he would ever come on talk radio. He said he doesn’t do such shows. Yet shortly thereafter he went on NPR.
What he meant to say was that he doesn’t go on conservative shows.
Why don’t liberals read us or listen to us or debate us?
Because the left has convinced itself that the right is unworthy of such attention.
They are certain that conservatives are sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic Islamophobic, racist and bigoted, not to mention anti-intellectual and anti-science.
The left has a mutually reinforcing dynamic at work here. Because liberals believe conservatives are all these terrible things, they do not bother acquainting themselves with conservative arguments. And because they do not acquaint themselves with conservative arguments, they are able to go on believing conservatives are all these terrible things.
To read the balance of Prager’s article, click here.