I’m hearing a lot of people (even from my side) who say “give Barack Obama a chance…”
Sorry, I can’t. There’s just too much non-negotiable stuff he campaigned on. I decided to look back all the way to the summer of 2007 and refresh my memory on what Barack Obama promised to do.
He wanted the troops in Iraq out before the surge was a success.
He voted for the McCain illegal immigrant amnesty bill. I will admit he wasn’t completely bad on border security, though:
The only things I like about Barack Obama’s approach is the part about legal immigrants who fight for our country getting expedited citizenship and the emphasis on employers not hiring illegals. But then again, if the bill he supported was passed we wouldn’t have any illegals. He joins the chorus in supporting more border infrastructure as well.
But I wasn’t thrilled with his stand on health care:
In deciding to drive profitability out of both business (employers that do not offer or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees will be required to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of the national plan) and health insurance (Obama will prevent companies from abusing their monopoly power through unjustified price increases and force insurers to spend more funds on patient care instead of keeping exorbitant amounts for profits and administration), Barack Obama is laying the groundwork for socialized medicine like Great Britain has – quite inefficient.
But wait, there’s more:
Barack Obama also has a laundry list of items increasing the size and regulation of the federal government. The sad part is that he’s talked a few Republicans into helping him support these measures. He also wants to make a Faustian bargain with auto companies where the government helps pay for retiree health benefits in exchange for investment in technology to make more fuel-efficient vehicles. Not only does that interfere with the auto market, he gets the daily double of placing the government even further into the realm of nationalized health care.
I’m a little more kind on trade and job creation, though:
There’s a couple ideas that Barack Obama has that might not be bad on a state level, and he at least pays lip service to the private sector in his spiel. One area he speaks about is helping out low-skilled workers through a partnership with unions. Where I don’t care for Big Labor in a political sense, they do tend (particularly in the construction industry) to train workers who exhibit craftsmanship that’s usually worth the premium paid. But his program would overstep the boundary between government and the market.
Of course I wrote this way before he wanted to create 600,000 more government jobs. That’s the way one would interpret the 3 million new jobs he wanted to create or save, 80 percent in the private sector.
And there’s something else which has been forgotten in this rush to praise Barack Obama – how many judgeships did the Democrats succeed in leaving empty as they ran out the clock on the Bush Administration? They even had moments-long sessions just to keep President Bush from making recess appointments.
It seems that the majority of court rulings which make Americans’ jaws drop at their audacity and lack of common sense exhibited come from appointees of Presidents Carter and Clinton. Now Barack Obama will have four years with a friendly Congress who will confirm practically whoever he wants, regardless of qualification.
Wait, I take that back. They have to have a few qualifications – rule in favor of environmentalist groups, against any abortion restrictions, and to maintain any race-based preferences that come up. If they feel the Constitution is to be a “living” one, then they’ll be okay in Barack Obama’s book.
But, fair readers, don’t worry. I won’t maintain this negative attitude for four years. Some conservative gains in Congress and here in Maryland in 2010 would put me in a little better mood.
So I’ll continue on my merry path once again, patiently explaining the benefits of limited government and maximized freedom to whoever will listen. You know you will before all is said and done.
By the way, I may be negative but I have nothing on this guy. He has a point – and a long memory.
Good anthology Michael. And I’m saving the link on that Red County article.
2010 isn’t so far away.
“But, fair readers, don’t worry. I won’t maintain this negative attitude for four years. Some conservative gains in Congress and here in Maryland in 2010 would put me in a little better mood.”
So I guess we can look forward to 8 years of doom and gloom from you, then? Time to look into that Prozac prescription 🙂
No, I have full confidence that Obama and company will overreach, as liberals always do. I’m sure there will be a stark choice presented in 2010 between big government and sanity and sanity will prevail.
So I appreciate the thought about my mental health but Prozac will not be necessary.
Your real objection to the new President finally emerges. It is likely that he will be given the opportunity to appoint at least two Supreme Court justices during his first four years along with other judicial openings. As a past President of the Harvard Law Review and a former professor of constitutional law, I am confident that Obama has a better understanding of the supreme law of our country than George Bush ever will.
I for one wish him all the best. I didn’t vote for him, and probably still wouldn’t, but I will allow him the benefit of a doubt.
One of my main grievances with him during the campaign was the fact that he is an unknown quantity. Undoubtedly the refusal (or complicity) of the media to address this helped get him elected.
Being elected President of the Harvard Law Review doesn’t cut any ice IMO. He never had a thing published in the Review the whole time he was there. His potential judicial appointments do give me cause for concern.
He is bright, charming, charismatic, but that doesn’t mean anything yet. I’ll wait. I don’t believe he can do much over-reaching with the economy in the state that it’s in.
When BHO complains that the Constitution is full of “negative rights” I don’t hold out much hope that he’ll appoint judges who will do anything but fill in the blanks according to their vision.
At least Obama’s justices will know how to recite an oath! Or at least they will know enough to bring up a friggin’ notecard with the oath on it! Roberts’ screw-up was emblematic of the Bush administration: really smart guys, often well meaning guys, who did not have the humility to know when they needed a little help.
Final Frontier, Just how many parting shots must you take before you cease to make less an ass of yourself?
Here some of us graciously welcome BHO in spite of differnces, yet you still cling to your Bush phobia.
You must thrive on polarization.
Swamp,
Please explain to me how this blog is “graciously welcoming” Obama? You think pointing out that he didn’t publish in the Harvard Law Review was gracious of you? You cannot even be gracious one comment before you take me to task for slamming the Bush administration for their appointment of a guy who will probably be Chief Justice for 30 more years. So thanks for the attempted rebuke, but my comment was legitimate and you are a hypocrite. You must thrive on hypocrisy.
By the way, “cease to make less an ass of yourself” makes no sense. Just sayin’
Yes, I realized my faux pas as soon as I clicked on Submit, I knew you wouldn’t fail to point that out to me.Thanks.
When I mention BHO at the Harvard Law Review I wasn’t being ungracious, I was simply stating fact.
Slam Away!
And when I slammed Roberts for screwing up the oath, noting that he certainly is a legitimate target for criticism since he will likely be a judge for 30 years, those were facts as well. Please don’t insult our intelligence by stating that it was “merely fact” that Obama did not publish, as if selective marshalling of facts does not constitute opinion. It is also a fact that he has two daughters, it is a fact that he graduated from Harvard Law, it is a fact that he won the popular vote, it is a fact that his inauguration drew the largest crowd ever to witness an inaugural, it is a fact that he plays basketball. So you just randomly chose your fact to report, right? It wasn’t negative, just a “fact,” right? Please, swamp, you are smarter than that, and so am I, and so are the readers of this blog. Big deal, I slammed Bush, you slammed Obama, quit yer cryin’!
Well, I’m at least glad you think my readers are smart. I was beginning to wonder there if my time spent on educating them was being wasted.
Final Frontier, Believe me I’m not cryin’ I’m howling. Keep ’em coming. I love comedy relief!
Michael,
It is all part of my grand plot. Since you are kind enough to let me keep posting my liberal genius here, I will slowly drain away your smart readers and they will become good Democrats. Just you watch–there will be a spike of at least 2-3 more liberal voters here in the next election all due to my efforts!
Delusional?
Nope. Just you wait, swamp, I’ll turn you liberal! I’ve got skills.
This is beginning to sound like Celebrity Death Match. But I love the continual readership.