Intransigent Boob in The White House

George Neumayr at American Spectator has a very good commentary on those who are really in the way of positively battling this nation’s debt and economic troubles, and why…

The politicians most responsible for America’s debt crisis are portrayed by the media as “grown-ups” while those least responsible for it are dubbed “intransigent.” Veteran profligate spenders have been credited in recent days with a “balanced approach” to the crisis, even as Tea Partiers in Congress with no fingerprints on the debt have been cast as recklessly indifferent to it.

The mainstream media exclusively defines “intransigence” as conservative opposition to non-negotiable liberal demands. Hence, President Obama’s willingness to risk default rather than drop his insistence on tax increases isn’t considered intransigent and reckless but principled and mature.

Polls suggest that this media manipulation of the debate over the debt ceiling is paying off for the Democrats. One recent poll says that the American public views Republican leaders as more responsible for the stalemate than Obama. Perhaps a political version of the Stockholm Syndrome is at work here. Obama certainly likes to play the captor turned hostage negotiator, saving the people from a crisis into which he has thrown them.

At his barrage of press conferences in recent days, he has presented himself as the people’s advocate who is bravely confronting a problem that both Democrats and Republicans have long ignored. This role ill-befits a president who spent two and a half years pooh-poohing the calls of deficit hawks.

He said at one of the press conferences, striking a remarkably patronizing tone: “Now, what is important is that even as we raise the debt ceiling, we also solve the problem of underlying debt and deficits. I’m glad that congressional leaders don’t want to default, but I think the American people expect more than that. They expect that we actually try to solve this problem, we get our fiscal house in order.”

Obama considers it very heroic that he is even contemplating unspecified spending cuts and expects Republicans to make a similar “sacrifice” and swallow tax increases. This line of negotiation is a self-serving diversionary sham given that the crisis is due wholly to overspending. He is simply using a crisis that he compounded through trillions of dollars in heedless expenditures to push an ideological agenda extraneous to the issue under discussion.

An honest media would expose this gambit as raw exploitation of a self-generated crisis. But, instead, it treats his euphemistic calls for tax hikes — he wants any deal to include a “revenue component” — as the epitome of reasonableness, and has assisted him in turning the discussion into a referendum on Republican flexibility.


In one of his off-teleprompter pressers I actually heard Obama imply we needed to get the debt issue settled so that we could get back to providing new programs for the American people. Exactly what doesn’t this guy (and his minions on both sides of the aisles) understand about ‘stop grabbing and spending our money and just get the heck out of the way’? November was not the American people looking for ‘compromise’ in the Congress. Why, THAT would indicate (coming from the MSM and the liberal-talkers) that Pelosi and company were railroading their agenda down our throats. No, November was our way of sending in the derailment, and putting the government and nation back on track. The embedded career politicians in DC are either too dumb to understand this, or blatantly refusing to listen to the American people … again. Which got us to November, and will do so again in November 2012.