For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com
Premium Left blogad
Left Blog Ad

Advertisement
An Un-American Display? No Way To Treat A President?
Written By : William Teach

Eugene Robinson, Washington Post opinion writer, apparently thinks history started on January 20, 2009. On the Opinions front page, the article is entitled “An Un-American Display,” while in the screeching single page, it is called “No Way To Treat A President.”

Anyone who watched Wednesday night as President Obama explained his health-care reform proposals to Congress saw a chief executive making what sounded like a genuine appeal for bipartisanship — and his opponents behaving like a bunch of spoiled first-graders. Obama should ignore them, even if they hold their breath until they turn blue.

Um, no. He sounded like a petulant child getting more and more shrill because no one will give him that pony he has been begging for for 8 months.

House Republicans were particularly ostentatious in showing their disrespect not just for Obama but for the office he holds. The outburst by Rep. Joe Wilson of South Carolina — who shouted “You lie!” when Obama said his plan would not cover illegal immigrants — was only the most egregious display of contempt. Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the House minority whip, fiddled with his BlackBerry while the commander in chief was speaking. Other Republicans made a show of waving copies of their own alleged reform plan, which isn’t really a plan at all.

And Rep. Louie Gohmert of Texas waved hand-lettered signs at the president, as if he thought he were attending one of those made-for-television town-hall meetings rather than a solemn gathering of the nation’s highest elected officials.

Throughout the speech, there was grumbling, mugging and eye-rolling on the Republican side that was not only undignified but frankly un-American. When I was a correspondent in London, I covered far more raucous sessions of the British House of Commons — that’s how Parliament treats the prime minister, who is the head of government. In the United States, that simply is not how Congress treats the president, who is the head of state.

I do the same thing when one of my roll ups are lying their backsides off to me or just throwing some BS at the wall. I bet you do, too.

Congress didn’t heckle Lyndon Johnson like that during the Vietnam War or Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal. Congress didn’t even show that kind of bitterness and aggression toward George W. Bush, who did lie — specifically, about the intelligence that his administration relied on to justify an unnecessary war that has cost 4,300 American lives and enough money to fund Obama’s health-care proposals for a decade.

Do we need to get into this yet again, the WMD garbage? I won’t. It has been done a gazillion times (a gazillion is slightly more than a shatload.) As far as the costs go, if we put that money into health care, it would be deficit spending. Hmm.

But, considering that the Democrats have consistently called Bush a liar, have personally insulted him and his family for 8 years, and….. well, how about when they interrupted Bush’s 2005 State Of The Union speech with boo’s? And in 2006, where they applauded to cheer their own obstructionism?

Ah, the good old days of civility.

Anyhow, doesn’t matter, because all you Republicans are racists

You will note that I have not yet mentioned race. For the record, I suspect that Obama’s race leads some of his critics to feel they have permission to deny him the legitimacy, stature and common courtesy that are any president’s due. I can’t prove this, however. And if I’m right, what’s anybody supposed to do about it? There’s no way to compel people to search their souls for traces of conscious or unconscious racial bias. We could have an interesting discussion about the historical image of the black man in American society, but that wouldn’t get us any closer to universal health care.

Told ya so!

Chatty Kathy Parker also does her “Mr. Wilson is mean” schtick while doing her pretend Southerner bit.

Interestingly, there is not one editorial about 9/11 at the WP, except for Charles Krauthammer discussing Van Jones’ Trutherism.

0
  • Mike_M

    Wow, whipping out the Head of State/Head of Government distinction is creative. Robinson failed to mention that the US President is also Head of Government, as we do not have a system of government that makes the distinction between the two.

    Perhaps Robinson was comparing Obama to a King or Queen, who would refer to himself as "we" standing alongside God. Or a Pharoh, an actual living Man-God who descended from the heavens to lord over us mere motrals.

    But I agree, as do all readers familiar with Atlas Shrugged: Mr. Obama, Head of State is a very appropriate title.

  • http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

    and his opponents behaving like a bunch of spoiled first-graders. Obama should ignore them, even if they hold their breath until they turn blue.

    Translation: "Waaaahh! Our widdle feewings are hurt!"

    Obama has been ignoring us all this time. If Obama can end fraud and waste then why hasn't he fixed that now for Medicare and why does the stimulus include a lot of fraud and waste?

    I'm sure Vega and whats_up will try to deflect this. Give them time to put on their "Yes we can!" cheerleading outfits.

  • http://Kingfisher Kingfisher

    who did lie — specifically, about the intelligence that his administration relied on to justify an unnecessary war that has cost 4,300 American lives and enough money to fund Obama’s health-care proposals for a decade.

    We've already read evidence of babies who have been left to die under socialized medicine. I'm sure that number is greater than 4,300. Where's the outrage?

    Where's the outrage over the soldiers who have died under Clinton's watch? While the amount didn't come near the number under Bush that would have to mean that soldiers are expendable as long as the number of dead stays below a certain amount.

    If that number is so bad, Obama can remove the troops anytime simply by ordering them home.

  • http://www.superdickery.com mightysamurai

    Anyone who watched Wednesday night as President Obama explained his health-care reform proposals to Congress saw a chief executive making what sounded like a genuine appeal for bipartisanship

    Yeah, because whining that your critics are all a bunch of liars is such a "bipartisan" thing to do.

  • http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

    See, this is where I part ways with critics of Hill's outburst. I thought it was accurate, but improperly timed. The setting and place was inappropriate. The left is acting like any disagreement of any kind in any place is always wrong and awful.

    Just consider the president's characterization of anyone who dares disagree with him as bickering and bad. The president's slanders of Sarah Palin (and everyone else who dared vary in opinion on this topic) were bad too, but they were delivered in a rhetorical manner which was appropriate to the setting. A better man wouldn't have done such a thing, but the last time we had a better man in office, he was so attacked, hated, and slandered he left office with poll numbers in the 20s.

  • D-Vega

    Seems pretty high & mighty, CT.

    Palin has been taking cheap shots at Obama since the campaign and has not let up.

    Plus, there are no death panels in the bill. You could say there is a fear of death panels. But that's not what Palin said.

    Seems there is a bit of a double-standard here in terms of acceptable rhetoric. When Obama complains, he's thin-skinned, where conservatives complain, its the right thing to do.

  • http://www.superdickery.com mightysamurai

    Palin has been taking cheap shots at Obama since the campaign and has not let up.

    Observe the liberal mind at work, where telling the truth and speaking your mind becomes "cheap shots".

    Oh well. At least D-Vega hasn't stooped to the levels of the rest of the Democrats and labeled Sarah Palin a terrorist.

    Seems there is a bit of a double-standard here in terms of acceptable rhetoric.

    Oh yes, I agree. When Democrats acted like boorish morons, jeering President George W. Bush during his speeches, implying he was complicit in the 9/11 attacks, accusing him of lying about intelligence they themselves confirmed only a few years ago, and accusing him of being a Nazi and an imperialist for wanting to protect America from terrorists, this was "patriotic dissent".

    But when Sarah Palin points out the very obvious fact that socialized medicine will lead to government bureaucrats deciding what type of medical care Americans have access to, suddenly there's all this concern about "cheap shots".

    Seems to be a bit of a double-standard here in terms of acceptable rhetoric, doesn't there D-Vega?

  • http://www.thepiratescove.us William_Teach

    Palin has been taking cheap shots at Obama since the campaign and has not let up.

    Dissent is now "cheap shots?" I thought it was patriotic?

    Plus, there are no death panels in the bill. You could say there is a fear of death panels. But that's not what Palin said.

    Virtually every single Conservative understood exactly what she was doing, which was putting the end of life counseling issue, made mandatory by HR 3200, out in the public forum. EOL counseling is fine, but, government should not make it mandatory. She didn't mean there were literal death panels. We understood that.

  • smelvertising

    telling the truth and speaking your mind becomes "cheap shots"

    Like all poor losers and awful debaters, liberals only complain that shots are "cheap" because they keep hitting the mark and they have nothing to counter them with.

    To exemplify: "non-cheap" shots from conservatives would be claiming that Obama is a woman, that 2+2=5, or snarling that people should be murdered solely because of their skin color.

  • NoloContendere

    I haven't read a Eugene Robinson column in over a decade. Can't afford to lose the brain cells.

Advertisement
Featured Video

The History of Ernesto Che Guevara – A Short Story

php developer india
Premium Right Ads
Blogads Right
Previous Features

Ads

The Best Quotes From “Ten Prayers God Always Says Yes To”
Hey Lady Gaga, Kids Have a Time-Tested Answer for Bullies: Punch Them in the Mouth
Seven Differences Between Winners And Losers
The Problem With The Occupy Wall Street Generation
The 20 Most Influential Black Republicans
Talking With Chuck D. From Public Enemy About Farrakhan, Air America’s Failure, And Open Borders
Advertisement
User Info