Team Obama Tries To Spin Away What “Hope And Change” Means

by William Teach | September 2, 2012 8:10 am

At least in terms of when he was stating that he would bring a new era of “post-partisan” politics

(Washington Post[1]) On the January night in 2008 when he won the Iowa caucuses, Barack Obama[2] delivered a victory speech that would reverberate forcefully across a divided America. Iowans, he said, had come together – Democrats, Republicans and independents – to stand as one in calling for a new politics of unity and hope. It was a message that would help carry him to the White House 10 months later.

“You said the time has come to move beyond the bitterness and pettiness and anger that’s consumed Washington,” the then-senator from Illinois said that winter night in Des Moines. “To end the political strategy that’s been all about division and instead make it about addition. To build a coalition for change that stretches through red states and blue states. We are choosing hope over fear. We’re choosing unity over division and sending a powerful message that change is coming to America.”

Today Obama’s words sound quaint, even naive.

Not sure about quaint or naive. It sounded silly back in 2008. Today, they sound foolish and a load of mule fritters. Which is what Conservatives said they were back in 2008, since Obama had no history of reaching across party aisles and listening, nor any experience leading. Obama is the guy who is suddenly promoted at the store for being a good ass kisser and immediately becomes a tin pot dictator among the people he used to work with.

Instead of bipartisanship, there is polarization as deep as it has been in modern times. Instead of cooperation, there is confrontation. Instead of civility, there is rudeness. The political system seems frozen and more resistant to compromise than ever. Two months before the 2012 election, the campaign has become an all-or-nothing battle over the future direction of the country.

There’s nothing really unusual about what is going on in Washington. Heck, politicians actually used to duel[3]. With guns[4] and swords. Politics has always been nasty, and always will be. Of course, Obama was the guy saying he would bring about an era of kumbaya in Washington

White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer said there has been a misunderstanding of just what Obama was talking about in 2008 when he called for a new politics.

“The president didn’t promise an era of kumbaya politics in which everyone agreed,” he said. “The primary thing he talked most about was that politicians too often ran from big problems that had haunted our country for decades. Whether folks like it or not, he did jump in and take on very big problems with full knowledge that they would have political consequences for him.”

See? You idiots just misunderstood what Obama was saying. He didn’t really mean that there would be a new tone in Washington, that he would be “post-partisan”, that he would try for cooperation, no, he meant he would…..ram legislation through the Democrat controlled Congress? Um, that’s what Republicans accused him of doing.

A good chunk of the Washington Post story is about attempting to blame Republicans, but, really, can anyone point to how Obama attempting to be a leader and reach across the aisle? Sure, a few serious squishes like Olympia Snowe might, but, this is the guy who said “I won” and then rammed through his policies. He’s been combative, abusive, and always blamestorms. Obama chose far left policies over what the American People wanted. Both the Stimulus and ObamaCare, among others, were highly unpopular before they passed, and didn’t get any more popular after being passed. It wasn’t just Republicans in Washington Obama was giving the middle finger: it was the American People.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove[5]. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach[6].

  1. Washington Post:
  2. Barack Obama:
  3. used to duel:
  4. guns:
  5. Pirate’s Cove:
  6. @WilliamTeach:

Source URL: