Anatomy of a Failed Presidency!

Just in case you missed it, the following is an interesting article from "American Thinker". This article is 5 months old, and things have only gotten worse...
________________________________________________

Another Failed Presidency

An article from American Thinker by Geoffrey P. Hunt

Barack Obama is on track to have the most spectacularly failed presidency since Woodrow Wilson. In the modern era, we've seen several failed presidencies--led by Jimmy Carter and LBJ. Failed presidents have one strong common trait-- they are repudiated, in the vernacular, spat out.

Of course, LBJ wisely took the exit ramp early, avoiding a shove into oncoming traffic by his own party. Richard Nixon indeed resigned in disgrace, yet his reputation as a statesman has been partially restored by his triumphant overture to China.

But, Barack Obama is failing. Failing big. Failing fast. And failing everywhere: foreign policy, domestic initiatives, and most importantly, in forging connections with the American people. The incomparable Dorothy Rabinowitz in the Wall Street Journal put her finger on it: He is failing because he has no understanding of the American people, and may indeed loathe them. Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard says he is failing because he has lost control of his message, and is overexposed. Clarice Feldman of American Thinker produced a dispositive commentary showing that Obama is failing because fundamentally he is neither smart nor articulate; his intellectual dishonesty is conspicuous by its audacity and lack of shame.

But, there is something more seriously wrong: How could a new president riding in on a wave of precedented promise and goodwill have forfeited his tenure and become a lame duck in six months? His poll ratings are in free fall. In generic balloting, the Republicans have now seized a five point advantage. This truly is unbelievable. What's going on?

No narrative. Obama doesn't have a narrative. No, not a narrative about himself. He has a self-narrative, much of it fabricated, cleverly disguised or written by someone else. But this self-narrative is isolated and doesn't connect with us. He doesn't have an American narrative that draws upon the rest of us. All successful presidents have a narrative about the American character that intersects with their own where they display a command of history and reveal an authenticity at the core of their personality that resonates in a positive endearing way with the majority of Americans. We admire those presidents whose narratives not only touch our own, but who seem stronger, wiser, and smarter than we are. Presidents we admire are aspirational peers, even those whose politics don't align exactly with our own: Teddy Roosevelt, FDR, Harry Truman, Ike, and Reagan.

But not this president. It's not so much that he's a phony, knows nothing about economics, and is historically illiterate and woefully small minded for the size of the task--all contributory of course. It's that he's not one of us. And whatever he is, his profile is fuzzy and devoid of content, like a cardboard cutout made from delaminated corrugated paper. Moreover, he doesn't command our respect and is unable to appeal to our own common sense. His notions of right and wrong are repugnant and how things work just don't add up. They are not existential. His descriptions of the world we live in don't make sense and don't correspond with our experience.

In the meantime, while we've been struggling to take a measurement of this man, he's dissed just about every one of us--financiers, energy producers, banks, insurance executives, police officers, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, post office workers, and anybody else who has a non-green job. Expect Obama to lament at his last press conference in 2012:
"For those of you I offended, I apologize. For those of you who were not offended, you just didn't give me enough time; if only I'd had a second term, I could have offended you too."
Mercifully, the Founders at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 devised a useful remedy for such a desperate state--staggered terms for both houses of the legislature and the executive. An equally abominable Congress can get voted out next year. With a new Congress, there's always hope of legislative gridlock until we vote for president again two short years after that.
Yes, small presidents do fail, Barack Obama among them. The coyotes howl but the wagon train keeps rolling along.

Margaret Thatcher: "The trouble with Socialism is, sooner or later you run out of other people's money."
"When you subsidize poverty and failure, you get more of both." - James Dale Davidson, National Taxpayers Union
"The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own." - Unknown

Y'all Gotta Excuse Old Jimmy - His Mouth Has Survived The Death of His BRAIN!

Former President James Earl "Jimmy" Carter, Jr. allowed his hummingbird brain to gain control of his hippopotamus mouth, and suddenly blurted out, "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African American." Let's dissect that sentence, shall we?

First of all "I think" is an overstatement. Jimmy rarely thought when he was occupying the White House, and now that he's 85 years old he probably he likes to think he's thinking. As for his statement that there is "intensely demonstrated animosity toward Barack Obama"... the old man has apparently forgotten what the word "intensely" means. Jimmy needs to look back at the Democrats constant attacks on President George W. Bush during Gee Dubbya's last term to get the true meaning of "intensely demonstrated animosity". The only part Carter got right was that Barack Obama is President (Rosalynn Carter probably had to remind him of that). Obama is not "a black man", he is a gray man. Obama is an equal mix of the black and white races - who has elected to identify with - and emphasize - only with that portion of his genetic makeup which is black. (Being black, combined with his ability to say nothing meaningful better than most people, is, after all, the thing which got him elected. It was his "hook", his gimmick, which he played very well against the guilt many white people have been carrying around for decades. His campaign was essentially saying to the country, "Prove to the world that you aren't racists - elect Barack Hussein Obama - a totally unqualified black man - as the next President of the United States of America!") And, finally, there's the "African American" claim. His father was an African national, and his mother was an American national. I will concede the "African" part, but it takes more than simply being born in the USA to be an American. Part of being an American is having pride in America, its history, its culture, its constitution, and its singularly unique accomplishment of having gone - in a scant 200 years - from l'enfant terrible (a rebellious infant) to world leadership. This is an achievement that heretofore had taken other nations a thousand years - or more - to accomplish... an achievement that most nations failed to accomplish even with a thousand year head start. One does not show pride in their country by traveling the globe apologizing for that country. One does not demonstrate pride in their country by rejecting its culture. And, one does not show pride in one's country by diverting it from the path of success, or by belittling, ignoring, or attempting to change it's Constitution! There are not enough voters of color in the USA to have elected Barack Obama as president if every one of them voted several times. It was those "racist" white Americans who carried Obama into the White House.

Can we not dislike Obama simply because his only qualification for office of President is that he carried the majority of the popular vote (many of whom are now regretting that decision)? Obama is a professional politician with less than 180 days in the U.S. Senate, who voted "present" over 90 percent of the time (thereby avoiding any real commitment to anything), and spent twice as many taxpayer paid days campaigning for president as he did fulfilling his duties in the Senate! Can we not demonstrate animosity toward any man (or any Congress) whose policies would destroy our financial system? Is it wrong that we feel uncomfortable with a President who has a documented history of association with terrorists, and intentionally surrounds himself with tax cheats, avowed Communists, Marxists, Maoists and other assorted socialists and revolutionaries in an effort to change our system of governance from a Democratic Republic to a dictatorship? Is it wrong that patriotic Americans are both embarrassed and angered by a President who displays a general disdain for the people and the nation over which he presides? If the best plan he can come up with is, "We will spend our way out of bankruptcy!", do we not have the right to voice our displeasure at such arrogant ignorance? America may need a few little "tweaks" to correct some minor flaws... but it does not need to be re-engineered from the ground up!

If you think there's any chance I could be wrong about this... think again! Your brain is probably as atrophied as Jimmy Carters...