October 5th, 2012

Who does Obama answer to?

Elizabeth Scalia (The Anchoress) gets it almost right, IMHO:

I think the Obama administration — the whole boiling of them, and Mrs. Pelosi, Mr. Reid and their posses and pals — have become so confident that a victory in this election means they will never again have to answer to anyone about anything, that in their heads, they’re already there.

I said she gets it almost right. So what are my reservations? Winning this election will only solidify the process, but I think they already reached the point she describes quite some time ago.

In 2008 I tried to explain to a lot of friends just what I found so disturbing about Obama and about the press coverage of Obama. Most either didn’t seem to get what I meant, or they just didn’t see it my way. I’m not sure how they see it now, but from the vibes I’m getting I am almost certain that most of them will be voting for Obama again. They glean all their information from sources such as NPR and CNN and the Boston Globe and the NY Times and trust them implicitly, at the same time seeing me as slightly dotty for reading outside that narrow band of opinion and thinking those alternatives have any credence.

It’s tiresome to keep railing on the MSM and its bias, although that bias is a key part of the problem we face. So I’ll shut up now and we can listen to former Democratic pollster Pat Cadell do it:

Elizabeth Scalia adds:

Win in November and that’s the game. Between the compliant, incurious and obsequious press, a cadre of fully-established-and-in-place White House Czars, continual “flick of the wrist, law of the land” Executive Orders, a noodle-spined congress, a senate controlled by a man who feels no compunction about stopping any-and-all-legislation not completely to his liking, and a couple more Supreme Court Justices?

“Hey, transmit to Vladimir (and Chavez, and Ahmadinejad and who-all else) that if they can just wait until after the election — then I can do as I damn please. I’ve got the precedents. I’ve got the tools, I’ve got the talent; I’ve got the drones, foreign and domestic.

And I’ll never have to answer to the press, the congress or the American people, again.”

Basically, all they have to do is grit their teeth, hold on and — with the help of their mainstream pals — plow through any pesky, irritating Benghazi resistance. If they emerge victorious in November? The world is their oyster, with an R in every month.

And by the way, if that happens, there will be plenty of blame to go around, but the major culprit will not be Obama — it will be a mainstream media that has been completely, happily, determinedly derelict in its duty to the public trust for at least the past decade, but certainly since Obama emerged as a serious candidate in 2007. A republic cannot withstand the loss of an unencumbered press, and our press wasn’t even pressured into its encumbrances; it took them on willfully, carried Obama into the White House on its shoulders and then bowed out of the Oval chamber, ass-first and with besotted trembling.

Ironic, isn’t it? Freedom of the press is one of the liberties for which Americans have fought and died, and yet the free press freely entered into this arrangement, of its own free will—in order to get “access,” a place at the very best cocktail parties, and to further their self-appointed mission of “telling a conflicted people a higher truth.”

19 Responses to “Who does Obama answer to?”

  1. Paul A'Barge Says:

    You’re making a valid argument for a 1-term limit on the US Presidency.

    I like it. Amend the Constitution. Put in term limits on Senators and Congress-critters at the same time.

  2. Teri Pittman Says:

    My boyfriend has been posting articles on Facebook about Fast & Furious. (I always try and get “reliable” sources. While Dems have no problem posting something from Daily Kos as gospel, they won’t accept anything from conservative blogs.) One of his friends said he didn’t understand why, if it was true, Fox news wasn’t broadcasting about it 24×7. I still don’t get that. It’s been covered a lot in the blogs I read, but somehow he’s not really heard about it. And now that Univision has been bought off, it makes it less likely that it will be covered again. I am not sure what we can do as citizens to make the press more accountable, but there must be a way to do that.

  3. George Pal Says:

    Saw Cadell’s video a couple of days ago. Never thought I would hear the likes of this, – unvarnished, unapologetic, unequivocal, and without soothing dreck in the name of politesse. And not one ‘but’ and not one mitigating ‘not all’.

  4. T Says:

    George Pal,

    An admitted (and known) Dem, Cadell has been on an anti-Dem and anti-press screed for quite a while now. He has, on several occasions that I’ve seen, indicated his disgust for what the Dem party and now the media has become. I get the sense that he’s channeling Daniel Patrick Moynihan here (one of my favorites from a land long ago).

  5. Sam L. Says:

    That “higher truth” is a lie, or many lies, as we’ve seen

  6. Wolla Dalbo Says:

    Obama answers to Islam and/or to Karl Marx, but definitely not to the Constitution or to the American people.

    Let’s take a little walk down memory lane–

    Since Obama & Co. have been in office:

    There has a very noticeable and radical shift in our stance and policies toward Islam and Its Jihad, toward the Palestinians, the Muslim Brotherhood, and towards Israel—all to the detriment of the U.S. , to the detriment of our strategic interests and our position in the world, to our Alliances, to our ability to comprehend and fight Muslim terror and its Jihad, and to the definite detriment of Israel.

    All U.S. government and especially foreign affairs and military training materials, vocabularies, and training have been ordered scrubbed of any references to Islam, or terrorism, or to Jihad, or any other terms or phrases that would help us to describe the situation on the ground, to understand, or to conceptualize the terrorist attacks against us and our interests, Islam, or its Jihad, or that links Islam and Jihad and terrorist attacks together i.e. in effect, we are now in the same position as were the American captives at our Embassy in Iran after it was taken over in 1979–blindfolded, stumbling around, manhandled by our enemies, deprived of our ability to see and comprehend the threats against us, much less to effectively fashion means to counter them.

    Even after CAIR and several other Muslim organizations were declared by a Federal Court to be “un-indicted co-conspirators” in the Holy Land terrorism funding case, the Obama administration continues to deal with them, meet with them, and to and turn to them for advice on issues concerning Muslims and Islam.

    Several members of our Intelligence Committees in Congress have now sent a joint letter to the I.G.s in several agencies within this Administration, asking them to investigate and to report back to Congress on whether it is the case that all sorts of Muslims who have very significant connections and relationships with the Muslim Brotherhood or other Muslim organizations inimical to the U.S. have infiltrated our government, military, intelligence, and foreign affairs establishments, and hold key/very influential positions within them, and from which they can gather information and influence policy.

    The most glaring example, the fact that Huma Abadin–who has multiple familial and working relationship ties to the Muslim brotherhood and major figures in it–is still Secretary of State Clinton’s very influential Chief of Staff, is her constant companion, and has her ear.
    And still no response to these requests from the Administration.

    Finally, there is the fact that Obama has destroyed several key, relatively stable relationships we had with “good enough” Allies in the Muslim world–resulting in the deposing and/or death of several former Allies, the destabilization of their nations, a great deal of bloodshed and violence, with the result that the Muslim Brotherhood has come into power or has greatly increased its influence throughout the Muslim world, and here in the U.S. as well.

    To quote a character in Ian Fleming’s “Goldfinger,” “The first time is happenstance. The second time is coincidence. The third time it’s enemy action.”

  7. Occam's Beard Says:

    victory in this election means they will never again have to answer to anyone about anything

    Mr. Soros may have other views on this subject.

  8. texexec Says:

    The MSM bears a heavy burden of blame for all of this but the ultimate blame lies with the American people…they let this happen.

    I’m sorry to say it, but it may be a basic flaw in our kind of democracy.

    Still…let’s fight on.

  9. Wolla Dalbo Says:

    As I’ve written here and elsewhere, the Gramscian task was two-fold.

    Re-frame, re-brand, and re-name Communism and adjust its the sales pitch.

    Second–and just as important–“transform” i.e. intellectually and morally disarm the audience listening to that pitch in ways–massive propagandizing, dumbing down, truncating and twisting subjects and the curriculum, Post-modern thought, multi-culturalism, political correctness, moral and cultural relativism, replace the thread of Judeo-Christian morality that ran though all of education and society with secular humanism, destroy faith in America, it values and actions, and knowledge about its fundamental principles and history–that would make this transformed, disarmed, less aware, less knowledgeable, less realistic, experienced, and street-wise audience much more receptive to the revised pitch.

    And, I think most people have got to agree that both tasks have pretty much been very handily accomplished.

  10. Occam's Beard Says:

    You’re making a valid argument for a 1-term limit on the US Presidency.

    I like it. Amend the Constitution. Put in term limits on Senators and Congress-critters at the same time.

    Paul, I’m not sure term limits are the answer. We have them here in CA, and they don’t work. When legislators know they won’t be running for re-election, they act with no restraint because they know they’re unaccountable. Instead, here they push through the most outrageous legislation favoring special interest groups (*cough*unions*cough*), who then give them “jobs” when they’re termed out. Or, alternatively, they get sinecures on some commission that oversees they’re bestest buddies (read: campaign contributors) ever.

    Better for legislators to learn they’re out of a job on election night, which gives them less time to feather their nests.

  11. Bob from Virginia Says:

    Wolla, there are explanations for a foolish electorate that are probably far simpler than leftist brainwashing. We have had generations of Americans with no serious worries so much so they cannot recognize a threat or picture 50% inflation, 20% unemployment and being afraid to ride on a bus, or even needing to ride on a bus, or the election of a liberty destroying fascist. I like to compare the American electorate’s choice of Obama over McCain with the Israeli preference for Rabin over Peres. Peres had an excellent record and did whatever he could to make himself loved. Rabin was a warrior and the opposite of Mr. Warmth. Because the Israelis had military experience in wartime they could evaluate and appreciate good leadership, hence they always choose Rabin over Peres. The American people on the other hand seem to believe peace and prosperity are G-d given rights rather than historical anomalies (the term historical bubbles is apt). They therefore choose the leader who makes them feel good.

    As for the media, they live in bubbles within bubbles. Beautiful articulate people isolated in an echo chamber of high wages and glamorous people in the better parts of town. I’m convinced they are as interested in convincing themselves that the world is really made of niceness as they are in protecting themselves from the dirty world on the outside. They are like true believers everywhere in that they try to compensate for their own insecurities by convincing others. In short they have an even worst maturity problem than the average American.

  12. rickl Says:

    texexec Says:
    October 5th, 2012 at 4:37 pm

    The MSM bears a heavy burden of blame for all of this but the ultimate blame lies with the American people…they let this happen.

    I’m sorry to say it, but it may be a basic flaw in our kind of democracy.

    I agree with your first point. I blame the MFM more than anything for Obama’s election. If they had devoted 1/10 of the time delving into Obama’s past as they did dumpster diving in Alaska, Obama would have been toxic to the vast majority of the American electorate.

    As for your second point, democracy itself is not a stable form of government. The Founders were well aware of this, which is why they created a republic–“if you can keep it”.

    We haven’t kept it. Little by little, our system of government has morphed into a nearly pure democracy, and is therefore doomed.

    At first, only white male property owners could vote. This was done to ensure that only the best educated and most responsible people had a say in government. Those restrictions made perfect sense in the 18th century. White male property owners were the best educated and most responsible members of society. Women usually didn’t pursue higher education, and in many places it was against the law to teach black slaves to read and write.

    Those particular restrictions don’t make sense today. Women and minorities now take advantage of educational opportunities that were not available back then. I certainly would not deny the vote to a Sarah Palin or a Thomas Sowell.

    But the universal franchise will inevitably destroy us. There is simply no way around it. It is a dead certainty.

    We must come up with a way to restrict voting to the best educated and most responsible members of society in a way that makes sense in the 21st century. The notion that people receiving government assistance can vote for politicians who promise them more goodies at others’ expense is absurd on its face. Voting must become an earned privilege, not a right.

  13. James Says:

    They are athletes who start to believe their own press and can’t understand how their butts kicked by someone better. Still say landslide Romney.

  14. James Says:

    Oh yes, Belmont Club said something very true. Obama mounted the stage a God and left a lesser mortal (words to that effect). That is something you can’t spin, fix or stuff down the memory hole.

  15. T Says:

    ” . . . they created a republic–”if you can keep it”. We haven’t kept it.”

    We haven’t kept it in its original form as you note rickl, but I don’t think we’ve lost it yet either.

    The problem with restricting voting is the same problem as with redistributing wealth; who decides? I could get behind a movement to limit voting to taxpayers but to try and limit voting to the most “responsible” members of society? By the definition of some people 4 years ago that could have been John Edwards.

    As you point out democracy is not a stable form of govt. It’s disputational at it very outset.

  16. rickl Says:

    T Says:
    October 5th, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    We haven’t kept it in its original form as you note rickl, but I don’t think we’ve lost it yet either.

    Oh, I think we have. The 16th and 17th amendments, the New Deal, the Great Society, and Obamunism were body blows to the Republic, and forever changed the relationship of the federal government to the states. They allowed the Feds to run roughshod over the states, which are now mere vassals of Washington, DC.

    As you point out democracy is not a stable form of govt. It’s disputational at it very outset.

    It’s not “disputational”, it’s doomed to failure. When (not if) democracy collapses, it will be replaced by dictatorship. We are on the very cusp of that today.

  17. One imporant point about that New Yorker Eastwooding Cover..... » Da Tech Guy's Blog Says:

    […] It looks like Powerline & the Anchoress got there before me and this quote from Neo Neocon says it all: Freedom of the press is one of the liberties for which Americans have fought and died, and yet the […]

  18. Gail Finke Says:

    Someone just posted this on a friend’s Facebook page: “I think that Obama walks a fine and wobbly line. He sees governing a diverse people as a process of cooperation between people of different views for the common good, rather than one of bullying everyone else to do what builds his and his cronies’ ego and bank accounts. To bullies, he appears weak, but I see him trying to live out/model this awareness and change the current climate in government.”

    I mean, what do you DO with that? It is based on absolutely nothing, and pretty much every action the President has taken in the past 3.5 years contradicts every single point. He is well known in Washington for being unwilling to compromise with anyone about anything, and for not working with anyone but his inner circle, and for rewarding major supporters and contributors — that’s been reported even in the mainstream “rah rah Obama” press. Yet this apparently thoughtful and earnest person thinks it is true.

    My husband told me I should check out your blog yesterday (we are also “neo-neocon” former liberals) and I clicked on The Anchoress’s link at once.

  19. neo-neocon Says:

    Gail Finke: well, you might want to take a look at this for an explanation of your Facebook friend’s behavior.

    I’m not just being cute or funny, either. Cognitive dissonance is a very uncomfortable feeling, and people will often turn themselves into mental pretzels rather than abandon their strongly held beliefs.

    Welcome, by the way.

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge