January 09, 2013
   « Much ado about nothing - The Tebow ad | Blog Home Page | Will no one rid us of this meddlesome AGW nonsense? »
Email Friend | Print Article | | Share Share

February 8, 2010

Obama the Scold

Ed Lasky
Politico has a very good column that characterizes our President as a scold.

For a president who ran on uplifting themes like change and hope, Barack Obama spends an awful lot of time scolding Americans about how he hopes they'll change.

He has advised parents to "replace that video game with a book and make sure that homework gets done." He has urged members of Congress not to read blogs or watch 24-hour cable news. And he's challenged lobbyists, lawmakers, bankers, journalists, insurance companies and other heads of state to do a better job.

He's prodded people to get off the couch, eat healthier and exercise more. He's even suggested Americans buy stocks, U.S.-made cars and energy-efficient light bulbs, while cautioning them not to max out their credit cards.

At times, having Obama in the Oval Office is like having a really powerful Dr. Phil around.

Obama drew criticism for his unusual finger-wagging at Supreme Court justices as they sat in the House chamber during his State of the Union address. He also used the speech to once again press Congress to go public with its earmarks. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, Obama's fellow Democrat, recently told him to "lay off Las Vegas" when Obama urged fiscal restraint by explaining, "You don't blow a bunch of cash on Vegas when you're trying to save for college."

Sometimes these statements come with a heavy dose of ignorance and hypocrisy.

For example, Politico points out these examples of Obama hectoring:

"What you're now seeing is profit-and-earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it," Obama told a CNBC interviewer last March.

"If you are considering buying a car, I hope it will be an American car," Obama said last May.

Americans expect some of this from Obama. During the campaign he talked of the need to make sacrifices for the environment, including turning down the thermostat, and promised to "lead by example."

"We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times," he said at one point.

Of course, there is no such thing as a "profit-and-earning ratio." The correct term would be price-earnings ratio. That reveals a great deal about our President's lack of knowledge regarding the stock market. Exhorting people to buy American-made cars sounds good but can cause trade friction (though it does help Obama with the UAW). He scolded us to turn down the thermostat and promised  to lead by example. That is belied when he hypocritically cranks up the thermostat in the White House to the extent that "You Could Grow Orchids in There." He doesn't like wearing suits (are golf clothes or swimming suits his preferred attire?) so , therefore, the White House -- a rather large building -- has to have its thermostat adjusted to HIS personal tastes. David Axelrod justifies it by saying "He's From Hawaii, O.K."  Well, Reagan and Nixon were from California and I imagine they wore suits at the office; Arkansas can be a bit warm -- I imagine Bill Clinton wore suits; and even our Georgian-born President led by example, by lowering the thermostat and donning a sweater.

This ideology-symbolized by the slogan ‘Do As I Say, Not As I Do" (title of a superb, short book on liberal hypocrisy by Peter Schweizer) -- is the modern liberal ideology. Americans need to be lectured on how to live our lives because we are the great unwashed masses that, unfortunately, have a vote. The Washington Post had a superb column over the weekend by George Alexander that comments on Liberal Condescension . It comes in four kinds, as summarized by David Freddoso:

(1) The first...maintains that conservatives win elections and policy debates not because they triumph in the open battle of ideas but because they deploy brilliant and sinister campaign tactics.

(2) [I]f conservative leaders are crass manipulators, then the rank-and-file Americans who support them must be manipulated at best, or stupid at worst...speaking to a roomful of Democratic donors in 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama offered a similar (and infamous) analysis when he suggested that residents of Rust Belt towns "cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations..." [I]t might be politically prudent for liberals to hear them out, but there is no reason to actually listen.

(3) The third version of liberal condescension points to something more sinister...It is now an article of faith among many liberals that Republicans win elections because they tap into white prejudice against blacks and immigrants.

(4) Finally, liberals condescend to the rest of us when they say conservatives are driven purely by emotion and anxiety -- including fear of change -- whereas liberals have the harder task of appealing to evidence and logic.

The condescension easily transforms into the disdain exemplified by Barack Obama's derisive comment about residents of Rust Belt towns, about a "typical white person"  and people who live in the very suburbs that "bore him." He mocked people who wore American flags because patriotism and pride are so ignorant. He blames the people's opposition to his agenda on a "failure to communicate" (we are too dumb to "get it" despite dozens of speeches, radio programs, and personal appearances by Barack Obama).

That mindset is so widespread in our media world that all I need to cite are how the media world treats Sarah Palin and grassroots Americans, sometimes referred to as Tea Partiers.

He insults a wide variety of groups (see The Insulter-in-Chief; he mocks; he mistreats American allies and looks down at Americans from Olympian Heights.

Americans don't want praise from our Presidents; we don't need to be coddled; but we demand and are entitled to be respected.  That is the least we deserve. But we are unlikely to receive it from on up high.

That type of respect is beyond this President's capability and character.

Posted at 12:10 PM | Email | | | Share Share