End of the Beginning and Beginning of the End

Russ Vaughn

The profound losses suffered by the Democratic Party earlier this month would indicate that we are indeed witnessing the end of the beginning of the once-trumpeted era of Hopenchange. The initial larval stage, heralded with all the goofy imagery of butterflies forever slowly ebbed away as the Obama Administration emerged from the inaugural cocoon to be revealed as just another hairy, ugly caterpillar of Washington partisan politics at its conventional worst.

During the subsequent period, the American electorate went through its own metamorphosis, from creature of delusional hope to one of growing doubt and then to one of outright anger and resistance. On November 2d, this disillusioned majority concluded that the thing that had emerged in Washington wasn’t a butterfly but a jackass. 

But what about this being the beginning of the end?  The people have spoken, obviously, but could those be doubtful growls we’re now hearing emanating from the Obama Administration’s very lap, where the loyal media dogs appear to be squirming a bit restlessly? (At this point I must beg forgiveness for mixing the metaphors of butterflies and dogs but actually when you look at where the  Obama Administration started and where it is now, it sort of fits.)

When the Washington Post allows two of the few truly objective and realistic Democrats remaining in the party to use it as a forum to call for Obama not to run for a second term, does that signal the beginning of the end?

When a San Francisco Chronicle editorial opens with,

Shellacked at home, shellacked abroad. President Obama’s Asia trip is extending a losing streak with the latest setback - a refusal by other major financial powers to follow his lead to revive the global economy.

Does that perhaps indicate that what caused the disillusionment and revolt of the American electorate may be dawning on the liberal media elite who are finally finding something distasteful in all their heretofore worshipful hand licking? Does not that reference to, “extending a losing streak,” not portend a sense of the beginning of the end?

Or what about a Kool Aid spewing venue such as the All Obama Channel, MSNBC, permitting one of their very own captive, liberal-leaning RINO’s like Joe Scarborough to reveal that he has been told repeatedly by Democrat leaders of the Senate since Obama took office that the President doesn’t know what he’s doing, that he’s incompetent? Then Scarborough’s frequent guest pundit, Mike Barnicle, confirms this and gives further clues as to who those Democrat leaders might be. Could this possibly be indicative of a beginning of the end?

And is it also the end of the beginning?

 

 

 

 

The profound losses suffered by the Democratic Party earlier this month would indicate that we are indeed witnessing the end of the beginning of the once-trumpeted era of Hopenchange. The initial larval stage, heralded with all the goofy imagery of butterflies forever slowly ebbed away as the Obama Administration emerged from the inaugural cocoon to be revealed as just another hairy, ugly caterpillar of Washington partisan politics at its conventional worst.

During the subsequent period, the American electorate went through its own metamorphosis, from creature of delusional hope to one of growing doubt and then to one of outright anger and resistance. On November 2d, this disillusioned majority concluded that the thing that had emerged in Washington wasn’t a butterfly but a jackass. 

But what about this being the beginning of the end?  The people have spoken, obviously, but could those be doubtful growls we’re now hearing emanating from the Obama Administration’s very lap, where the loyal media dogs appear to be squirming a bit restlessly? (At this point I must beg forgiveness for mixing the metaphors of butterflies and dogs but actually when you look at where the  Obama Administration started and where it is now, it sort of fits.)

When the Washington Post allows two of the few truly objective and realistic Democrats remaining in the party to use it as a forum to call for Obama not to run for a second term, does that signal the beginning of the end?

When a San Francisco Chronicle editorial opens with,

Shellacked at home, shellacked abroad. President Obama’s Asia trip is extending a losing streak with the latest setback - a refusal by other major financial powers to follow his lead to revive the global economy.

Does that perhaps indicate that what caused the disillusionment and revolt of the American electorate may be dawning on the liberal media elite who are finally finding something distasteful in all their heretofore worshipful hand licking? Does not that reference to, “extending a losing streak,” not portend a sense of the beginning of the end?

Or what about a Kool Aid spewing venue such as the All Obama Channel, MSNBC, permitting one of their very own captive, liberal-leaning RINO’s like Joe Scarborough to reveal that he has been told repeatedly by Democrat leaders of the Senate since Obama took office that the President doesn’t know what he’s doing, that he’s incompetent? Then Scarborough’s frequent guest pundit, Mike Barnicle, confirms this and gives further clues as to who those Democrat leaders might be. Could this possibly be indicative of a beginning of the end?

And is it also the end of the beginning?