Obama adds to his 'enemies list'

Obama's approach towards his opponents is to view them as "enemies." One of his more revealing Kinsleyian gaffes (these occur when a politician tells the truth) happened during the 2008 campaign. He announced his modus operandi during political battles was to follow the rule "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."

He seems to believe political rivals are "enemies" (didn't he tell Hispanics they should consider those who oppose their political goals "enemies?"). He seems to be quite busy developing an enemies list of his own - Fox News, Republicans, etc.
Among his newest enemies is clearly Congressman Darrell Issa (R-California), the new Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, who has announced an ambitious agenda to examine how taxpayer dollars have been wasted, how ACORN and the New Black Panther Party controversy in Philadelphia have been treated (with kid gloves, apparently), how Inspectors Generals have been sidelined and weakened, how stimulus money has been used, and how other operations of the Obama administration have been run. He recently called the Obama administration the most "corrupt" in history. He later clarified his remarks by characterizing his use of the word corrupt meaning "wasteful".

Well all this has been more than enough to earn Issa a place of honor on the proverbial enemies list. Obama's Democratic operatives have been busy trying to derail Issa - including using the barrels of ink the liberal media consumes to paint Republicans as ..well..the enemy.

The New Yorker has become the periodical equivalent of the New York Times editorial page. For years, readers have been exposed to the spite and venom filled columns of their political commentator, Hendrick Hertzberg (an alumni from the Jimmy Carter administration who, like his former colleagueChris Matthews, just can't seem to let go of the partisan rage).

Since David Remnick took over as chief, the magazine has become even more political. Remnick's own liberalism was clear in his book on Barack Obama - one long mash note to the President. The magazine has recently published a long "expose" on the Koch brothers - funders for a wide variety of conservative groups. They were depicted as villains while their peers on the left (such as George Soros) rated nary a mention.

The long history of George Soros as a main funder of the Democratic Party and such liberal political groups as MoveOn.Org were ignored. This attack on the Kochs coincided with Democratic politicians also criticizing the Kochs as demons: filthy rich from polluting industries, descended from a John Bircher, etc. In other words, a political hit job.

We are seeing history repeat itself-as farce.

Now the New Yorker has written a long column on Darrell Issa filled with innuendo that cast him in a bad light. Why this sudden media treatment?

After all, Issa has been in Congress for many years and never rated a New Yorker profile. The question answers itself. Issa now wields power - power to uncover acts of malfeasance, waste, and , yes, corruption.

Issa is a thorn in the side of Barack Obama who, as the New Yorker suggests, is "about to make life more difficult for President Obama." How would he do that? By making government more transparent. I thought liberals were all for transparency. Wasn't that what we were promised by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and other Democrats back in 2008?

Hence, the New Yorker smear. The hypocrisy is palpable. The magazine seems devoted to protecting the image and political career of Barack Obama.

There is one more dynamic to note. Just as the magazine came to print, Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, went on the warpath. He used the magazine's allegations to publicly lambast Issa. Cummings is a cunning political infighter who the party "promoted" over other Democratic members of the committee, to be its ranking member - all the better to combat Issa and try to silence him and chill his activities.

Politics is a blood sport and Barack Obama is as cold blooded as they come (he "took out" a previous political mentor who stood in his way during his state senate run by challenging the signatures on her nominating petition). He rightly perceives Issa as a man who poses a threat to his reelection chances. Thus the Democratic Party selects Cummings to do his bidding for him in the committee.

But what is distressing, if not unsurprising, is how willingly once august journals such as the New Yorker have sold out their much honored patrimony to put themselves in servitude to the Democratic Party.


Obama's approach towards his opponents is to view them as "enemies." One of his more revealing Kinsleyian gaffes (these occur when a politician tells the truth) happened during the 2008 campaign. He announced his modus operandi during political battles was to follow the rule "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun."

He seems to believe political rivals are "enemies" (didn't he tell Hispanics they should consider those who oppose their political goals "enemies?"). He seems to be quite busy developing an enemies list of his own - Fox News, Republicans, etc.

Among his newest enemies is clearly Congressman Darrell Issa (R-California), the new Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, who has announced an ambitious agenda to examine how taxpayer dollars have been wasted, how ACORN and the New Black Panther Party controversy in Philadelphia have been treated (with kid gloves, apparently), how Inspectors Generals have been sidelined and weakened, how stimulus money has been used, and how other operations of the Obama administration have been run. He recently called the Obama administration the most "corrupt" in history. He later clarified his remarks by characterizing his use of the word corrupt meaning "wasteful".

Well all this has been more than enough to earn Issa a place of honor on the proverbial enemies list. Obama's Democratic operatives have been busy trying to derail Issa - including using the barrels of ink the liberal media consumes to paint Republicans as ..well..the enemy.

The New Yorker has become the periodical equivalent of the New York Times editorial page. For years, readers have been exposed to the spite and venom filled columns of their political commentator, Hendrick Hertzberg (an alumni from the Jimmy Carter administration who, like his former colleagueChris Matthews, just can't seem to let go of the partisan rage).

Since David Remnick took over as chief, the magazine has become even more political. Remnick's own liberalism was clear in his book on Barack Obama - one long mash note to the President. The magazine has recently published a long "expose" on the Koch brothers - funders for a wide variety of conservative groups. They were depicted as villains while their peers on the left (such as George Soros) rated nary a mention.

The long history of George Soros as a main funder of the Democratic Party and such liberal political groups as MoveOn.Org were ignored. This attack on the Kochs coincided with Democratic politicians also criticizing the Kochs as demons: filthy rich from polluting industries, descended from a John Bircher, etc. In other words, a political hit job.

We are seeing history repeat itself-as farce.

Now the New Yorker has written a long column on Darrell Issa filled with innuendo that cast him in a bad light. Why this sudden media treatment?

After all, Issa has been in Congress for many years and never rated a New Yorker profile. The question answers itself. Issa now wields power - power to uncover acts of malfeasance, waste, and , yes, corruption.

Issa is a thorn in the side of Barack Obama who, as the New Yorker suggests, is "about to make life more difficult for President Obama." How would he do that? By making government more transparent. I thought liberals were all for transparency. Wasn't that what we were promised by Nancy Pelosi and Barack Obama and other Democrats back in 2008?

Hence, the New Yorker smear. The hypocrisy is palpable. The magazine seems devoted to protecting the image and political career of Barack Obama.

There is one more dynamic to note. Just as the magazine came to print, Congressman Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland), the ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, went on the warpath. He used the magazine's allegations to publicly lambast Issa. Cummings is a cunning political infighter who the party "promoted" over other Democratic members of the committee, to be its ranking member - all the better to combat Issa and try to silence him and chill his activities.

Politics is a blood sport and Barack Obama is as cold blooded as they come (he "took out" a previous political mentor who stood in his way during his state senate run by challenging the signatures on her nominating petition). He rightly perceives Issa as a man who poses a threat to his reelection chances. Thus the Democratic Party selects Cummings to do his bidding for him in the committee.

But what is distressing, if not unsurprising, is how willingly once august journals such as the New Yorker have sold out their much honored patrimony to put themselves in servitude to the Democratic Party.


RECENT VIDEOS