Delusion is in the air, as media supporters of President Obama grapple with his accumulating record of failure.
"With problems for the president in Afghanistan, health care and unemployment, some critics on both the left and right are asking: Is the president essentially ‘too nice' to make the important decisions?" That is how David Kerley of ABC News opens his recent piece titled, "Is Obama ‘Too Nice' to Make Tough Decisions?"
You've got to love it when liberals use the words "some critics," or "critics say," to voice what they believe without substantiation. Please tell us Mr. Kerley, which critics on the right are asking whether the President is "too nice" to make important decisions?
If critics on the right are asking such a misguided question, then they, like Mr. Kerley do not know the real Barack Obama. And, inasmuch as ABC News failed to vet Candidate Obama we would not expect the organization to know much about Obama beyond the shiny narrative.
Just a few days before the 2008 presidential election, Tom Brokaw appeared on the Charlie Rose show. Here's a brief excerpt:
Rose: I don't know what Barack Obama's worldview is.
Brokaw: No, I don't either.
Rose: And do we know anything about the people who are advising him?
Brokaw: You know that's an interesting question. . . . I don't know what books he's read.
Rose: What do we know about the heroes of Barack Obama?
Brokaw: There's a lot about him we don't know.
Not to worry though. Our esteemed journalists knew that Obama was the perfect candidate. They knew he read a mean teleprompter. They knew he looked good and had a good looking family. They knew he had a nice looking smile. They knew he was black and was the one to make history.
He seemed like a really nice guy.
If they had done their homework, however, they would have known that Obama was a Chicago-machine politician who had used bare-knuckles tactics against his opponents.
Apparently, Kerley still doesn't know how Obama began his political career. No, I'm not referring to Obama's fundraiser for state senate in the home of former United States terrorist and present-day radical, Bill Ayers.
I'm referring to the manner in which Obama won his first election. Alice Palmer had been an Illinois state senator since 1991. In 1995 a U.S. congressional seat had become available and Ms. Palmer tossed her hat into the special election race. Barack Obama endorsed Palmer for Congress and she blessed him with an endorsement for the state seat she would leave open.
It was a simple plan: Palmer would go on to Washington and Obama would fill her seat in Illinois. The only problem was that Jesse Jackson Jr. would enter the congressional race and outspend Palmer almost two to one. After losing her congressional run, Palmer assumed that Obama would step aside and allow his elder to resume her post unchallenged.
But Barack Obama had no plans of stepping aside. That wasn't the not-so-nice part. He certainly was entitled to stay in the Democratic primary. Convicted fraud artist, Tony Rezko raised over $15,000 for Obama's campaign. That wasn't the mean part either -- though it was a little slimy. The not-so-nice part of Obama's election victory was his treatment of Palmer. Obama had Palmer disqualified from the primary.
David Freddoso reports in his book, "The Case Against Barack Obama," that Palmer collected nearly 1,600 petition signatures to get back on the ballot for reelection and submitted them well ahead of the deadline.
But rather than leaving the outcome to the voters, Obama decided to take the matter into his own hands. He decided to use Chicago hardball tactics against Palmer. Obama had his team painstakingly examine each of the 1,580 signatures, searching for technicalities. Freddoso writes:
One by one, Obama's ‘petitions guru' [Ronald Davis] disqualified Palmer's signatures for one reason or another. According to one local newspaper at the time: ‘Some of the problems include printing registered voters name [sic] instead of writing, a female voter got married after she registered to vote and signed her maiden name, registered voters signed the petitions but don't live in the 13th district.'
At the end of the day, Obama disqualified enough signatures to kick Palmer out of the race. "While they were at it," notes Freddoso, "Obama's campaign got the other three candidates disqualified as well."
Learning about the real Obama shatters the media-created image of Obama in an instant. Maybe, that's why our brave journalists close their eyes, plug their ears and utter, "la, la, la, la." Gee, Charlie, there's a lot about him we don't know.
In case you haven't noticed, Mr. Kerley, Obama doesn't tolerate opposition well. His treatment of Palmer is sort of consistent with his treatment of his current opponents. I can think of words to describe Obama, like controlling and authoritarian. But nice doesn't come to mind; unless you're only looking at the polished image.
Remember some of Obama's first words to his opponents just three days after taking office. "I won," announced Obama, "I will trump you on that [the so-called stimulus bill]." In the same meeting the new president also warned Republicans about listening to Rush Limbaugh. Brad O'Leary predicted before the election that a President Obama would effectively tell traditional Americans to "sit down, shut up, and pay the bills." Well, he was close. Mr. Obama would actually say in August of 2009, that, "I don't want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess." I don't think Obama was very nice in trying to ram through over a thousand pages of unread health care law before the congressional break back in August. And, I'm not seeing the niceness in the way Obama responded to his critics. Initially, he characterized their honest dissent as "chatter." He vowed to pass health care anyway, even before anyone had read the "bill," including himself. Then his administration turned to calling the bill-reading, town hall protesters spiteful names. And, lastly Obama resorted to characterizing his opponents as liars, before a joint session of Congress. Mr. Obama seems to have quite an enemies list. The latest target of the disqualification machine is Fox News. Rather than engage in transparent debate, the name calling has begun, with David Axelrod childishly maligning Fox as "not really a news station." And Obama's dictatorial attempt to ban Fox News from the White House Press Pool just might be the serendipitous eye-opener for many journalists in the "mainstream" media.
Mr. Obama's indecisiveness on certain issues may be explained by any number of factors; but I don't believe being "too nice" is one of them.