Featured Post

Castro and the Nazis: Makes Perfect Sense

As we come up on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, we see newly declassified German intelligence documents reporting that Fi...

Wednesday, November 13, 2013

On Responsibility and Obama

It's tough to write the words "responsibility" and "Obama" in the same sentence.  We have as President a man who never took to heart Mitt Romney's wise observation that "leadership is about taking responsibility, not making excuses."

Obama is a case study of what in Spanish is known as the "se me cayo" phenomenon. In Spanish, when you drop something, you didn't. It dropped itself from you. For Obama anything that turns out crooked, wrong, or manifestly stoooopid is somebody else's fault. He just read about it in the papers this morning, and, by golly, "there's nobody madder than me about it." We have seen this stunt over and over these past five-plus years.

On "Fast and Furious," an operation begun and launched by Obama's DOJ as a way to sabotage the second amendment and promote international gun control, the President "read" about it and ordered it stopped, and, of course, it was a policy actually launched by George Bush, and, oh by the way, although the facts don't support it, the guns in Mexico come from US gun shows and stores. The idiot media gave him a pass even when it was shown that the guns slipped into Mexico by Obama's team killed hundreds of Mexicans and at least two US federal agents. The media instead focussed its attacks on Republicans who sought to get the documents that showed what the White House knew about this insane operation.

We saw this nonsense play out again in the course of the IRS scandal. The President was "furious" when he found out that his IRS had been targeting conservative groups and donors for "special" attention. Again the media gave Obama a pass and bemoaned how this scandal, labelled "phony" by the President, gave Republicans political ammunition.

We saw this scenario play out again on the Benghazi murders, and on the Syrian "red lines" nonsense. It was all somebody else's fault, a video caused the attack in Benghazi, the world made Obama draw a red line on Syrian chemical weapons. On Syria, of course, the "solution," a clever stunt by Putin who outfoxed Obama every step of the way, that Obama tried to claim for himself.  By this time, even the brain-numb media had a hard time buying the story.

Now we see the granddaddy of domestic political, social and economic disasters. Yes, the horror known as Obamacare. It's cutting a swathe of destruction through the American health system and wreaking havoc on millions of Americans--many of whom fell for Obama's outright lie that, "if like your plan you can keep your plan." They couldn't, of course, because despite the President's typical attempt to blame the insurers, the Republicans, anybody but the man in the mirror for these cancelled policies, he couldn't run from the fact that his "signature" legislative achievement made millions of Americans' insurance policies illegal. Yes, illegal. Fewer people now have medical insurance than before the passage of Obamacare.

Now we see even Democrats waking up from the snake charmer's spell. CNN runs headlines telling us that "Democrats are losing patience" with the President and his prevarication on Obamacare. They have learned their lessons from him and are now seeking to blame somebody, anybody for the disaster.  A couple of simple humble questions. Who voted for this thing? Anybody read it first? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller? All these Democrat Congressmen now complaining about the Obamacare beast might want to remember the answers to those questions.

Just another attempt to evade responsibility.

24 comments:

  1. Not to forget the bio on his first book jacket, stating that he was "born in Kenya", which was also someone else's fault. This despite the publisher requiring all its authors to write their own bios.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I'm not responsible" will continue to be used until it doesn't work.

    The Obama and the Democratic Congressmen aren't really dumb They just think their constituents are. As said constituents elected and in most cases re-elected them, they have a point.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anybody who has had young children will recognize the trait, Obama is a child with an imaginary naughty friend. Any good deeds he has done get recognized as Obama, any bad deeds can be assigned to those naughty republican children.

    Strange that a mature media would fall for this. Perhaps the media are naughty children too.

    I am firmly convinced the halfrican princess needs psychotherapy he is delusional.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is it possible that Pelosi was speaking the truth when she said that they needed to pass the legislation to find out what was in it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, like a Dr finds out what's in the sample after it's passed.

      Delete
  5. There has been an ongoing discussion elsewhere about just how closely Obama follows and displays almost all the diagnostic criteria of not only narcissism but narcissistic personality disorder (formerly known as megalomania).

    Apparently this denial, shifting of blame and the 'rewriting' of occurrences to present himself in as good a light as possible is all internally consistent with these diagnoses.

    I have no idea whatsoever whether it's true or not (the wiki pages seem to be describing him to a tee though), but if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ...

    Worrying no?

    ReplyDelete
  6. paul_vincent_zecchinoNovember 14, 2013 at 6:39 AM

    Why fault a jihado-marxist for faithfully obeying Lenin's command to shift the guilt for one's crimes onto inanimate objects and/or innocent citizens in order to protect the communist crime syndicate?

    Of course he shifts the guilt. To quote President Muffley in "Dr. Strangelove", 'they're trained to do it."

    They always defend their failures and crimes thusly, "Well, it's not really communism in Cuba, it's actually castro's junta...well, Russia wasn't really pure communism, the Russian military kinda took over, didn't allow communism to work...." Being a good commie means never having to say you're sorry.



    So here's a young guy, mentored by internationally renowned photographer 'artiste' and jazz announcer, Frank Marshall Davis, who is filled with crac...er...a yearning to be Lenin's New Socialist Man, doing as the shark-eyed hydrocephalic soviet gangster counseled, and you come along, criticize him?

    When one at last can almost see all the smiling faces at the tractor factory, you insist upon being so cruel and 'mean spirited' and racist. Yes, that's it, racist, finding fault with a someone who practices the time-honored commie tradition of blame-shifting? Oh, the pain. The pain!

    I blame Bush, personally. And 'society', as well plus Calvin Coolidge, also.


    "Man has climbed Mount Everest, gone to the bottom of the ocean. He's fired rockets at the moon, split the atom, achieved miracles in every human endeavor...except crime!" - Aurich Goldfinger (Gert Frobe) "Goldfinger", c. 1964

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obama seems to be progressing from Liberal to Collectivist to Autocrat to Central Planner back to Autocrat. If the Senator Landrieu D-La bill makes it to his desk and he embraces her "mandate the insurance companies" to act as they want...then he becomes all the above plus, finally, Command and Controller. What's left?

      Delete
    2. paul_vincent_zecchinoNovember 15, 2013 at 5:59 AM

      State sponsored soft genocide.

      Delete
    3. It wasn't President Merkin Muffley, it was General Buck Turgidson, speaking of initiative. And where is our friend Merkwürdigliebe to point this out?

      Mr. Whitewall, rotating among synonyms isn't really "progressing", is it?

      Mr. Zeccino, in the immortal words of Inigo Montoya, I don't think that words means what you think it means. Rounded to the nearest million, how many millions has "soft genocide" murdered?



      Delete
    4. a6z...well, I see your point. For Liberals to break out of the loop they would need a different word. Chavez? Peronista? Bolivarian? Or Maybe Leninism 2.0.

      Delete
  7. Even now as Dems flee the Ocare train wreck, they do so Only out of self preservation and practical politics. Not because of the flawed goal of DC as command and control center for one seventh of the US economy. They want a fast fix without endangering the tarnished brand of big government Liberalism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And those moronic Republicans are jumping in as fast as they can with Legislation to "fix" the problem...which will only serve to:
      A. Remove the best tool they have to break the Left and regain control of Congress; setting up a Conservative taking of the Presidency in 2016.
      B. Creating the illusion (which the Democrats will instantly proclaim) that Obamacare is now Bi-partisan legislation since the Republicans have now voted for ammendments to the ACA.
      C. Allow Obamacare to slowly wind itself into the system (economic and legislative) that it will be impossible to get rid of without a drastic shock to the system.

      Delete
    2. Unfortunately I agree. The GOP will eagerly want to show that it is riding to the rescue when the best thing for it to do is sit on its hands and do nothing. They must remind Americans that the GOP is the stupid, knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, Neanderthal party that can only hide in the shadows of the uber-intellectual Democratic Party, not barely understanding the greatness of The Dear Golfer. They could dust off Paul Ryan's plans, they could run old video clips of GOP or TP folks pointing out the obvious flaws in MugabeCare but they must at all costs avoid applying any palliative care.

      What they should have done beginning last year is fight against every one of the hundreds of MugabeCare waivers that were handed out as well as the employer mandate slip. Single item legislation, one per waiver, declaring the waiver against the settled law of the land PPACA, passed by the House and loudly presented to the Senate. Then the imbecile majority party in the Senate would have been between a grenade and another grenade - either vote would destroy them.

      But nobody listens to me anyway.

      Delete
    3. The Old Man....I read you when you write. Don't be so pessimistic. This time the Liberal has taken too big a bite of the Central Planner apple.

      Delete
    4. I hope you're right, Whitewall. But Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot didn't discredit socialism, not sufficiently anyway. Obama isn't even in their league.

      Obama does have one advantage, if that is the word I want, as it applies to discrediting socialism with Americans. All those old guys' murders happened to other people in other countries. Obamacare is happening to us.

      Delete
    5. a6z....all those fellows are mercifully dead. The body counts took up the headlines and a delicate little concept like "socialism" can't even get a mention is the press or history books. Socialism here will be felt by tens of millions but the Left will fight like hell to keep the word socialism out of the lexicon. We may have to settle for "Liberal Fascism" as an attack phrase. That may smoke out some left over regular Democrats that I believe are still in that party, just being quiet.

      Delete
  8. As I write this we are one hour away from hearing President Obama appear on the nation's airwaves to announce his "plan" to fix Obamacare. Typically, he took only two days to design a fix to a program that required months to be written in the first place and was written without any Republican ideas or compromises, yet the country waits breathlessly to hear how he is going to "save" his signature legislation. Remember, this is a man who, as a Senator, voted "present" most of the time, yet the country's media class is willing to give him the benefit of the doubt yet again.

    I don't know what he'll say. One hour out, HE probably doesn't know what he's going to say. But he going to "fix" Obamacare. Would that he had fixed it before he signed it.

    I really think Romney might just have turned this nation around and I regret right now that we don't have a parliamentary system where he, as spokesman for the loyal opposition, could be standing up and giving us alternatives to the disaster that is unrolling before our very eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This also isn't just something that administrations do. None of our past Presidents had anything near the record of tarring and feathering the previous administration (to raucous media applause). And it's just jarring and painful to make this criticism and be responded to by some dimwit: "but Obama's predecessor simply WAS that bad!", as though that was some sort of objective fact.
    Uggg.. it's like he's already brought everybody who supports him into a Blame Game Challenge Death Match.

    What sucks worse? 2016... Dems: machine already geared up promoting the Queen of Benghazi, GOP: nobody at all even notable on the stage.

    - reader #1482

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "GOP: nobody at all even notable on the stage."

      Just remember in 1979 Ronald Reagan was just a has been usurper who got his 'what-for' in the 1976 Primary. Nothing left of him except wash up window dressing. 1980 was all about GHW Bush and his coronation as the Savior from the Carter Administration.

      That said...we all know that the MSM will do everything they can to install her Royal Thighness to the seat of power just as they done so for The One. Benghazi? Thats old news and it makes no difference. F&F? That was Bush's fault. Obamacare? Thats now Bi-Partisan Legislation whose full implementation is delayed until after the 2016 elections.
      Hillary gets 4 years to insulate her from any other disasters that Obama comes up with.

      Delete
    2. I really hope such a person steps up.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
    3. Clinton has buckley's chance of getting the Democrat's nod for 2016. The Democrat Donkeys made great noise about John McCain's advancing age and Clinton will be 69 in 2016, old and stale. The obvious parallels will be drawn.

      Delete
    4. Right. Hillary is too old. We need to continue to say that. Drive home her age. I don't think people really think about or know how old she really is. Sixty-nine is way too old, and she would be probably be 70 or close to it when she took office. Toooo old.

      Delete
    5. Hey, Reagan was 69 when elected, and turned out to be a decent POTUS.

      Then again, Shrillary Shrew is not a fundamentally decent person. This, and her incompetence as SecState are things that need to be hammered home.

      Delete