Short-Changed

December 22, 2011

Columbus, MS, News, Politics

Change

Here we stand on the verge of the GOP primaries to see who will be the next person to take on President Barack Obama in the next election, in what some have claimed will be his prompt demise after one term.  After having one of the highest approval ratings ever right after taking office, President Obama is holding on to a mere 47% approval rating. What happened?

I believe our President’s problem goes back to something we all experienced in high school. Remember the kid who tried to be friends with every little clique? It normally doesn’t go over so well, because at an early age we are taught that if you try to please everybody, you’ll end up pleasing nobody. This seems to be the case with President Obama.

I remember the Bush Administration. I also remember that not very many people (Republicans included) were sad to see him go. In fact, most members of the GOP wanted to distance themselves from the Bush Administration entirely; a Bush endorsement was a kiss of death. He started two very long and wildly unpopular wars, bungled the response to Katrina, and oversaw the swing of a budget surplus to an economic recession. That’s not even including the corporate scandals, profiteering from the war, and soaring gas prices.

Many people were lining up in ‘08 to vote for the “Not Bush” ticket. Let’s face it, the Republicans were doomed that year. There were political commentators saying that the GOP wouldn’t bounce back from the Bush administration for decades. Yet we find ourselves 4 years later in a situation where people are prepared to vote “Not Obama”. You may or may not agree, but this is what happened — in my opinion.

When you win an election based on “change” by as many votes as Obama did, have a filibuster-proof Congress and that high of an approval rating is what is called a Political Mandate. It basically means you can do whatever you want, and the people will back you. The President didn‘t do that though.  He tried to govern in the middle and start this bipartisan, consensus-building nonsense. We didn’t put him in office for that. We wanted less corruption, out of the wars immediately and universal healthcare.

It’s December 2011, and we’re just leaving Iraq and still deeply entrenched in Afghanistan. They passed some type of healthcare law, but it was so weak and came up so short on expectations that most people have not even bothered to familiarize themselves with it. Why?

Though the President could have come in and said, “Hey, pass this” without checking to see what anybody thought, instead he decided he would only pass things that the Republican party agreed with.  I’ve always been of the school of thought that the Republicans can’t be negotiated with, and they will sabotage anything the Democrats try to pass.  There’s another thing I’d like to bring up as a reason the GOP especially doesn’t want to go along with President Obama — but that’s a can of worms I don’t want to open and is another piece altogether.

Not only do I blame the President’s lack of ability or willingness to take on the GOP, but I blame him for selling out to corporate interests. The real reason they never attempted to install universal healthcare wasn’t because of the cost or a need to transition, but because the Obama Administration didn’t have the balls to cut the HMO and pharmaceutical companies out of the box.  Did I mention Rahm Emmanuel is a snake, and I always knew having him on the President’s staff was a red flag, considering he was the first to shoot down universal healthcare? I’ve digressed; I also don’t like the cozy relationship the President has with Goldman Sachs — but that’s another article as well.

That being said, the Republicans really don’t like President Obama for various reasons, some of which I don’t think are purely because he’s liberal or a Democrat but that’s what we expect.  However, what I didn’t expect was for him to come in and come up small on this big of a stage — worse than Riley Benock at the end of a SEC game. In doing that, the President also isolated his Democrat/liberal base; I’d have never dreamt that the President would be this awful, but those of us who elected him should blame nobody but ourselves.

The President was highly inexperienced, and most people in the field thought that he stood no chance. John Edwards was a really good candidate (scandal aside), and in all honesty, John McCain was not the conservative the Dems made him out to be in the campaign.  Having Sarah Palin as a running mate was a mistake, though.  We got caught up in the ‘hope and change’ sale and the popularity contest of electing either the first black or female president.  A Junior Senator has no business with a viable chance of being elected, because he speaks well or that he’s of a certain race.  By the same token, a female shouldn’t be elected just because she was a former President’s wife… Hillary and Barack would never get elected based on credentials; they didn’t belong there anymore than Boise State belongs in a NCAA National Championship game.

Do I believe that all of his problems are because of him? No. There are a lot of moderate and conservative Democrats who are falling in line and going against him that’s negatively affecting the Democratic Party. But that’s a problem that a good Party whip can take care of.  Being a good President is almost like my job: working with students. If you establish yourself and handle business in the beginning, it’ll save you from having a bad experience; but if you don’t, you end up being shown the door. I believe the President is finally coming around to seeing the error of his ways, but will he be around long enough to do anything about it?

Arthur Hosey, Jr. is a Greenville, MS native and a Government/Economics teacher at Lanier High School in Jackson, MS. He also holds a B.A. degree from Mississippi State University in Political Science.  He can be reached on his own blog, treatywithtahiti.tumblr.com, or on Twitter @kingarthurj.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About The Real Story

The Real Story for the Golden Triangle and North Mississippi. Always the truth... No Compromise. Changing the community one story at a time! You make the news... We keep it Real.

View all posts by The Real Story

Subscribe

Subscribe to our RSS feed and social profiles to receive updates.

9 Comments on “Short-Changed”

  1. Arthur J. Hosey Jr Says:

    I’m interested to see you guys comments about my story and I’ll field any questions or comments you guys got!

    Reply

  2. Tommy Gentry Says:

    I remembewell Ralph Nader’s comments on what an Obama Presidency would mean:”Barrack Obama doesn’t have challenging personality;he has an accomodating personality to power.”

    Obama is a creation of David Axelrod and the neo-con think tank cabals in DC and Tel Aviv.

    Reply

  3. Tommy Gentry Says:

    Ralph would’ve spelled “accommodating” correctly.

    Reply

  4. Tommy Gentry Says:

    To all those “W” students back in 2008 that fainted, fawned-over, flagellated(self) and feigned praise of the assassin and murderer in the White House, this is for you.

    Reply

  5. Melody Says:

    With Ron Paul surging in Iowa polls, Dick Morris, the Fox News analyst and Republican strategist, warns of horrific consequences for the GOP if he wins the GOP nomination.

    In a column released on Dickmorris.com this weekend, Morris writes:

    “Ron Paul remains terrifying. He is really the ultimate liberal in the race. He wants to legalize drugs, repeal the Patriot Act, slash our military spending, pull out of Afghanistan… On these issues, he’s way, way to the left of Obama. What makes him a conservative is hard to tell. But, whatever he is, he would be a disaster as the Republican candidate. His bland assertion in the last debate, that ‘anyone’ will beat Obama is both self-serving and inaccurate. He wouldn’t. Anyone who votes for Paul and is not brought up short by his denuding us in our defenses against terrorism and his passivity in the face of Iranian nuclear weapons, has to realize that nominating him is tantamount to re-electing Obama.”

    Morris notes that while Newt Gingrich leads as the favorite candidate among Tea Party Patriots polled, a splintering effect among more conservative candidates continues to help Romney.

    The latest conservative-leaning candidate to see a surge is Rick Santorum, Morris says.

    But Morris predicts that support for Romney will wane as a “buyer’s remorse may set in,” especially as Republican primary voters realize they are backing the candidate who instituted Romneycare, a program similar to President Obama’s healthcare plan.

    As conservatives realize a vote for any conservative other than Gingrich is a vote for Romney, Morris predicts a Gingrich come back.

    © Newsmax. All rights reserved
    ..

    Reply

  6. Tommy Gentry Says:

    I agree with Jon Stewart on Newt Gingrich:”Newt Gingrich is the Pillsbury Doughboy’s older, angrier know-it-all brother.

    And Dick Morris could be the posterboy for a “mugwamper.” Dick Morris was political advisor to both “Treasonous Trent” Lott(Bill Clinton’s “fast track pointman” for NAFTA) and President Bill Clinton. The proverbial “two peas in a pod.”

    And on Paul’s States Rights policy regulating drugs, did you know that President George Washington, in his later years, took a daily dose of an opium derivative for his dental problems.It didn’t affect his Presidency.

    Coca Cola…it soothes the stomach the doctors used to say.

    Reply

  7. Tommy Gentry Says:

    On Mississippi Jim Barksdale’s “hatchetwoman”(CNN’s Gloria Borger) interview with Ron Paul.

    Ron Paul answered the question… TWICE!

    Reply

  8. Tommy Gentry Says:

    Surely, Dick Morris knows that Iran has no nuclear weapons, but that Israel does have them and has threatened to use them against Iran, thus carrying out it threatened “Samson Option.” Israel just took delivery of another German-“donated” submarine to add to its nuclear fleet.

    A President Ron Paul will pursue an even-handed foreign policy in the Middle East with no “entangling alliances” or “favored nations.” That is what Dick Morris finds “horrirfic.”

    And there would be no Mississippi boots on the ground in Central Africa.

    Reply

  9. Arthur J. Hosey Jr Says:

    Mr. Gentry I see that you’re rather passionate about this subject and well informed too!

    Reply

    • Tommy Gentry Says:

      Mr. Hosey~

      If you watched John Pilger’s video, I don’t think you can claim Obama was duped by Emanuel and Axelrod. He knew from the beginning what was expected of him , as Nader predicted in 2008,

      What do you think of Obama unleashing kill teams to liquidate Joseph Kony and his 100-member Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda? President Eisenhower set a precedent in sending assassins into Africa back in 1960 when he gave the DIA orders to liquidate Patrice Lumumba , shortly after Lumumba won the election to be the first freely-elected President of the Congo.

      And Dianne Fossey must be rolling in her grave.

      Reply

What is your opinion?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: