...when the Chicago Tribune sees that the bloom has fallen off the rose:
In his book The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama had the insight to explain much of his political appeal. “I serve as a blank screen,” he wrote, “on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.” ...
But in his first year in office, the president has had to fill in that screen. And many Americans are disillusioned with the picture that has emerged.
I would say the people who voted for him deserved it, but for the fact that their decision dragged all of us down. And it's a sad commentary on the intelligence of the American electorate that they bought that "blank screen" gambit. Everybody believes in something. Everybody has a certain vision. And even a cursory examination of Barack Obama's record would have shown him to be exactly the "old-fashioned, big-government Democrat" the Chicago Tribune calls him out to be. I thought it was pretty funny how they lamented his supposed deference to Pelosi and Reid in Congress. Did they seriously believe Obama would have deferred to them if he didn't agree with what they had in mind? You see what he told the Republicans early last year. Does anyone seriously not think Obama would have pulled that shit with Pelosi and Reid if they had tried to pull rank on him, with all the political capital bestowed on him by virtue of his fraudulent marketing of himself as that "blank screen"? Oh well. At least his former supporters are actually starting to see the light. Better late than never, I suppose, even if they do try to use bullshit rationlizations of it.
|