A.J. DiCintio
Slobbering love affair's ironic result
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By A.J. DiCintio
June 24, 2012

After Bernard Goldberg enlightened the nation with sordid details regarding the slobbering love affair the elite media conducted with Barack Obama during the 2008 Election, no person capable of intellectual honesty doubted the power of the psychodynamically-induced megavolts thrilling through the brains and up the legs of America's journalist aristocrats to keep the slobber flowing endlessly.

As it had to turn out, the honest realists were correct.

So it was that in June of '09, Newsweek's Evan Thomas appeared on MSNBC's Hardball to make the astonishingly arrogant, perfectly stupid assertion that unlike Reagan, who was "all about America," President Obama heads a United States that is "above being parochial, chauvinistic, [and] provincial," thereby revealing he stands not just "above the country" but "above the world" as "God."

And so it was a few weeks ago that in one of two articles about U.S. drone and cyber attacks in which the New York Times became complicit with the political intentions of named and unnamed White House sources, the newspaper's reporters wrote this:

"A student of writings on war by Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, [President Obama] believes that he should take moral responsibility for such actions."

Ah, yes, just as media liberals can't honestly characterize Barack Obama as a senior lecturer who taught law school courses for a few years but feel compelled to mindlessly repeat his assertion he was "a professor of constitutional law" or gush over him as a legal "scholar," they can't describe him simply as a president who has taken to reading the works of Church Fathers to satisfy himself that using drone-dropped bombs to blow viciously psychopathic terrorists into smithereens is morally just.

Instead, they feel driven to exalt him as a long-time "student" (read "scholar") of Just War theory, their slobbering going so far as to imply he agonizes over Augustine and Aquinas even when he is confronted with decisions about discombobulating the brains of a maniac enemy's computers.

The truth about media slobber, however, is that it represents an ironic poison to political leaders because in its failure to stir up the public with truth, it causes politicians to greatly exaggerate the support their policies enjoy and thus to commit ever more of the stupendous mistakes to which their nature disposes them.

To the nation's detriment, that reality has been the case with liberal ideologue Barack Obama on a number of issues, the most important of which is economic policy.

With respect to "the economy," Obama began to err horribly from Day One of his administration, when he reacted to the recession as if it were caused by a typical downturn in the business cycle that could be fixed quickly with expedient spending, failing to realize it resulted from a breakdown in the financial system, whose damage, history has shown, takes many years to repair.

Moreover, he has stubbornly refused to admit to consequences arising from the fact that the financial debacle of 2008 and its painful aftermath coincide with the end of what John Mauldin has termed the West's "debt supercycle."

Those crucial mistakes owe their existence to Obama's long held, dogmatic belief that the best state is the nanny state (though he prefers the euphemism "social democracy"), a conviction he honed by acquiring pragmatic knowledge about centralized power, spending, and debt while working for the Chicago Political Machine.

They are also directly connected to other mistakes, including that President Obama has never spoken seriously with the public about the reality that just as business and families have entered into a period of deleveraging (reducing debt), a government with burgeoning debt must do the same, not just by eliminating waste, fraud, and unnecessary spending but reforming entitlement programs whose unsustainable promises and "generational theft" make them not just fiscally but morally ruinous.

. . . That in one of most cowardly and irresponsible acts ever committed by an American president, he summarily dismissed the debt commission he had appointed, thereby insulting the public as well as the commission's bravest members, whose suggestions arrived at amid ugly name calling and uglier distortion of facts could have served as a starting point toward achieving real, substantive fiscal reform in Washington.

. . . That he supported and signed a destined to fail, pork stuffed, political-pay-off "stimulus" bill instead of listening, for example, to oil expert Gregor Macdonald that America will increasingly rely upon electricity produced by coal, natural gas, and solar and therefore using the Oval Office to push for innovative cooperation between government agencies and private sector utilities to build a modern electrical grid designed to play a major role in sustaining the nation's economy for the next 50, even 100, years.

. . . That among his many trips, not one involved traveling about the nation asking this single question of business leaders, especially those in charge of the profoundly important economic engine that is small business: "What can Washington do to help you create good jobs for the American people?"

. . . And that, having campaigned relentlessly across the swing state of Ohio in '08, promising to reform NAFTA if elected, he has completely frozen the issue out of his administration while assigning a priority of absolute zero to the immensely important task of reforming our job and middle class killing trade relationship with China.

Unsurprisingly, most media elites have reacted to those failures by slobbering either vigorous support or convenient silence, certainly with the hope of enhancing Barack Obama's image, especially during this election year.

However, in these hard times, no amount of slobber or silence can keep the public from perceiving the truth and acting accordingly, a reality vividly supported by the work of respected Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who told CNN's John King "Obama is in trouble" after a focus group session revealed not just that "voters don't see a plan for the future" but that of ten former Obama voters, only four are committed to the president.

In view of Hart's findings, media elites ought to change Sir Walter Scott's lines and exclaim, "Oh what an ironic web we weave/When first we slobber to deceive!"

But human nature being what it is, the odds on that happening are at least a billion trillion to one.

© A.J. DiCintio

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

A.J. DiCintio

A.J. DiCintio posts regularly at RenewAmerica and YourNews.com. He first exercised his polemical skills arguing with friends on the street corners of the working class neighborhood where he grew up. Retired from teaching, he now applies those skills, somewhat honed and polished by experience, to social/political affairs.

Subscribe

Receive future articles by A.J. DiCintio: Click here

More by this author