Tags: State of Denial | Betrays | White House | Arrogance

State of Denial Betrays White House Arrogance

Monday, 15 March 2010 03:54 PM Current | Bio | Archive

The White House arrogance in denying that Tuesday's election results were a repudiation of President Barack Obama's radical agenda echoes its arrogance in attempting to advance this agenda against the people's will.

One of the great ironies of this administration is its promise to return power to the people, while it governs with an iron fist and its back turned to the expressed wishes of the voters. The White House claims a mandate for its extreme blueprint to restructure America, but the voters had no idea Obama would go this far, even if many of us listening closely to his statements and studying his relationships and voting record did.

It's possible, given the relatively monolithic embryo in which Obama was incubated politically, that Obama believed the majority of Americans held the same contempt for America's political and economic system as he did. It should be clear to him now, though, that he's not on the same page with them — perhaps not even in the same book.

But if you're paying attention, you know that this cold, hard slap of reality hitting Obama in the face isn't slightly deterring him from pressing forward. If anything, it has strengthened his resolve to implement his agenda with increased urgency, before the public turns even more against him.

Obama's attitude in over-reading his mandate and dismissing the significance of Tuesday's elections is, I believe, consistent with the liberal mind-set that liberals know better than the people what is in their best interests.

Sen. Jim Webb, whose fellow Virginia Democrat was defeated soundly Tuesday, said the election results indicate that "people up here on our side need to get their message straighter."

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., went even further, saying it is "nonsense" to suggest that the New Jersey and Virginia results represent a referendum on President Obama and that Democrats should try harder to make sure they "deliver on the promises of the last election."

Well, that could be news to the more than 4 in 10 Virginia voters stating in their exit poll responses that their views of Obama — pro and con — factored into their choices; a similar number responded the same way in New Jersey. Indeed, it's hard to deny that political issues are more nationalized now than they've been in years.

Webb's fantastic idea that Democrats simply need to get their message straighter parallels Obama's 5 million unpersuasive public speeches on socialized medicine, always expecting a different result.

But how much clearer can Obama and the Democratic Party be that they have embraced, wholesale, the domestic model of European socialism and the foreign policy model of Jimmy Carter appeasement? As dense as we the people are, I think we grasp that, gentlemen.

We see this same liberal superiority complex — an elitist confidence that they know better — in MSNBC's "Hardball" host Chris Matthews' snarky reaction to the election results. When radio host Mark Williams opined that the Republican gubernatorial victories signaled a repudiation of big government, Matthews hissed that that was "the wing nut line . . . There are some people that believe that all their lives. They've always believed the black helicopters are coming. They've always believed somebody's coming to get their guns. They've always hated government."

To Matthews and his ilk, the expression of mainstream conservatism on talk radio, the public's outrage at bankrupting federal spending demonstrated at tea party protests, and the voters' rejection of liberal candidates are examples of extremism. But the liberals are the ones who are extreme and out of phase with mainstream Americans, twice as many of whom self-identify as conservative than they do liberal.

But what the public is coming to see is that liberals are the extremists and that, if placed in a position of unchecked power, they will recognize no boundaries in their quest to remake America in their image. It's obvious that for them, there is no such thing as government excess, no level of government intrusion that would justify a legitimate adverse public reaction.

If Obama's election and the Democrats' simultaneous control of the legislative branch have served any constructive purpose, it is to give liberals the confidence to finally expose their extremist agenda.

You can be sure that, no matter what face they are wearing in the wake of these elections, Obama and his Democrats are fully aware of what they mean and that they'll have to make adjustments. They'll either redouble their efforts to press forward their extremist agenda by pretending to moderate it or descend into hyper-panic mode and accelerate their Draconian schemes with even greater urgency.

But one thing you can be sure of: They will not abandon their agenda, nor will they moderate it in substance, which is why conservatives must never let their guards down but prepare for an even greater battle ahead.

David Limbaugh is a writer, author, and attorney. His book "Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party" was released recently in paperback. To find out more about him, visit his Web site at www.DavidLimbaugh.com.

© Creators Syndicate Inc.

1Like our page
The White House arrogance in denying that Tuesday's election results were a repudiation of President Barack Obama's radical agenda echoes its arrogance in attempting to advance this agenda against the people's will.One of the great ironies of this administration is its...
State of Denial,Betrays,White House,Arrogance
Monday, 15 March 2010 03:54 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved