Obama’s Engine of Change: Runaway Train?

Boy, that was quick! Just three weeks into the Obama Presidency and already there is reason to be fearful. Media types generally give the president due deference during his first 100 days, but, lacking strong leadership, what was perceived as a powerful engine of change has, in the span of less than a month, morphed into a runaway train.

---

A series of events and revelations over the past week have cracked the air of invincibility that the media once used to cloak Barack Obama from even the slightest of criticisms and opened the eyes of Americans to the shocking possibility that the post-partisan, candidate Obama may be a complete polar opposite of the impulsive, defensive, combative President Obama. Despite stern pledges of the highest standards, Obama chose to ignore his own self-imposed ethics regulations, sought multiple waivers on his own lobbyist restrictions and filled the majority of his cabinet with Clinton insiders and tax cheats. The only bright side to these revelations is that America finally understands why Democrats are so eager to raise taxes, yet so loathe to cut them; Democrats simply don't believe in paying taxes. And despite the groundswell of support for the new president and the alleged public approval of his economic plans as parroted by the media, I found myself among a slim few who, long ago predicted the consequences of what was about to transpire if the federal government intervened in the free market. I predicted TARP would fail, that it would expand government intervention and that money would be wasted. I predicted that Congress was speeding up their push for socialization of our country. I predicted that their legislation would be a pork-filled monstrosity that would do little to stimulate the economy. This week, the evidence validating all of those predictions finally percolated to the surface. An analysis of the effectiveness of TARP found that no one really knows where the $350 billion went. It also revealed that in spite of congressional assurances that taxpayers would eventually make money, we lost nearly $100 billion, or ten percent of our "investment". News stories of corporate sponsorships and lavish getaways by companies receiving bailout money further validate the waste. Perhaps most sinister, reports surfaced of federal pressure on some financial institutions to take TARP money. These institutions were told it was the "patriotic thing to do". Even those that could survive without the money. And now we're being asked to do it again. One unfortunate thing that I didn't predict, is that the American taxpayer will borrow the stinkulus money from the People's Republic of China. And judging how the Chinese like to enslave those who owe them far less, I don't believe that would sit well with many Americans if they knew. What I saw on Barack Obama's face when he took to the stump to try and convince us to eat a trillion dollar piece of dung was not leadership, nor confidence, which is what Americans demand from their President. It was fear. It was panic. It was desperation. It was arrogance. I'm not buying the Obama stinkulus. The 3-4 million job figure is pure baloney and Obama knows it. But rather than govern from the center like he swore he would, demanding House Democrats shred that monstrosity and start over, he bows in deference to Queen Nancy, accepts a grand total of three Republican votes in a Congress of 535 and maintains his position that this legislation cannot wait another day. He just doesn't get it: The surest way to turn off Americans is to lead like you ran your campaign. When the most powerful leader on Earth uses words like imminent catastrophe, calamity or disaster to describe his own country, in attempts to scare us all into accepting his cockamamie idea, he projects weakness and indecision. His unfortunate speech to the Arab world, in which he called the US a nation of, among other things, non-believers (directly translated as "Kafir", a social and religious status punishable by death according to strict Islamic interpretation) didn't help matters either. I also warned America that Barack Obama's commitment to our military forces was nothing more than rhetoric. Friday morning came news that charges were dropped against Abd el Rahim al Nashir, one of the planners of the October 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole (DDG-67) in Yemen, a decision made to spite the military. Since when do dead US servicemen just not matter? As a Navy veteran who bled for this country, I am angered beyond comprehension at Barack Obama's decision to place more importance on liberal politics than the lives of 17 US Navy sailors. I don't give a damn if this terrorist was tortured, waterboarded or given a warm bath. These 17 Americans were defending their country's foreign policy overseas and Obama is writing them off simply because he vehemently disagrees with that foreign policy. These sailors were my shipmates and terrorists killed them in one of the opening shots of a war that Obama still refuses to acknowledge; an opening shot that succeeded because the last Democrat to hold that office didn't want to offend Yemeni's with even a timidly defensive US Naval posture, such as manned .50 cal. deck guns. Barack Obama has thus far put more more thought into what breed of puppy to buy, than when, or even if he should close Guantanamo Bay. He's put more effort into keeping his Blackberry than keeping his promises to unite the country. Although Democrats may have the votes to shove whatever they wish down our throats, if that's how they choose to govern, they're going to find their stranglehold over Washington very short-lived.