BloggeRhythms

Observing the incumbent president’s recent actions leaves considerable room for presenting alternative motives for his behavior. An article by David Lightman and Anita Kumar in mcclatchydc.com/2014 today calendars subjects he’s personally addressed since the recent Congressional elections..

 

“Nov. 10. He declared strong support for net neutrality, the idea that Internet content be freely available and subject to government regulation to protect consumers. Opening the door to government regulation infuriated conservatives.

 

“Nov. 12. During Obama’s Asia trip, the United States and China unexpectedly agreed to new targets for greenhouse gas emissions designed help combat climate change. Republicans complained that Obama unilaterally decided the U.S. would cut greenhouse gas emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels in the next 11 years.

 

“Nov. 20. Obama announced he would unilaterally protect millions of immigrants who are in the United States illegally from deportation.

 

“Nov. 24. Obama pushed out [Defense Secretary Chuck]  Hagel, a former Republican senator. It was widely reported that Hagel was dismissed after a series of disagreements. Previous Obama defense secretaries complained that national security discussions were often insular and guided from the White House predominantly by domestic politics.”

 

Examining the incumbent’s actions, the authors explain that: “Typically, when you have a change in power in Congress, the new congressional majority dominates the conversation and drives the discussion.” But, not in this case. 

 

In response, White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer Pfeiffer, said. “Since right after the election, the president has been driving the discussions, moving forward aggressively on core priorities.”

 

Voters, however, “Generally rejected those core priorities, as Republicans had a net gain of at least eight Senate seats and will start 2015 with their biggest majority in the House of Representatives since the late 1940s.” While, “Obama maintains he’s on the right course; it’s just that Republican obstructionists have made progress difficult.”

 

So, one could look at this situation and conclude, as does Mr. Pfeiffer, that the incumbents acting forcefully, driving the discussions as a leader. Inferring that his “core priorities “ are an example of leadership and concerns for the good of the nation as a whole.

 

Or, one could alternatively determine on the other side, as did the vast majority of voters on November 4th, that the incumbent’s simply a political hack who's pandering to the shrinking core of leftists still supporting him.

 

And, what’s really far, far worse, is that if you carefully look at the actions he’s personally taken, you find that each in its own way is disastrous for the nation and its citizens by growing government, increasing regulation, decreasing job opportunities for Americans, and opening doors to future illegal aliens by enticing them to come here. 

 

Which makes you wonder whether or not these actions have been taken by someone who knows or cares about what’s good for the nation at all, but rather driven solely by political payback, regardless of national risk or cost.

 

That’s it for today folks.

 

Adios