“Obama’s disastrous weakness […] went further toward undermining liberalism than anybody […] knew”
That awkward headline is the last sentence of a New York Magazine article by Jonathan Chait entitled: “How Obama Tried to Sell Out Liberalism in 2011.” His article reviews a 3/17 Washington Post article, “Obama’s evolution: Behind the failed ‘grand bargain’ on the debt,” and Chait’s last two sentences read:
The Post is making the case that there was a potential deal, and Obama blew it by failing to properly handle the easily-spooked Republican caucus. What the story actually shows is that Obama’s disastrous weakness in the summer of 2011 went further toward undermining liberalism than anybody previously knew.
But, wait a minute! Chait is the Obamabot who last November wrote an article with the long title “When Did Liberals Become So Unreasonable?: If every Democratic president disappoints, maybe there’s something wrong with our expectations. Tough love from a fellow traveler [Bill Clinton]”, which began as follows:
If we trace liberal disappointment with President Obama to its origins, to try to pinpoint the moment when his crestfallen supporters realized that this was Not Change They Could Believe In, the souring probably began on December 17, 2008, when Obama announced that conservative Evangelical pastor Rick Warren would speak at his inauguration.
Now that’s bullshit. Every liberal remembers the FISA-flop knife in the back of 6/20/08, the week after Obama secured the Dem nomination. And that lying sack of shit had the temerity to later stand there with his bare face hanging out and insist that he had not changed his stance, in spite of video evidence to the contrary.
But, how the hell do we parse Chait’s recent article? The headline says that he “Tried to Sell Out Liberalism.” The concluding sentence says that his “disastrous weakness went further toward undermining liberalism than …” So, WTF, he was trying to sell us out and “disasterous weakness” almost allowed him to succeed? That makes no sense. FWIW, I thank God that Obama wasn’t stronger in selling us out. IMHO, it would have been a disaster had he succeeded.
Visibly Chait is suffering from Obama-Derangement Syndrome. Like the cognitive dissonance George Bush experienced when he looked into Putin’s eyes and “knew he was a good man.” Many liberals, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, just know that “Obama’s heart is in the right place.” As Chuck Berry put it: “That won the game; he was a brown-eyed handsome man.”
But this raises an interesting question: If both Obama and the Republicans want to
strenghten gut entitlements, why didn’t they succeed. IMHO, the answer is obvious. Both wanted the credit from the 1% for gutting entitlements and wanted the 99% to blame the other for it. Obama and the Republicans work for the same masters, but they are whores competing for the same favors, two whores that got into into pissing contest that ended in a deadlock. And, that deadlock is the only thing saved the Great Society and the New Deal.