Anger and Divide Within the Republican Party
How will we recover?Read More »
In a representative democracy fear of displeasing those who have the power to keep you in office was once a deterrent for politicians. In America the voice of a largely center right majority served to dissuade politicians from moving the pendulum too far left.
Following the Republican Revolution in the 1990’s even Bill Clinton was intelligent enough to shift to the center. Under the leadership of Newt Gingrich, the Republican Party won control of both houses of Congress, sending a clear signal to a Democratic president to align with public opinion or suffer the embarrassing fate of serving one term.
Presently, we have a Chief Executive whose daily actions and statements are only surpassed by theabsurdity of what he says or does the following day. Actually, the more the public rejects a particular policy the more Obama insists on imposing it. Barack Obama’s hard left; liberal initiatives are worrisome. But, even more disturbing is Obama’s lack of trepidation concerning the consequences of implementing policy in spite of public objection.
Suffering “…the worst third quarter decline in public approval rating of any elected president in the post-World War II era,” Obama audaciously remains determined to inflict socialistic policy on a nation with strong opposition to everything from stimulus to universal health care. Undeterred by the gallows of Election Day, Obama forges ahead, caring little about the result of continued diminished popularity.
The President of the United States might as well be robbing houses in broad daylight. Begging the question, why is Barry such a risk taker?
Take for example, at the Summit of the Americas, rather than avoiding tyrants, Obama specifically sought an encounter with Dictator Hugo Chávez’. And why not, Barack Obama and Chávez’, together with Honduran President Zelaya are ideological amigos? Recognition of the Venezuelan leader indicates a troubling comfort level on Obama’s part with Chávez’s modus operandi establishing, orchestrating and maintaining power.
Chávez is a university level lecturer on a subject Obama majors in and Manuel Zelaya, the lab rat. Barack Obama is well aware that new friends and Members of the Organization of American States (OAS) have extended term limits in unscrupulous ways. In addition to embracing their Marxist economic policies, is President Obama considering circumventing Constitutional restrictions by utilizing the retention methods of fellow socialist compadres? Could a US President be mulling over setting aside what he considers a “flawed,” “hypocritical” document and using Latin America as an alternate route of escape from the wrath of disgruntled voters?
In 2007, under Hugo’s communalist tutelage, Venezuelans’ voted on a referendum to “…lift presidential term limits to censor the media, suspend civil liberties and allow the government to nationalize private property.” Presently, Chávez mentee, Barack Obama, is systematically completing the assignment of repressing opposing views, looking for ways to control the Internet, nationalizing every branch of the private sector and appointing Supreme Court judges who hold biases against private property rights.
Based on attitude and actions it appears Barack Obama is an outstanding student, furiously jotting down vocabulary words in his marbled Composition notebook like “labor unions,” “the poor,” “socialist populism.” Only time will tell whether, Obama included “Constitutional crisis” on that list.
As a precursor to taking a shot at establishing an indefinite term in office Zelaya labored to cultivate the proper political climate. Hugo Chávez tutored Manuel Zelaya on how to gain “…the support of labor unions and the poor.” However, the Honduran, “…middle class and the wealthy business community feared [Zelaya] wanted to introduce Mr. Chávez’s brand of socialist populism into the country.” Sound familiar?
Wearing a signature ten-gallon cowboy hat and in a brazen abuse of Chávez-encouraged power Zelaya then attempted to circumvent the system and establish himself as Honduras’ president past the January 2010 deadline. To assist the undertaking, Hugo generously sent truckloads of ballots to Honduras for a referendum vote to rewrite the Constitution and overturn Presidential term limits.
In June, Zelaya was ousted by the military with the approval of the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress. Honduran political and business leaders argued that, “…the military coup was a legal response to Mr. Zelaya’s attempt to rewrite the Constitution and seek re-election.” This particular constituency was astute enough to recognize Zelaya’s, “deepening alliance with Venezuela’s leftist president, Hugo Chávez.” Ya think?
Yet, Barack Obama openly supports Zelaya being reinstated to power saying, “America supports now the restoration of the democratically elected president of Honduras, even though he has strongly opposed American policies.” A US President, supporting an attempt to rewrite the Honduran Constitution with the help of Hugo Chávez should alarm every American that loves freedom and abhors tyranny.
A perplexed Washington Times questioned Obama’s support for the toppled leader,
You can understand someone like Mr. Chávez pleading [Zelaya’s] case. That egomaniacal Marxist is in the oppressive process of destroying rights, legal traditions and the Venezuelan middle class. He is in the process of making the poor poorer in the name of anti-capitalist equality, and he would like company. But dear heavens, how in the world can the Obama administration call for Mr. Zelaya’s reinstatement…here’s a fear – that this administration has deep, abiding sympathy for socialist solutions.”
An even greater fear is having the leader comporting himself in a manner similar to Chávez and Zelaya. The President carries on making outrageous policy decisions and ignoring public opinion as if the only one that dictates whether Obama remains in power is Obama. Like a killer unphased by the death penalty, Obama’s worrisome attitude and disturbing dismissal of the citizens of this nation is alarmingly similar to ideological peers in Latin America. Next thing you know Barry will show up at a press conference sporting a Stetson Rancher.
Some observers say, “Mr. Zelaya’s attempt to change the laws should serve as a lesson to anyone attempting to tamper with democracy… and are sort of clearly moving in undemocratic ways.” Exiled and deposed by the government and speaking from the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa, Zelaya emphatically, contends he is the democratically elected leader of Honduras and should be returned to serve out his office, repeatedly intimating an eerily familiar, “I won!” In the same way, Obama ignores declining public support the toppled Honduran leader remains impervious to discipline and fails to recognize the error of his ways.
The 2010 and 2012 elections draw near it remains to be seen whether Zelaya’s disciplinary expulsion has taught the socialistic-wannabe in the White House anything about how democracy works and the consequences of making an effort to achieve personal power by means other than a fair, sound Constitutional election. Either way, Obama can always count on “divisive and demagogic leader” and friend, Hugo Chávez to propose creative ideas about how a comrade can secure an extended tenure in office without the hindrance of a democratic election.