The Boston Tea Party

If Obama had avoided Massachusetts, the pundits in the media may have a point when they attempt to distract you awat from implicating Obama in this loss. If that were the case, they may have a point when they tell you that Coakley lost because she ran an awful campaign, and that she wasn’t the most desirable candidate for the given time and place in Mass. They will tell you that Obama couldn’t have turned an election in an election that was so far gone. They will tell you that no one, not even the greatest president who ever lived, could have turned this particular election. Why? From reports that I’ve heard, Coakley was up by double digits a couple weeks ago. What happened a couple weeks ago: The Health Care bill passed the Senate. I’m quite sure that the Democrat pundits on MSNBC and CNN will not mention Health Care Reform as a plausible reason for Coakley’s defeat, but the question should be asked what if Coakley won?
If Coakley won, the media would claim that this was an historic election. They would have probably mention that she was the first woman seated in the Senate in Mass., and they would most assuredly have stated that this was a stamp of approval on Obama, Obamacare, and that the voters have stated that they are willing to give Obama a chance, despite what the right-wing pundits said. They would never state the opposite in the face of a loss.
They will not tell you how Democrats have ruled Mass., and that this is an historic overturn of that stronghold. They will not tell you that registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans in Mass. by one million. They will probably stop calling this Ted Kennedy’s seat, and how this has been a Kennedy seat (JFK’s tenure included) for over fifty years, and how Health Care Reform was Ted Kennedy’s pet project. They also won’t mention that investors drove the Dow Jones Industrial rate up 116 points on the very idea that Brown would win and Obamacare would be a lot harder to pass with Brown taking ‘Kennedy’s seat’.
They will not tell you that it’s possible that people voiced their concerns over the crony capitalism that is occurring in this white house with this vote; they will not tell you that this may have been the first opportunity people have had to vote on Obama’s Health Care reform, and his overall agenda. They will not tell you that this is a statement about how disillusioned the people have become with the self-professed: “one that we’ve all been waiting for.”
Had Bush, or any other Republican, said: ‘Read my lips, “this will be an administration that will be committed to unprecedented levels of openness’” what would’ve happened to him if he did nothing to provide openness? One need only look to George H.W. Bush’s attempt to get re-elected to office in ’92 to see evidence of this. Obama then went onto speak of the necessity of government transparency. What have we seen? We’ve seen C-Span request that Obama live up to his pledge to “have the Health Care debate on C-Span”. Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has thus far given what has generously been called a Non-answer to an inquiry regarding this.
Defenders of Obama have said that passing legislation has been equated to sausage making: “You don’t want to see the process, if you want to indulge in the benefits.” Fair enough, but those who are disillusioned claim that they were promised something different in this administration. They were promised change. They were promised unprecedented levels of change. What they have received, at the very least, is more of the same.
They were promised a president that would reach across the aisle, but we’ve received a president that blames Republicans for not reaching across the aisle. They were promised an ethical administration, but we’ve had former lobbyists granted waivers to work in the administration. We’ve had political appointees listed as tax cheats, we’ve had an overabundance of unaccountable czars placed in prominent positions, and we’ve had an increase in earmarks on bills when we were promised that these levels would return to 1994 levels. We were promised a post-racial president that condemned a white police officer’s actions “without knowing all the facts.”
The question can then be asked: ‘has Obama been dishonest, or is he simply overwhelmed by the law-making process in Washington?’ Did he meet the SEIU officials in a closed door session, because that’s the only way he could get the Health Care legislation passed, was Ben Nelson given the Medicare goodie, because this particular Health Care bill was so good that they had to satisfy the Senator to get this incredible bill passed? Was Mary Landreau given 300 million, for the same reasons? And then there’s Chris Dodd. Then there’s the intimidation the Black Panthers engaged in in Philadelphia, and the idea that we’re going to be trying terrorists on our home land under Constitutional protections. There’s been no openness or transparency regarding these decisions. There’s been no website that lists the bullet points of the decision making process regarding any of these things. I don’t know if his inexperience is catching up to him, if he’s overwhelmed, or if he is straight dishonest, but he hasn’t lived up to any of the lofty campaign promises he issued in the campaign, and I think Mass. voters sent him a reminder of this.


Thank you for your comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.