That is, if they’re really mad at him at all. Obama whines that Massachusetts voters are really blaming him for someone else’s mistakes. Guess who?
George Bush, of course.
“Here’s my assessment of not just the vote in Massachusetts, but the mood around the country: The same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept me into office. People are angry, and they’re frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs tried to shovel the same stuff Wednesday, saying that the “anger and the frustration” that swept Brown to victory on Tuesday swept Obama to power a year ago.
Except, wait a second. Obama was carried into office on the wings of the flying unicorns called “hope” and “change,” not “anger” and “frustration.” Besides, if voters are frustrated with the slow pace of reform, why did they just elect a guy promising to slow down Obama’s agenda?
I know a lot of people won't believe me when I say this, but I honestly wish that Obama wasn't so awful. But I truly do. If he were more calculating and triangulating like Clinton he would arguably cause more trouble for the conservative movement, but maybe that would be better for America. When I hear callers to talk shows complain that there aren't enough conservative leaders emerging or speaking out presently I always think the same thing: why should they attack an opponent who is busy pouring gasoline on himself and about to strike a match?
No comments:
Post a Comment