Olby: Obama won’t get renominated if tax deal goes through
posted at 2:15 pm on December 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
How angry has the professional Left become? Their oracle on MSNBC isn’t just warning that Barack Obama won’t get re-elected after cutting a deal with Republicans, but won’t even be on the ticket come November 2012. Keith Olbermann warned in his Special Comment last night that Obama won’t survive a primary challenge if he persists, because Democrats and progressives are wedded to principles, not personalities:
Er, doesn’t the nomination of Obama in 2008 more or less rebut that notion? Obama didn’t offer any different rhetoric than did John Edwards did, or even Bill Richardson, who was a lot more experienced and qualified as an executive (and in foreign affairs) than Obama. The only real argument for Obama over Hillary Clinton (who was playing all the populist cards at the end, too) was “change” over experience, and Obama’s supposed charisma over Hillary’s baggage.
Beyond that, though, has a sitting president ever been denied the nomination of his party for re-election? None comes to mind, especially in the modern era. LBJ may have come the closest, with a narrow victory in New Hampshire in 1968 enough to push him into retirement. Nor is Obama likely to be the first to lose it. His strong support from African-Americans won’t change no matter how many Special Comments Olbermann launches, and Democrats can’t afford to alienate that bloc in 2012, and not just in the presidential election. A poor turnout among black voters will doom their Senatorial incumbents as well. Splitting the party along progressive lines will doom Democrats across the country in yet another wave election.
If anything, Obama might prevent getting a challenge from the old DLC wing of the party with this deal, and that would be much better for him in the long run. If Evan Bayh (as an example) ran against him in the primaries, Obama would have to run all over again as a progressive, which won’t be the path to re-election, if one exists at all.
Update: Rob Port notes that Olby went for the crazy in another part of last night’s Countdown:
“I will confess I won’t fight if anyone wants to draw a comparison between what you’ve done with our domestic policies of our day to what Neville Chamberlain did with the domestic policies of his,” says Olbermann. The reference is to Neville Chamberlain who, as Prime Minister of Great Britain, infamously cut a deal with Hitler (that Hitler subsequently broke to the surprise of nobody except Chamberlain) and proclaimed “peace in our time.”
Because, in Oblermann’s [sic] world, Republicans are Nazis and the Bush tax cuts are like Hitler’s invasion of Czechoslovakia.
Unless Olbermann has something else other than the Munich capitulation in mind (does anyone care about Chamberlain’s tax policies?), then this is both incoherent and, well, idiotic. It takes Obama’s “hostage takers” and raises it a couple of Nazis. Ironically, Chamberlain’s domestic policies were strikingly progressive. He nationalized the British coal industry, limited working hours, forced paid holidays onto the private sector, and extended rent controls. If Olbermann has an objection to Chamberlain’s domestic policies, I’m sure his audience would be interested in hearing it.
Also, Hitler invaded Poland, not Czechoslovakia — because Chamberlain made invasion unnecessary. They gave away the Sudetenland to Hitler, who quietly took the rest six months later.
Update II: Commenters make a good argument that Hitler invaded the rest of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. It was more an annexation by military deployment; there wasn’t any organized resistance, mainly because Munich had neutered Czechoslovakia. But still, point taken; it certainly wasn’t an Anschluss.
Update III: Stacy McCain has the full transcript, and Rob misquoted Olby in one key way, emphasis mine:
I don’t want to make any true comparison to the historical event to which it related; the viewer can go ahead and look it up if they wish; I will confess I won’t fight if anybody wants to draw a comparison between what you’ve done with our domestic politics of our day, to what Neville Chamberlain did with the international politics of his.
So Olby didn’t confuse domestic and foreign policy as indicated in Rob’s post — but he still “won’t fight” a comparison between Obama negotiating with Republicans and Chamberlain negotiating with Nazis.
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.
Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.
tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM
Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .
BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…
Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM
Perfect!
lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.
bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM
If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!
SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)
He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.
Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2