Quotes of the day
posted at 9:01 pm on November 4, 2012 by Allahpundit
Four years ago, the Daily News endorsed Obama, seeing a historic figure whose intelligence, political skills and empathy with common folk positioned him to build on the small practical experience he would bring to the world’s toughest job. We valued Obama’s pledge to govern with bold pragmatism and bipartisanship.
The hopes of those days went unfulfilled…
The presidential imperative of the times is to energize the economy and get deficits under control to empower the working and middle classes to again enjoy the fruits of an ascendant America.
So The News is compelled to stand with Romney.
Obama is the president. The buck stops with him. This is now Obama’s economy, even though the GOP shares in the blame for partisan games.
It was Obama and his fellow Democrats who went it alone on health care, making subsequent deals even harder to find. It was Obama who too often let Congress steer the ship in circles. It still is Obama who hasn’t laid out a clear vision for the next four years.
We endorsed Obama for change last time around. Now we’re endorsing change again: Mitt Romney.
Last week, I noticed this blog comment: “Romney was not my first, second, or third choice, but I will crawl over ground glass to vote for him.”
A lot of Republicans — and, judging from polls, a lot of independents — feel this way. If there are enough of them, Romney will win, and win big.
Are there? Well, there are some signs. I’ve written here before that politics is all about showing up. And in recent months, people on the Right have been doing a lot of showing up. They’ve showed up at Romney-Ryan events in unprecedented numbers. They made Dinesh D’Souza’s “2016: Obama’s America” a huge hit despite a virtual blackout from traditional media. They stood in line for hours at Chick-fil-A restaurants to buy chicken sandwiches in response to politicians’ bullying. They packed houses at the “Hating Breitbart” premiere.
Will they now pack the voting booths and vote for Romney, and against Obama, in similarly unprecedented numbers? If they do, Romney will win in a landslide.
The 76-year-old retiree was a Hillary Clinton supporter in 2008, but volunteered for Barack Obama when he became the nominee. He’s been doing the same for the Democratic president’s campaign since March, door-knocking and phone-banking throughout Ohio, repeating shifts from the late morning until the evening, when it’s too dark to see outside.
Can the Democrat put his finger on the difference in energy in 2012?
“It’s hard to quantify, but there is significantly less enthusiasm,” said Roan. “I think there’s sort of grim determination on the part of some people, more than enthusiasm. … And it shows up in our volunteers. … We don’t have the number of young people volunteering like we did last time.”
Already our government redistributes too much from the young to the old, from working families to retirees, from productive entrepreneurs to protected clients. To accede to this government’s permanent expansion is to walk, with eyes wide open, into the kind of economic and demographic trap that has ensnared the weaker economies of Europe today.
President Obama did not single-handedly put us on this path. But he has kept us on it, accelerated our progress down it, and campaigned for re-election as though taking this course had no downsides whatsoever. He’s the candidate of the Medicare status quo in a country facing an entitlement crunch, of government bailouts in an economy with a crony capitalism problem, and of contraceptive mandates in a society with a birth dearth.
For an incumbent president facing a mistrusted opposition party, this may prove a formula for a narrow electoral victory. But for the country that might vote to re-elect him, it risks four more years of drift, stagnation and decline.
I don’t know whether Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan can fix things, but I do know that Barack Obama and Joe Biden won’t even try — and that therefore a vote for Obama is a vote for the certainty of national collapse. Look at Lower Manhattan in the dark, and try to imagine what America might look like after the rest of the planet decides it no longer needs the dollar as global reserve currency. For four years, we have had a president who can spend everything but build nothing. Nothing but debt, dependency, and decay. As I said at the beginning, in different ways the response to Hurricane Sandy and Benghazi exemplify the fundamental unseriousness of the superpower at twilight. Whether or not to get serious is the choice facing the electorate on Tuesday.
Via Breitbart.
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 3
Because everyone already knows.
“Praise and save Obama and punish the evil right wingers, amen.”
profitsbeard on May 18, 2013 at 3:43 AM
This is a disgusting and diabolical use of a government agency for nefarious ends. Honest Americans in both parties should be appalled and scared by such abuse.
Random targeting of groups due to their political beliefs is more the product of thought police than a republican democracy. Whoever is involved used the auspices of government, a government we own and finance, to despotically and illegally destroy her citizens. That is not only “chilling” but destructive to the very freedoms upon which our country operates.
There is no question this was carried out by Democratic Party operatives and is therefore political in premise. Tax exempt groups applying at the same time received no similar scrutiny and in fact moved swiftly through the process. So the only question I have is who knew what and when? What were their motives?
The President has stated he found out about this last week. Yet last year, before the election this was fairly common knowledge. In fact senior officials in his administration, including Neil Wolin, were directly briefed. Again, who knew what and when? Why was this not disclosed by those who knew- especially given the criminal nature of this activity, which apparently then continued through the election? Did this not rise to something of importance to Mr. Obama either as President or a candidate? Surely such as scandal would be notable in some regard.
This entire sordid mess stinks and not simply as a matter of politics. It undercuts the very premise of our democracy by destroying a voters right to participate in free and fair elections. It adds an element of fear to freely voicing one’s political choices. That’s not just chilling, it has no place in our country and should be punished in the most punitive way to send a signal of zero tolerance for such criminal behavior.
Thus far, President Pedestrian is still sitting on the sidelines muttering how he “looked away” when the parade passed and wants to know what he missed. One begins to wonder who running our country.
Marcus Traianus on May 18, 2013 at 9:27 AM
Apparently a secret can be kept in DC, especially if it involves keeping your highly paid no show job. No one with a govt job ever gets fired, they get promoted.
Kissmygrits on May 18, 2013 at 9:40 AM
Wait, so the IRS discovered these wrongdoings, independently put a stop to them and briefed the Treasury department, AND authorized an IG investigation which then they leaked to the public. But we’re mad because they chose not to make it a campaign issues considering it has nothing to do with Obama’s governance? *yawn*
libfreeordie on May 18, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Why? Do you have to be that stupid to ask that?
watertown on May 18, 2013 at 11:14 AM
re:
verbaluce . . ad nauseum . .
He who argues with a fool (tool?) is an even greater fool.
barton on May 17, 2013 at 6:34 PM
As I recall, Solomon had that figured out almost 3,000 years ago. LOL
yesiamapirate on May 18, 2013 at 11:28 AM
libfreeordie on May 18, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Ann Barnhardt has a couple of good pieces up about you people.
tom daschle concerned on May 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM
I go with option Three, above.
Lourdes on May 18, 2013 at 12:02 PM
Also correct, almost certainly, as goal.
Anyone who thinks Axelrod, Obama, Jarrett, Holder, Hillary, etc. are nice people is out of their mind.
Lourdes on May 18, 2013 at 12:04 PM
“I was not told of this problem at any time before the election … Even if I was told of it, it was an on-going investigation that I couldn’t comment on … When actual evidence was developed that this problem existed, and that laws, regulations, and rules were violated, we couldn’t comment until hearing both sides … Who you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?”
Another Drew on May 18, 2013 at 12:11 PM
With the acquisition of power, Obama was able to substitute the IRS, and other government agencies, for the thugs at ACORN who enabled his 2008 election.
Another Drew on May 18, 2013 at 12:13 PM
The question is – “who benefits”?
The answer is – Obama personally (his re-election), the Democrats and their big govt. liberal agenda.
It is laughable to think this was being done without their knowledge. It’s like thinking all the traffic lights you’ve come to recently are now magically changing “green” just as you arrive by sheer luck. The fix was in. And even if you didn’t order it, it gets NOTICED.
Saltyron on May 18, 2013 at 12:44 PM
From the NY Times article:
Here the NY Times is trying to limit the damage to the Obama Administration but these are career bureaucrats that have been working there long before Obama was elected in many cases. This is a culture of coverups and political intimidation that penetrates the entire “progressive” wing of the Democratic Party. The NY Times here is trying to limit the scope and blame only Obama. But we see the same sort of coverup and dishonesty in the New York state government and the government in New York City.
This is a systemic problem with the entire Democratic Party and it needs to be portrayed in that way.
crosspatch on May 18, 2013 at 1:39 PM
Why did the IRS keep the scandal quiet until after the election?
Simple answer; it probably would have made the difference in our last election.
Romney was riding high in popularity on this issue and loathing for the IRS is fairly ubiquitous across the political spectrum. So combined with the first debate, could Obama’s second campaign withstood a wide-ranging scandal which got extensive coverage on an important economic issue? Or is the real scandal in covering up the fact they knew and were deeply involved in this issue? That’s hard to say and speculative. But it sure became a non-factor with no impact- which was ultimately the Obama Campaign’s intent.
As to the cover up, I suspect we are about to find more people close to the president who had very intimate knowledge of what was going on. Anyone heard from Jim Messina lately?
Marcus Traianus on May 18, 2013 at 2:49 PM
And let us not forget the leaking that the IRS did to ProPublica… funded in part by Soros… it isn’t just the rectal exam level of information, down to prayers conducted by organizations… but the ‘inadvertant release’ of such information to political groups.
Also the IRS getting its hands on your healthcare info. Isn’t that sweet? Can’t yo just wait until THAT INFORMATION gets leaked by the IRS? Because the same lady who headed up the political rectal exam unit is now heading up the Obamacare enforcement unit.
ajacksonian on May 18, 2013 at 3:54 PM
The clinton’s used the IRS as a weapon when they were in the White House and I imagine many more did the same thing with the FBI when J. Edgar Hoover was at the helm. After his death they found he had files on tons of people.
mixplix on May 18, 2013 at 5:17 PM
Asking a question like that equates to the intelligence of a snail.
mixplix on May 18, 2013 at 6:26 PM
Very simple. These guys are smart. Once the election is safely stolen, as 2012 was stolen by the Democrats, it does not matter if Obama’s henchmen (and in this case, henchwoman) broke the law. Since their side has control of the Government, no one will be prosecuted and the regime remains in power and the election remains stolen.
The IRS was instrumental in stealing the election and the election will stay stolen no matter what happens. That is all that these totalitarianists care about.
Rogervzv on May 19, 2013 at 11:01 AM
I’m really not surprised, it’s time to leave this place.
Not sure where to go, but it’s time.
mmcnamer1 on May 19, 2013 at 11:19 AM
I go with the option that most public employees vote Democrat. As an observation. Dems are risk averse – not all, but definitely the majority – “Let someone else tell me what to do; when I’m in power, I’ll tell others what to do.” They think alike – just as most secure university positions are held by Dems, so are most government positions. Rs are in the minority. (Guess we’re too busy creating real jobs, working two jobs to stay off the gov’t welfare, coaching, heaving forbid – going to church or a gun range, etc.”
Stolen election or not, this crew will stay in power – no one will impeach a minority president or a woman.
MN J on May 19, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Now the IRS is like the labor unions.
Basically they are political organizations that force you to donate to them.
esnap on May 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM
SERIOUSLY? You are THAT stupid that you have to ask?!
easyt65 on May 20, 2013 at 9:16 AM
Every time the main page of Hot Air loads, I see this question, and think, “That must be a rhetorical question!”
There Goes the Neighborhood on May 20, 2013 at 10:10 AM
Then again, you have Exhibit A for why you sometimes need to ask rhetorical questions…..
There Goes the Neighborhood on May 20, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3