Or the construction boss without a crew
If there was one thing that had me shaking my head over the last few days following the President Obama/GOP tax cut deal is the facts of who is suddenly opposed to the whole thing. Spokesman-Review print edition as well as on-line at “Hey Democrats Obama won,” by Charles Krauthammer where the author is livid with fury that the GOP could now add even further to the nation’s deficit instead of being “fiscally responsible” after all. Or even take umbrage at the idea that the GOP seemed a little too quick to abandon their campaign promises when working out a compromise solution with the president. And on the other hand, “The liberals last gasp,” by Jonathon Allen, the (old) left have gone on record as literally attacking Obama for practicing “Reaganomics.” Isn’t that a shame that a guy shows that he is capable of moving to the center and practicing a “new kind of politics” should instead get nothing but heartburn from people who resort to bitching and whining? Suddenly, it would be nice, wouldn’t it, if both “bases” of both parties would simply grow up.
Here then, is a hypothetical for my readers to consider. A new home is to be constructed, the lumber for its construction is ready, all the tools are available, the concrete is ready to be mixed, the heavy equipment is certainly in place, the electricians are on standby to install the wiring as the home is to be built. It is a good day for building, but… When the foreman arrives, he doesn’t find his crew ready to start the work because they are no shows. Or, he makes an appearance, as does the crew, but they don’t want to do the actual work for some odd political rationale. Or, they stand around complaining about the working conditions. Or they somehow expect the foreman to do the actual work while they stand around complaining. And if the house doesn’t get built in a day while the construction crew plays pocket pool, they complain about that as well. Does that sound about right in this highly strange year of 2010? I think so. Which is why I have to shake my head about both left wing parties.
President Obama as construction foreman. He has supplied all the tools, material and etc. to put a new house together… And, the people who put him in this position ultimately don’t want to work with him to build a house. It was bad enough when a percentage of the work crew were ideological obstructionists. They decided they didn’t like the blueprint for the home being built. Never mind what the prospective home buyer wanted in the way of a home. Now, it is the rest of the work crew that starts crying foul the moment Obama gets with the prospective home owner and asks if he will agree to at least some of the proposed changes—and they’d rather the changes were never made because they hadn’t agreed to such changes in the first place! Those two links about says it all. In these dire economic times, we have a nation governed by children!
On the actual Krauthammer thread, (commentaries following the posted editorial) the vast majority of those commenting at least saw what Krauthammer was getting at (he happened to be right this time around) about what sort of budget-busting addition to the deficit this compromise would create. Of course it would. Indeed, most people with a modicum of intelligence would recognize what sort of budget-busting addition to the deficit this tax cut proposal would cause. However, I held my fire on the deal being struck. After all, until the GOP got the tax cuts they wanted; they were simply going to balk at much needed legislation to help people in truly dire straits. The unemployed, you know, don’t have the monetary clout to be heard in Washington, D.C. And on the other hand, now the Democrats can “stand on principle” and end up hurting people in economic straits just because they couldn’t stand the fact that Obama worked out a deal with the GOP. Which is it? A government by, for and of ideological principles? Or a government that actually works for the people who voted for it? Mid-term elections, bet the voters are already sadly disappointed in the circus taking place on the federal level. And the new Congress hasn’t even convened yet.
I had this to say to a person on Facebook who was complaining about Obama’s “lack of spine” and essentially hoping that someone would run against him by 2012. Perhaps, not in so many words, but referring to him as “wounded” and “exhausted.” In effect, no longer able to govern. The GOP would applaud the (old) left for having an attitude like that; it is definitely what they want to hear. What defeated the Democratic majority in 2010 wasn’t after all the “TEA Party” but rather the (old) left base that lacked the necessary cajonés to stand up for what they were supposed to believe in and refuse to allow the GOP to paint the [canvas] Obama in what ever colors they wished. But, they don’t like it that presumably the GOP can “shove the president around?” Exactly what are they saying or doing that would disabuse the GOP of behaving like bullies? It really has to be something all right, in a nation that has a rich tradition of “can do,” that we now have people who simply won’t. Regardless, Obama has my vote, as he did the last time around.
Obama on the campaign trail and also when he was inaugurated, duly informed the electorate of their need to do the work to bring this nation back to health, economically and otherwise. He did not expect to do it alone. In fact, the idea of his doing it alone is not in his job description. At some point, we need a nation of adults to go along with adults in government, if we are to in fact put this nation back on the road to recovery. Children voting for children to govern them is doing us all a disservice.