SFconservative
May 29th, 2009, 12:49 pm
This morning driving into work I heard a very good description of Obama's political strategy on the radio, and realized it's exactly the opposite of what Bill Clinton tried. Recall that Bill Clinton used "triangulation"- in short, he ruled out what the extreme right an left wanted in order to come up with a solution in the middle. This was basically the path of least resistance.
Obama on the other hand, does the exact opposite. He appeases both the right and left- basically playing both sides against the middle, in order to achieve his own political goals. Consder the following:
1) Autos: Appeases the right by saying he doesn't want to run car companies, but appeases the left because the unions are now in charge. In the middle are the shareholders, they get screwed.
2) Gitmo- Appeases the left by trying to close Gitmo, but appeases the right by saying we reserve the right to waterboard when it's absolutely necessary. In the middle are the american people, who are afraid islamic terrorists will be brought to their hometown.
3) Supreme Court- Appeases the left by appointing a left wing activist Judge who believes Judges should make policy, and appeases the right by saying the most important quality a judge should have is to apply the constitution (my paraphrase there). In the middle, again, are the american people who have no idea what this is all about- which is scary.
4) Health Care- Appeases the left by saying the government should provide free health care, but also appeases the right by saying the govn't will not make health care decision. In the middle are people who are currently insured (the majority of us) who will end up paying more money for reduced quality of healthcare.
5) Taxes/Economy- this is a big one. Appeases the left by promoting a complete change in our economy- one that will return the nation's wealth to it's rightful onwers. Promotes an economy based on redistribution of wealth instead of white man's greed running a world of need. But also appeases the right by claiming to lower taxes on 95% of American. Caught in the middle are Americans paying less than $250,000 but not on any kind of gov't welfare. This group will end up paying for most of the new debt because those too rich will take their money and put it somewhere Obama can't touch.
6) Envirnoment- Apeases the left by proposing massive spending to reamake our economy to one green-based, and appeases the right by claiming his proposal will create tonse of new jobs. In the middle is anybody who pays an electric bill, because all of the most cost efficient ways of producing energy are not included in Obama's energy plan.
7 Gov't Spending- Appeases the left by using fiscal spending as the main driver to shape government and social policy, but appeases the right by saying the current debt is unsustainable and thus needs to be controlled. In the middle- again, anybody who pays taxes and especially our children who will inherit all the debt- which Obama plans to increase 400% in 10 years. Already the fiscal deficit is about 400% higher, and we've only just begun.
Bill Clinton would never take extreme sides because he didn't want to rock the boat, so to speak. This path of least resistence only delayed the major decisions that need to be made, and especially made us less safe when it came to our national defense. With national defense you can't play both sides against the middle because this will prevent any significant action from taking place. There are pleny of nut cases out there, and they will be more empowered. This is very dangerous.
SFconservative.
Obama on the other hand, does the exact opposite. He appeases both the right and left- basically playing both sides against the middle, in order to achieve his own political goals. Consder the following:
1) Autos: Appeases the right by saying he doesn't want to run car companies, but appeases the left because the unions are now in charge. In the middle are the shareholders, they get screwed.
2) Gitmo- Appeases the left by trying to close Gitmo, but appeases the right by saying we reserve the right to waterboard when it's absolutely necessary. In the middle are the american people, who are afraid islamic terrorists will be brought to their hometown.
3) Supreme Court- Appeases the left by appointing a left wing activist Judge who believes Judges should make policy, and appeases the right by saying the most important quality a judge should have is to apply the constitution (my paraphrase there). In the middle, again, are the american people who have no idea what this is all about- which is scary.
4) Health Care- Appeases the left by saying the government should provide free health care, but also appeases the right by saying the govn't will not make health care decision. In the middle are people who are currently insured (the majority of us) who will end up paying more money for reduced quality of healthcare.
5) Taxes/Economy- this is a big one. Appeases the left by promoting a complete change in our economy- one that will return the nation's wealth to it's rightful onwers. Promotes an economy based on redistribution of wealth instead of white man's greed running a world of need. But also appeases the right by claiming to lower taxes on 95% of American. Caught in the middle are Americans paying less than $250,000 but not on any kind of gov't welfare. This group will end up paying for most of the new debt because those too rich will take their money and put it somewhere Obama can't touch.
6) Envirnoment- Apeases the left by proposing massive spending to reamake our economy to one green-based, and appeases the right by claiming his proposal will create tonse of new jobs. In the middle is anybody who pays an electric bill, because all of the most cost efficient ways of producing energy are not included in Obama's energy plan.
7 Gov't Spending- Appeases the left by using fiscal spending as the main driver to shape government and social policy, but appeases the right by saying the current debt is unsustainable and thus needs to be controlled. In the middle- again, anybody who pays taxes and especially our children who will inherit all the debt- which Obama plans to increase 400% in 10 years. Already the fiscal deficit is about 400% higher, and we've only just begun.
Bill Clinton would never take extreme sides because he didn't want to rock the boat, so to speak. This path of least resistence only delayed the major decisions that need to be made, and especially made us less safe when it came to our national defense. With national defense you can't play both sides against the middle because this will prevent any significant action from taking place. There are pleny of nut cases out there, and they will be more empowered. This is very dangerous.
SFconservative.