What kind of an example is President Obama setting by the manner in which he is running this country? In his initial campaign for the presidency, he pledged some of the hallmarks of his administration would be openness, transparency, a desire to work with all members of Congress, honesty, accuracy and a clean-up of the abuses of the Bush years in the White House.
Also, he pledged, if elected, to bring about “fundamental” changes in this country.
He has missed on most all of these promises about openness, transparency, honesty and working with Congress, but has followed through on his pledge to make, or try to make, fundamental changes in this country — not necessarily good changes, better changes or changes that strengthen the nation, but changes that have weakened Uncle Sam’s position of leadership and respect throughout the world, placed this country further in debt and rammed a health care plan through Congress using phony promises about patient care, doctors, the cost of medicine and many other facets of the plan.
Putting partisan politics aside, all Americans — Democrats, Republicans or independents — would like to have their president looked upon as an individual who stands for the best, the very best, in honesty, integrity and commitment to a strong, powerful nation. They hope their president conducts himself in a manner that justifies respect, regardless of whether they support his particular view or actions on controversial issues.
The president of the United States should be, by far, the best president or leader of any country in the world, setting standards for others to try to match.
Partisan politics is a rough, bare-fisted business, but some of the players and elected leaders are able to maintain a clean, honest image while others succumb to the darker side of elective politics.
Since Obama moved into the White House, the public has seen nothing but hardball politics, policies and actions based on what would win the most votes, how to get more Americans hooked on federal subsidies, beholden to the federal government for coverage of their daily existence.
History is likely to show Obama used some degree of caution in carrying out his “fundamental” changes in America in his first years in the Oval Office, but the Obama machine put together a magnificent, well-financed election organization to give him another four years in the White House. In his second term, he has been free to give his full attention to changing the country. This he has done, and it appears his game plan calls for him to get his way, what he wants, by whatever means necessary, regardless of whether it means breaking the law, bypassing Congress or misleading or even lying to the public.
A few examples: Obamacare, the actions of Internal Revenue Service people to target politically conservative organizations, the manner in which he handled the Benghazi tragedy, White House and State Department spokespeople lying about the Benghazi affair, the use of executive powers to bypass Congress, the current Veterans Administration hospital situation (when during his first presidential campaign, he pledged to clean up the VA), using the Environmental Protection Agency to kill the coal industry through Obama’s carbon emissions plan, and, just recently, the manner by which he bypassed laws that required him to inform members of Congress that he intended to release Guantanamo prisoners. He released five senior terrorists, supposedly to gain the freedom of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a soldier who fellow platoon members say is a deserter. Obama, however, held a Rose Garden press event for Bergdahl’s parents, and his national security adviser claimed Bergdahl had served with honor and distinction.
Earlier this week the Obama team called a top secret meeting for members of Congess to give them the background and details of the Bergdahl affair. At the same time, members of Bergdahl’s squad told of their first-hand experiences with Bergdahl. Later that night, several lawmakers who attended the closed meeting were asked whether what they were told rang true with what the soldiers’ reported. They said they were told nothing that confirmed the first-hand reports.
Obviously, someone is lying: the soldiers or the Obama team.
This is why the upcoming congressional elections are so important. In many cases, most cases, Democrats running for office have been strong, generous, active supporters and workers for Obama but now are trying to distance themselves from the president.
The tactic may work for some, but chances are good if these former Obama workers and supporters win their elections, they will quickly revert to their former support and adulation of the smooth-talking Obama and his social, fiscal, environmental and military agenda. Zebras cannot change their stripes.
The actions and policies of Obama over the past eight years should provide a good road map of what he will try to accomplish in the final two years of his presidency when he doesn’t have to worry about being re-elected.
He can, and is sure to, use his executive powers more often in the next two years. This is why it is important for the country, at least the traditional United States, that Congress is not in his hip pocket and that the majority of state capitol offices remain in the hands of strong, fiscally sound men and women who are not used as rubber stamps for Obama policies.