The Arrogance of Obama’s Leftist Supporters
June 5, 2008
It’s interesting that the main people pushing Obama in the name of unity and civility are the same ones brutally trashing Hillary (and Bill) Clinton. They seem to have no sense of their own hypocrisy in defending the Clintons yesterday for far greater misconduct than that for which they are mercilessly excoriating them today in their editorials and so-called news reporting.
The hypocrisy and absence of self-reflection of this group — mostly the mainstream media and the leftist cabal of the Democratic Party — is born of its profound arrogance. This arrogance is also evident in the striking incoherence of their assumption that Obama can be a unifying force while working to change America in ways that are repugnant to a large plurality, if not a majority, of Americans.
You have to recognize that something about this group is just not natural when its members, such as MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, can say without embarrassment that Obama sends shivers up his leg or when swooning crowds of supporters faint in his presence.
The group’s obliviousness is demonstrated in its stunning state of denial over Obama’s virtual free fall since the revelations about his associations with such unsavory characters as Tony Rezko and William Ayers and his longtime membership in a Christian church whose pastors and theology seem more race-oriented than Christ-centered.
You would think these fawning zealots would take notice of the backlash against Obama since he issued his outrageously divisive critique of small-town America as embittered gun- and Bible-clingers. But their Obama-intoxication blinded them to seeing anything other than that Obama still had an insuperable lead in the delegate count.
Their stubborn attachment to him is understandable, though, if you consider their psychological state prior to the messiah’s entrance onto the political stage and that many conditions existed at the time that would create a perfect political storm for him.
The group had been poisoned by its consuming hatred for George Bush over Bush-Gore 2000 and the Iraq war. Hillary’s unpardonable act of voting for the Iraq war resolution caused her excommunication from the group and ensured that she would not be the one who could capitalize on Bush Derangement syndrome.
Also, the economy was finally fading as if to conform to seven years of dishonest Democratic naysaying, and with the hyperinflation of oil and gas prices, much of the public was ripe for the leftist class-warfare message that Obama would adopt when John Edwards left the race. The public was poised for this promise of hope and change, as if Democrats had finally succeeded in convincing them they were destitute, miserable and needed otherworldly deliverance from a this-worldly deliverer.
All that remained was for Obama to reveal himself as a charismatic figure with soaring oratory promising a sea change from the dark years of Bush-Cheney. Conditions were perfect for Obama’s skill set. He hit the perfect tones at the perfect time and with near-perfect delivery. And as an added bonus, he put the witch in her place in the debates.
The Obama era would vindicate the complaints of the leftist malcontents. He would end this “unnecessary war, which has not made us safer,” would “provide” every American health care, would punish the evil rich, and would turn back the tide on global warming. And he would unify the American people in the process, in glorious validation of the left’s warped assertion that Bush never tried to unite Americans.
It’s astonishing that these people touting Obama as a uniter are so blind to their own bilious hatred and divisiveness. They called Bush a Nazi, derided Condoleezza Rice as “Brown Sugar” and “Aunt Jemima,” and labeled John Ashcroft a “witch burner.”
They never allowed the facts to interfere with their predispositions, such as denouncing Bush as a divider even while Sen. Kennedy was stabbing him in the back for fulfilling his promise to work with him on the education bill.
Today their calls for unity are no less insincere, unless by unity they mean the gleeful, unanimous acceptance of their radical leftist agenda by a center-right nation marching in lock step like obedient Stepford wives.
Unless we accede to their extremist vision for America — one that could change America’s governing institutions to the point of making them unrecognizable to our nation’s Founders — we will be the evil obstructers.
It’s nothing new for advocates of socialism, isolationism, appeasement, multiculturalism, defeatism and American non-exceptionalism to flex their muscles and gain power for a time. But expecting to effect such far-reaching and potentially devastating changes to this nation in the name of unity is breathtakingly arrogant.