Obama as Peter Jennings II

The more the American people oppose Obama’s program, the more his contempt for them comes out. From Politico:

WEST NEWTON, Mass.—President Barack Obama said Americans’ “fear and frustration” is to blame for an intense midterm election cycle that threatens to derail the Democratic agenda.

“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country’s scared.”

Obama … faulted the economic downturn for Americans’ inability to “think clearly” and said the burden is on Democrats “to break through the fear and the frustration people are feeling.”

Here’s Lucianne’s reaction:

President Obama: ‘Fear and frustration’ drive voters
How ‘bout love of country? How ‘bout God and the flag?
Too clingy for ‘ya?

- end of initial entry -

Jim C. writes:

Thanks for posting this. I will not waste your time detailing why these statements are so unbelievably stupid. I will state, however, that it’s time for the Republicans and the Tea Party folks to start describing Obama as a cautionary tale in the sad annals of affirmative action.

Alexis Zarkov writes:

Obama tells us that the goodness of his administration is essentially an unfalsifiable hypothesis. According to Obama, if you don’t like his policies, you must be too scared to think clearly about them. As such, in his mind, he’s immune to any objective criticism. This seems to be Obama’s version of Trotsky’s “the party is always right.” He believes that questions of policy are like scientific questions, they necessarily have a correct and objective answer (not actually true in science either). Note how he chides the public,

“Facts, science, truth seem to be significantly absent from what we call our political dialogue. It’s hardly a dialogue. It’s a shouting match, sloganeering.” If you disagree with him, then you are being counter-factual and unscientific. He can make a tactical error, but not basic policy error because there can be only one possible correct answer—his. Obama chooses his words carefully, and we should pay attention. Like the Communists, he really doesn’t accept a two-party system, he simply lives with it out of necessity.

Paul K. writes:

I used to think it was incongruous that Obama would begin a speech by saying that Americans are tired of partisan bickering and then seamlessly segue into a harangue against the Republicans. Then I realized that to Obama, “partisan bickering” refers only to opposition to his policies.

I understand Alexis Zarkov’s point that Obama regards his essential rightness as an unfalsifiable hypothesis. However, all politicians do this. I don’t remember Bush entertaining the possibility that he could possibly be misguided in his policy on immigration or the Middle East’s capacity for democracy. If a president expressed doubt in his own judgment, how could he justify his holding that office?

October 18

James P. writes:

About this quote:

“Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we’re hardwired not to always think clearly when we’re scared,” Obama said Saturday evening in remarks at a small Democratic fundraiser Saturday evening. “And the country’s scared.”

This is just another variation on the usual leftist assertion that principled, intelligent disagreement with them is impossible. As they are intelligent, morally upright, rational, and correct, anyone who disagrees with them is not merely wrong, but also stupid, evil, and irrational.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at October 17, 2010 08:44 AM | Send