Friday, June 14, 2013

Can You Trust a Liberal?

Now that America's Aunt Peggy has weighed in on the subject of trust in government, we know that trust is a real issue -- and not just partisan bleating from conservatives and Republicans.

It curious that this is even an issue.  Trust government?  Come on!  Government is force, politics is division.  You should trust government as far as you can throw it.

But in practice we trust government when our guys are in charge.  And the whole thrust of partisan politics is to teach the moderates and the uncommitted voters not to trust the present government.

For liberals things are a bit different.  They have unbounded faith in their ability to create a world of peace and justice through government.

In the 2000s the Democrats did a superb job of teaching ordinary Americans not to trust George W. Bush and whipping Democrats into a partisan lather about Bush and his lies.

Please.  If you are a Republican president you dare not lie the way that a President Obama can lie, because if you do every liberal from the New York Times to the left-wing foundations and activist groups and liberal professors will eat your lunch.  That's why President Bush had to gussy up stuff on WMD before going into Iraq.  He put together some credible intelligence and sent Secretary Powell up to the UN to publicize it.  In the end, of course, it turned out that there were no WMDs in Iraq.  So Bush lied.

Back in the late 1960s the big question was the "credibility" of President Johnson on Vietnam.  He had been assuring everyone that things were going fine in Vietnam but we, the media, knew better.

President Obama's trust crisis is a bit different.  The scandals of the lasts six months have a different patina than the "Bush Lies!" era or LBJ's "credibility."  The Obama scandals show that Obama people will do anything to harass and intimidate the other side.  The setup is that Obama stigmatizes conservatives or Tea Party people or Fox News in his speeches as extremists or obstructionists and the media and the folks is the bureaucracy merely follow his rhetorical lead.  It doesn't hurt that their college professors years ago taught them that conservatives are wicked.

At this point, what difference does it make?

The point is that Rule One in politics is: Don't rile up the opposition.  That's probably why the winning side usually dials down the partisan heat after an election and says that we are all Americans and now we should pull together.  Then the winning side tries to structure its policy to get some of the opposition party to vote for their legislation.

The Obama scandals demonstrate to every non-liberal American that for the Obamis, the war never ends.  The Obama scandals demonstrate that the Obamis don't just use their own campaign assets in the political battle but the assets of the IRS.  This is not surprising, if you listen to the progressives.  In their world politics is everything.  The whole point of Alinsky's Rules for Radicals is never to let up on "them," ever.

Theoretically, this divisive strategy might work.  It might be that Democrats have forged a permanent political majority and they can afford to marginalize and harass conservatives without getting in political trouble.

But the fact is that President Obama got reelected in 2012 on fewer votes than 2008.  The popular vote in 2008 was 69.46 million to 59.93 million.  In 2012 it was 65.62 million to 60.88 million.  Imagine what could happen if Republicans were really motivated to vote and Democrats were no longer voting for the First Black President.

President Obama was elected on great wave of not mere trust, but faith.  By 2016 Democrats will have drawn down that well to the bitter dregs.

Then it will be anyone's game.

No comments:

Post a Comment