Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson didn’t care for the tone of President Obama’s Second Inaugural Address:
Those who oppose this agenda, in Obama’s view, are not a very admirable lot. They evidently don’t want our wives, mothers and daughters to “earn a living equal to their efforts.” They would cause some citizens “to wait for hours to exercise the right to vote.” They mistake “absolutism for principle” and “substitute spectacle for politics” and “treat name-calling as reasoned debate.” They would have people’s “twilight years . . . spent in poverty” and ensure that the parents of disabled children have “nowhere to turn.” They would reserve freedom “for the lucky” and believe that Medicare and Social Security “sap our initiative,” and they see this as “a nation of takers.” They “deny the overwhelming judgment of science” on climate change, don’t want love to be “equal” and apparently contemplate “perpetual war.”
For Abraham Lincoln, even the gravest national crimes involved shared fault. For Obama, even the most commonplace policy disagreements indicate the bad faith of his opponents.
Mr. Gerson doesn’t address the accuracy of Obama’s claims. As Jane Mayer points out, the “nation of takers” rhetoric has been increasingly prevalent on the right. The Republicans have consistently opposed equal pay for equal work. Republican governors from Ohio to Virginia to Florida did all they could to assure long lines at the polls. Who could argue against the idea that the Norquist anti-tax pledge puts absolutism over principle or that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh substitute spectacle for politics? What kind of reasoned debate involves questioning the president’s birth certificate and calling him a Muslim or a Stalinist or a Nazi? What does Gerson think happens to the elderly and parents with special needs kids when you slash Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security and other health programs? Three in ten conservative Republicans express a belief in climate change. And the neo-conservatives explicitly call for perpetual war.
The president told the truth. Who cares if the right doesn’t like it?
Gerson thinks that the president created a problem for himself by hurting the Republicans’ feelings. There are two words for that kind of analysis: concern troll.
Hey, I have an idea! Let’s have both sides, the President’s and Gerson’s, debate these points in an open and national forum for a few months. And then, after all the discussion and debate, have an election where the people decide which side they agree with!
How ’bout it? You in???
.
Jennifer Rubin is up in arms, she might as well change her blog’s name. It’s obsolete …
Indeed, the lies for war have ended. The loss of lives and suffering of our men and women in service has ended. No more wars of choice or Bush’s doctrine of pre-emptive was has been laid to rest. I trust the Israeli people will choose wisely today and offer Netanyahu a great loss of seats in the Knesset. Jerusalem Post journalist Jennifer Rubin will have more to cry about!
PS Gerson’s cry baby story wasn’t worth it to give any comment.
Well, it would help if he stopped accusing his opponents of bad will and of trying to get us to drink polluted water.
No, it wouldn’t. He tried that, and all the happened was his opponents spit in his face and called him a racist and a Nazi.
Bed. Made. Recline, Ms. Rubin.
Not to put too fine a point on it, Michael Gerson is full of shit.
I was going to respond to Boo but I can’t really put it any differently than you did.
I suppose if Republicans aren’t all the things Obama said they will have no problem helping him achieve these apparently shared goals.
What pathetic drivel!
He (and Rubin); WATBs.
Rather, it’s someone who refuses to acknowledge reality.
Yeah, I’ve got a shoe for Michael Gerson to try on. It’s just his size.
And Lincoln? Seriously? The guy who had to fight an actual war against his political opponents? Don’t this people think at all before they start tossing around historical references?
“If the shoe fits, wear it.” Everything Obama said was spot on. And after the way the Repubs treated him during the first term, he’s apparently learned that there is no upside trying to make nice with these lunatics.
Does Gerson get together with D. Brooks and pretend to change diapers on a GOP babydoll?
The Villagers have made concern trolling into a lucrative vocation over the last 20 years. Too bad facts and truth don’t earn similar compensation. Or attention.
Here’s a thought for Michael Gerson’s concern; how much taxpaper money is spent locally, by state and Federally on prosecuting gun related incidents that we could at the very least put a dent in with background checks and the Obama plan for gun sanity?
The gun manufacturers get to make money hand over fist so that not only people are killed, our first responders put in harms’ way and then the taxpayers get to foot the clean up bill. How’s that fiscally responsible?
Gerson is right, that speech was chock full of insults wrapped in velvet, designed to make the right-wingers look bad.
And there’s not a damn thing he can do about it. Even whining about it makes him look like an asshole.
Tee hee. Stop biting the heads of chickens, assholes, and maybe Obama will stop telling the world you bite the heads off chickens.
actually BooMan the two words you are looking for are:
Fuck you
Uh-oh, Gerson’s right. The lunatic right’s fee-fees are hurt.
And because of this they’re going to be less cooperative with Obama than they’ve been to date.
Except that I’m having a very, very difficult time imagining how that would be possible.
So he’s lost nothing by alienating people who already despise him, and there’s a huge upside to the POTUS acknowledging what’s obvious to the rest of us, that his political opposition is clinically detached from reality.
I think Biden had it right in his debate. The proper response to their idiocy is to laugh to their face. That’s not arrogance, you morons. That’s contempt, mixed (in the more humane of us) with a bit of pity.
there’s a huge upside to the POTUS acknowledging what’s obvious to the rest of us, that his political opposition is clinically detached from reality
He’s done enough spade work making that “obvious to the rest of us,” and it’s sunk in. Now he can let ‘er rip.
Didn’t do well with his own constituents. He wanted a larger majority to rule a new coalition and joint with right-wing Avigdor Liberman for a joint ticket.
A weakened Benjamin Netanyahu will be confronted with a stronger President Obama.
Likud-Yisrael Beiteinu lose 11 seats, Netanyahu has smallest majority of one vote to form a right bloc in Knesset