Liberty Postings

Raise your hand if you’ve heard someone say this, “President Obama and Nancy Pelosi are not listening to the will of the people!” or “The President is not listening to the voters!” or “Let’s kick this guy out.  He doesn’t speak for me!”

Well, yes, he does speak for you.  We might not like what he says, but he speaks for all of us.  That’s the way our country works.  He is our president.  He won fair and square.  He earned the right to his seat in the Oval Office nearly two years ago by a substantial margin of victory.  More Americans wanted him there than did not (or, should I say, more states offered him their electoral votes than did not), so there he sits. I don’t like most of President Obama’s policies, and I certainly did not vote for him, but he is my president.

I wonder how many people who are now complaining about Obama not “listening to the voters” used to mock President Clinton for not being able to decide on how to cook his eggs for breakfast without first taking a poll.

The president and our other elected officials do not have to ask us every time they need to make a decision.  That’s why we have elections and a representative government. (After all, we are a “republic” and not a “democracy,” right?  I know that Glenn Beck fans in particular are proud of themselves when they try to pull that “gotcha!” out on somebody.)  We vote for the person who we believe will best represent our ideology and values and then let that person do his or her job.  Of course, politicians should listen to their constituents as part of their decision-making process and we certainly should speak up when we aren’t happy.  But, if President Obama or your congressman is advocating for legislation with which you disagree, just work hard to make sure someone else is elected next time!

I REALLY hope that President Obama is a one-term president and I would love to see Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid go down to defeat on election day.  But until then, they deserve to be where they are in D.C.  They were put there by the voters.  That’s the way our country works and I wouldn’t have it any other way!

I have been thinking more about the “Supreme Court moment” during President Obama’s State of the Union speech yesterday.  During that lovely act of un-presidential scolding, the President reminded me of the guy in the schoolyard who is not so tough himself, but who is popular and persuasive and therefore gets the tough guys to follow him around.  He gets his minions to hold down the victim of his choosing, and then he throws some punches.  He is willing to be bold only when he knows his opponent is defenseless.

For those who are unaware of the offending comment:

With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections.

What are the members of the Supreme Court supposed to do in response?  Is Scalia supposed to jump up and say, “Wanna thrown down, Mr. President?”  Perhaps Alito should yell back, “You’re a liar who feels as if the separation of powers does not apply to your grand plan (despite your claim of deference) and who apparently doesn’t mind that McCain/Feingold tramples all over free speech!”  No, I suppose not.  Instead, the viewing audience was able to discern a whispered “not true.”  Gasp!  How dare a member of the highest court in our land take issue with our President attacking one of the Court’s decision in a completely inappropriate setting!

President Obama’s words for the Supreme Court were tacky, childish, and just as inappropriate for the environment as the outburst by Rep. Wilson last year (and perhaps even worse, as the President’s were a deliberate component of his prepared remarks).

One of my New Year’s resolutions is to focus as much energy as possible on the positive.  I  want to find the good in people, make the best of my circumstances, and get excited for the possibilities that life will bring in 2010.  I have found that people who harp on the negative or find it necessary to put others down are only making themselves more miserable.  This doesn’t mean that I won’t write about the problems and challenges I see around me.  But, when given a choice, I will choose to see the positive while remaining realistic about the existence of the negative.

That being said, I want to get a jump start on my promise to myself by sharing a few things that I like about President Obama.

1. He appears to have a genuine and loving partnership with his wife.  President and First Lady Obama seem to share a mutual respect for one another and really value what the other person offers.  I get the sense from watching them look at each other there is a real sense of trust and friendship.  That is a great example for our country.

2. He is an involved father.  He clearly adores those two beautiful girls.  He is interested in their education and their personal development.  We could use more dads like that.

3. While I would never support a candidate based on his or her race, gender, religion, etc., I do know that having President Obama in the White House provides a positive role model for all children, particularly minority children.  I know that in everything from television shows to dolls to the presidency, it is important to see a person who looks like you.  President Obama has afforded that opportunity to millions of kids for the first time.

4. President Obama is active and athletic and is using his office to encourage physical fitness in others.  One of my personal interests is the problem of childhood obesity.  I am discouraged by the lack of movement and healthy eating by our kids.  With few exceptions, I see no reason for children to be overweight (adults, too, but that’s a different matter).  If President Obama can be one of many leaders who will carry the banner for fit kids, then I back that one hundred percent.

There you have it.  Those are some things I like about President Barack Obama.  Sure, they don’t have anything to do with his major policies.  But, he is our President and I am teaching my daughter to have respect for that office.  The points I listed above are ones that I share with her when we see President Obama on the news.  She will be four in a couple of weeks.  There’s time for in-depth policy debates later.

In search of hard-hitting news analysis and thoughtful opinion, I turned on The View this morning.  One of the “Hot Topics” was the assertion by our esteemed former president Jimmy Carter that much of the hostility that President Obama is receiving towards his policies is based on the fact that he is black.

First, I had to pause and really think back on the images I had seen on my TV over the past couple of years.  I had never before noticed that our president is black!  You must understand, I am not someone who sees color.  I look past a person’s skin and only notice the content of his character.  I see the beauty within.  In fact, I couldn’t even tell you my own skin color if you happened to ask.  I barely even notice that I have skin.

OK, point made.  I just can’t stand when someone pulls that “I don’t see a person’s color” garbage.  It’s such a lie.  Moving on …

Joy Behar, always the voice of well-reasoned logic, mentioned that Obama must have significant white support because he received 52% of the popular vote and that at one point his approval rating was around 70%.  Wow!  Joy Behar actually reached a conclusion that makes sense.  You should probably stop now, Joy.  No?  There’s more?  OK.  Ms. Behar when on to say that the 30% of people who didn’t approve of the president at the peak of his popularity must be the racist white folks.  That’s right, Joy.  The ONLY reason someone has to disapprove of President Obama’s job performance is his skin color.  It couldn’t be his views on health care reform, broken promises of transparency, a Treasury Secretary who doesn’t pay taxes, a global apology tour, airborne photo ops over lower Manhattan, a beer summit to discuss what should be a local matter, a national debt that is going to force us to come up with a word even more ridiculous than “kagillion” …

Are there people in this country who are going to dislike anything that President Obama proposes simply because he is black?  Yes, absolutely.  It’s the unfortunate truth.  Republicans need to stop acting shocked whenever this reality is mentioned.  And, if you don’t know what I mean, here’s an example of what you should not say anymore:  “What??  What an unsubstantiated accusation!  I am truly offended!  I would gladly vote for Alan Keyes or Clarence Thomas to be president!  Skin color has nothing to do with it.”  (Side note — You automatically lose any opportunity to contribute to a rational discussion once you voice support for Alan Keyes.)  Don’t act so incredulous.  It’s OK to admit that, yes, some people allow race to affect their vote.  You don’t have to (and shouldn’t) like it, but you are insulting and not really believable when you pretend the problem doesn’t exist.

On the other hand, I contend that a large majority of the people who are opposed to President Obama’s agenda have reached this opinion without any his race being even the smallest of factors.  Come on, liberals/progressives/Democrats (whatever label you prefer).  You know the policy positions of conservatives/Republicans/the party currently without a leader (again, pick a label).  And, if you do, you know that Obama’s goals run counter to their agenda.  If a person really is a conversative, of either the fiscal or social variety, she is not going to support the Obama administration, regardless of the President’s melanin content.

So, in summary –

1. Don’t pretend that race is not an issue for some people when deciding how they will vote.  It’s insulting and disingenuous.

2. Don’t pretend that race is the only reason a person is unable to support the policies put forth by a black president.  It’s insulting and overly simplistic.