May, 10, 2012 — nicedeb
This has been a point of contention for me, too…Does the Republican establishment think that the American people can’t handle the truth? Why do they insist on raising the white flag in the battle for hearts and minds, by ceding to the left one of their weakest propaganda points?
It’s so easy to point out all of the things that make Obama a not-so-nice bully, yet the establishment doesn’t even try.
There is a reflexive desire among a certain species of moderate Republicans to be perceived as “civil” by liberal opponents who believe that the mere existence of free-market, limited-government conservatism is an indecent affront to humankind. All aboard the U.S.S. Lost Cause.
This disastrous, bend-over bipartisanship is a hard habit to break. In 2008, Arizona Sen. John McCain rode the “Barack Obama is a nice guy, but vote for me” wave to crashing defeat. In 2012, McCain’s endorsee, Mitt Romney, has made “Barack Obama is a nice guy but in over his head” a standard stump-speech talking point.
Conservatives of good will who’ve watched President Obama brutalize his enemies have one question for the nice-guy niceties: Why, GOP, why?
Romney’s smarter-than-thou strategists explain that he can’t scare off independents and Democrats with straight talk about Obama’s thuggery. But he’s turning off the conservative base, on whom his hold is tenuous. More importantly, Romney’s McCain-lite impersonation is also writing off independents and Democrats who’ve come to realize what the myriad targets of White House bullying have learned the hard way over the past four years: Barack Obama is not a “nice guy.”
Ask Gerald Walpin, the former AmeriCorps inspector general who was pushed out of his job by the Obamas after exposing fraud and corruption perpetrated by Democratic mayor of Sacramento and Obama friend Kevin Johnson. Walpin was unceremoniously fired and smeared by Team Obama. The White House baselessly questioned the veteran watchdog’s mental health and never apologized for slandering him.
Ask the family, friends and co-workers of murdered Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. They have been forced to sue the Obama administration to combat the Operation Fast and Furious cover-up of deadly policy decisions that led to their hero’s death. “I think they are liars, and I would tell them that,” Terry’s father, Kent, said of Obama’s henchmen.
As Townhall editor Katie Pavlich makes clear in her devastating new book, “Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and Its Shameless Cover-Up,” the president, his corrupt attorney general, Eric Holder, and their minions weren’t “in over their heads.” They knew exactly what they were doing and have obstructed investigations into the bloody consequences of their policies ever since.
That’s not “nice.” It’s rotten to the core.
Keep reading –Michelle’s not done by a long-shot – she has a long memory (and so do I) which is why we cringe every time we see this lame-o tactic employed by the “gentleman’s rules” Repubs.
They’re happy to allow Mitt to be portrayed as a stiff, insincere, elitist jerk, while, Obama is gushed over as a “cool”, messianic “nice guy”? Give me a freakin’ break.
They guy who fought tooth and nail to stop the IL version of the Born Alive Infant Protection Act? The guy who is willing to tell Catholics they have to violate their consciences, or else? The guy who actually invoked JESUS to justify same sex marriage?!
I utterly reject this pusillanimous thinking - the American people can handle the truth — if they’re told the truth.
As Michelle Malkin correctly notes; “Romney’s surrogates insist that conservatives should “stick to the issues.” But Obama’s by-any-means-necessary ruthlessness is an issue.”
…back in December 2011, O’Reilly asked Romney if he thought President Obama was a socialist. To which Romney replied, “I consider him a big government liberal Democrat.” LBJ was a big government liberal Democrat. Calling Obama a mere liberal doesn’t accurately reflect the extent of his radicalism. Aside from killing bin Laden, Obama’s main selling point is that he nationalized GM. It doesn’t get more socialist than that.
Unfortunately, Romney is too cautious to accurately describe Obama as a socialist. I’m not saying Romney can’t beat Obama. But by not properly defining Obama, Romney makes an already challenging task that much more difficult for himself.
And Willard buys into the Leftist Narrative. They would like nothing more than to see Obama classified as a Liberal, which is more acceptable to the Mushy Middle than the word ‘Socialist’.
Along with Romney repeatedly stating that Obama is a ‘good, but misguided man’, this avoidance of the truth shows that he has, so far, not given us any evidence that he understands what he is up against and that he still thinks the old, mythic rules of political behavior apply. Such thinking is the thinking of a Loser.
Wake up before it’s too late, RINOs.
Thanks to Nice Deb: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/