We have been following with less than our full attention the progress
of the health care bill, but we surmise it has just made a great gain
in the Senate -- not because of anything the Democrats have said (who
listens to them anymore?), but because we saw this at National Review:
"The story of the day is certainly Senator Ben Nelson's shameless
perfidy -- giving up his pro-life principles in return for swindling
taxpayers in the other 49 states..."
Even in these hyperventilationist times, Democrats don't rate
that kind of rightblogger dudgeon unless they've pulled off something
big.
To get the bill to this stage, Democrats had to make concessions to Congressional foot-draggers, which has annoyed some liberals who thought they were sacrificing too much to secure passage. RedState
twirled this into a mendacious masterpiece of spin:" Conservatives hate
this bill" and "Progressives and liberals hate it too." Also, "The
public is solidly against it" -- an anti-Obamacare consensus!
And, RedState went on, the fact that Democrats are still pushing the
bill -- as opposed to just throwing it out and reverting to tax
vouchers -- means democracy is threatened:
"The question of whether we live in a country ruled by leaders
who refuse to listen, but do what they believe is in their own
interest, has been answered. The public is solidly against it... The
implications of a country in open revolt against this bill and the
elite in the Democratic party giving the public the finger are
profound...
"The world will understand America has changed. Our country is now run
by elites who are printing money... we have now crossed that line from
what our country was into something else, and that something else has
nothing whatsoever with the country being a Republic..."
The author, Dan Perrin, did not overtly call for his fellow
citizens (you too, liberals!) to grab their muskets and storm the White
House; perhaps that is being saved for when the bill is reconciled with
the House version.
Others, as strongly in opposition, looked on the bright side:
passing a health care bill will awaken the sheeple and destroy the
Democrats. Byron York
considered "why Democrats push health care, even if it kills them." A
sympathetic reader might think that Democrats push health care because
they think it's the right thing to do. York restated that in more
sinister terms via quotes from an unnamed "Democratic strategist":
"Because they think they know what's best for the public... And they
are going to make the decision because Goddammit, it's good for the
public."
The nerve of them! York added the strategist also "compared
congressional Democrats with robbers who have passed the point of no
return in deciding to hold up a bank. Whatever they do, they're guilty
of something." Thus, elected representatives passing legislation are
engaged in the equivalent of desperate criminal behavior, and in full
view of the surveillance cameras of C-Span. You have to wonder why they
don't attend the Senate chamber with their hoodies pulled up, to escape
detection.
When Obama said in a pro-bill speech to House Democrats that
"each and every one of you will be able to look back and say, 'This was
my finest moment in politics,'" the Heritage Foundation blog
characterized it as an "appeal to political vanity," and called the
impending passage of the bill "political suicide." Later the Heritage
author requested that the Democrats "slow down and consider the best
interests of the country," which is an odd appeal, given that the
Democrats are allegedly engaged in suicide and presumably would be
better advised to think of their families and whatever else they might
have to live for.
Other rightbloggers focused on President Obama's work in
foreign policy, as revealed by analysis of his body language in
photographs.
Ann Althouse
found a picture in the White House Flickr stream of Obama in
explanatory mode with Chinese Premier Wan Jiabao at Copenhagen. "This
is a photo from Obama's own Flickr site," she said, "so it presents
Obama as Obama's people want him to be seen. Obsequious? Abasing? Or
steady and serious in a difficult process of persuasion?"
Andrew Malcolm knew what he saw -- bowing, the obnoxious habit
of our royalist President. Though Obama is seated in the photo, Malcolm
suggested the President was not inclined in emphasis, but in
furtherance of another "wow bow." "So if this photo of Obama leaning
way over to stress his point isn't technically a bow," said Malcolm,
"who do you think in this picture out of Copenhagen is doing the
selling/pleading -- China's Wen Jiabao or America's Democrat
president?"
"Is Barack Obama bowing yet again to a despot?" asked Andrew Bolt. "You don't have to stare at the photo very long to identify the alpha dog at this meeting," said Red Girl in a Blue State. "How does it benefit America to have a President who travels the world as a groveling mendicant?"
Riehl World View
offered a caption: "'It's claimed there are huge differences between
black and Asian men. I'm here to demonstrate what a myth that actually
is.' Look at the image. You tell me who's has the bigger stones. heh!"
While these observers attacked Obama for unmanly
obsequiousness, others attacked him for his brutal temper. "Does it
concern anyone else," asked Foreign Object Damage,
"that anger is the only emotion that President Obama has displayed in
public over the last month?" What? Did he go Incredible Hulk at the
Nobel Prize speech? Turns out Obama answered "yes" when someone asked
if he was "angry" over the gatecrashers nontroversy, and a reporter
said he was "visibly angry" at Copenhagen. "I never before thought of
the implications of having an angry President," said FOD. "Not
comforting."
"Our Angry President," concurred Instapundit. "Obama Angry in Copenhagen," said The Lonely Conservative,
adding, "the good news is that Obama isn't getting his way. No wonder
he's so mad." "Our president is quite the angry man these days," said William Hughes, stretching for a War on Christmas
angle. "Perhaps his heart is two sizes too small, or maybe he just
hates the residents of Who-ville... Perhaps being forced by public
opinion to retain the 'religious' aspect of White House Christmas
decorations has placed our man in Washington in a foul mood."
No wonder American Thinker
declared Obama "Our laughingstock President." Why, even traditional
allies of America like Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro are mocking him!
Also, "the Iranians have swatted away his outstretched hand by
depicting him as no better than George Bush." Wow, that is low.
In any event Obama's obsequious/angry approach has yielded a non-binding agreement with the Chinese -- or, as Eric Posner put it, a "Debacle," as the goals for Copenhagen were far more grand. Just as well, said Roger L. Simon, as the Copehhagen conference "was only peripherally about
'climate change' and almost entirely about UN hegemony."
At Race42012 (lately renamed from Race42008, for obvious reasons), Matthew E. Miller
said, "It is almost impossible to miss how obviously this environmental
movement resembles a religion... It's a religion that doesn't want to
admit it's a religion. And the proof, beyond their almost comical
contortions to justify these doctrines, is in this: when was the last
time you heard someone try to sell you some mystical pap about
gravity?"
Miller was not talking about Copenhagen, but Avatar, the vaguely green new James Cameron movie and the new front in the climate wars. John Podhoretz
panned it for its allegedly environmentalist and anti-military
components: Will all its "technical mastery," he asked, "silence the
discomfort coming from that significant segment of the American
population that, we know from the box-office receipts for Iraq war
movies this decade, doesn't like it when an American soldier is the bad
guy?"
From Avatar's box-office receipts,
it would seem, yes. Perhaps for this reason, rightblogger coverage is
thus far light; we'll probably have to wait till Obama goes to see it
to hear much from them. And he better not lean forward in his seat!
Roy Edroso's Rightbloggers: Exploring the right Wing Blogosphere appears courtesy of our sister paper in New York City, Village Voice.
Showing 1-4 of 4
Calvin says:
"Critical thinker; why do you hate the people that protect your right to mouth off without oppression?"
The U.S. military has never protected my rights. And yes, I hate veterans as much as active military because they're the real "welfare queens" in America.
Critical thinker; why do you hate the people that protect your right to mouth off without oppression? Why do you hate me (veteran)? Why are you a hater? What happened when you were a child? Bad potty training? See your parents having sex? with other people?
Come on CT unburden yourself and you will be a better person for it.
Grant says:
"The soldiers in Avatar are hired guns, not US military."
Yeah, because America doesn't use mercenaries, huh? We have hired guns blowing up Iraqi, Afghani, Pakistani babies right now. Who knows who else they're killing. When the US military uses hired guns that makes them ALL hired guns, and no person with a conscience can support any of them.
like
dislike
