Machiavelli: Analysis from beyond the grave
It has been an interesting two weeks of existence we’ve had here in America, hasn’t it? Ever since the Democrats gave America’s Tina the Ike Turner Treatment by passing health care in the face of majority opposition, we’ve had the Democrats give us a victory lap, settle down, look at their poll numbers, and apparently they’ve begun to feel something similar to the uncomfortable state of being which accompanies the passing of a kidney stone the size of your average brick.
There is no other way to explain the actions of Barack Obama from a PR-only standpoint.
By this, I refer to the tendency of any politician to want to control the headlines. If you examine the headlines only, and don’t dig any deeper, the image being painted is slightly disturbing…
Obama to health reform detractors:Bring it on; Obama’s victory lap.
Quickly followed by his interview with Harry Smith of CBS News, where he stated the following:
“Well, I think that when you listen to Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck, it’s pretty apparent, and it’s troublesome,” Obama said. “But keep in mind that there have been periods in American history where this kind of vitriol comes out. It happens often when you’ve got an economy that is making people more anxious, and people are feeling like there is a lot of change that needs to take place. But that’s not the vast majority of Americans. I think the vast majority of Americans know that we’re trying hard, that I want what’s best for the country.”
He can’t help but lie through his teeth. He knows full well that there is no vast majority of Americans who think he’s trying hard and doing what is best for the country. His approval rating is below 50%, and more Americans might prefer to step in dog crap, barefoot, than meet their Congressman these days. In fact, damn near 60% think that the country is on the wrong track. His interview was typical politician: Take whatever comes out of a politician’s mouth, and instantly assume that the opposite is actually true.
His actions this week point to the fear that exists in the Democrat Party these days.
On March 30th: Obama calls on UN to impose tough sanctions on Iran.
On March 31st: President Obama: Drill, baby, drill
Back to our domestic abuse analogy, Obama is engaging America just like the stereotypical puke from the daily soaps…
SMACK!
“Oh baby, come on baby, you know I didn’t mean that… I looove you, baby…”
It’s an abusive relationship! Beat them up a bit, then try to bribe your way back into their good graces! Give them lies about how you love them, when the real problem abusers face is that they love themselves too much… It’s like watching a bad episode of Cops: Trailer Park Edition. Ugh.
Of course, it fits the Health Care pattern. The Democrats bribed everyone and anyone in DC to get this thing passed, now they think it’s just a matter of bribing the public. But they’ve screwed up, they’ve forgotten their Machiavelli, in its entirety:
When a decision has to be made involving the fate of powerful cities that are accustomed to free institutions, they must either be destroyed, or conciliated by benefits. Any other course will be useless; and, above all, half measures should be avoided, these being most dangerous.– Niccoló Machiavelli, The Discourses. 1517.
The Democrats were faced with two possible responses to their violation of all the principles of democratic/republican government: destroy their opposition (not possible since it’s the majority) or try to bribe them.
But here’s the President’s problem: He can’t really afford to bribe conservatives to be happy because of the anger on the left. Conservatives only demand no quarter in this political fight because the liberals have been fighting to win, no holds barred, for decades. You don’t see video of Conservatives laughing at the Constitution, saying that they don’t care about the Constitution, etc… The President accuses the right of angry vitriol, but I post on a lot of forums, bulletin boards, and the like, and let me tell you: The right has nothing on the anger of the left.
So the President is, through ineptitude, falling into that third option, the “half measures” option. He isn’t going to recover from this health care vote, politically speaking. He’s trying to appease the right because the left is a minority in this country. By doing so, he angers the left, and they step up their attacks on the right. This in turn fuels the right’s anger, and we get a vicious, self-feeding cycle. As Ol’ Nick said, the “most dangerous” of measures…
Latest posts by Mike McGowan (Posts)
- From one single father to the next - July 20, 2012
- Why isn’t anyone talking about the man - February 13, 2012
- Questions about the power of precedent - February 8, 2012
- Suffer not the Innocent to find relief - February 2, 2012
- Romney v. Newt: How the GOP and the conservative media killed the TEA Party - January 31, 2012
Print This Post
Regarding Obama’s love affair with the camera and inability to exist even one day out of the spotlight, I just watched the NCAA final four show on CBS and the half time show was what? Obama shooting baskets. The only way to not see his face everyday is to cover your head with a paper sack!
Perhaps he’s not lying; perhaps he’s just deluded himself.
And if he really wants to tune down the vitriol, he should ask Olbermann to do so, as well. It could be his “Sista Souljah” moment. But don’t count on it ever happening.
@ Colin
I don’t think the vitriol should be turned down, and I hope Obama doesn’t either.
Health care, as the Vice President so aptly noted, is a “Big Fucking Deal”. It should be debated, at length, and people should be free to voice their opinions and feelings on the matter. If tempers flare, good! This is a BIG fucking deal, after all…
I love Keith Olbermann’s show. If the US were Iran, and he’d said anything about the powers-that-be there that he said about Bush here, they’d have shot him in the street. I’m glad that even the voices I disagree with have a chance to be heard.
But I also respect the right of the people I agree with to call the obvious lunatics crazy once those opinions are voiced.
It’s not the freedom of speech being exercised in this country that is the problem. It’s a Democrat controlled Congress that has nationalized banks, auto companies, higher education, and health care in face of clear majorities of opposition.
” . . . in face of clear majorities of opposition.”
The opposition is neither clear nor in a majority. Those are just the words opponents use to try to add force to assertions that do not square with reality. “Clearly” this and “majorities” that . . . bushwah!
@ Parsifal
When health care reform passed, public opposition was clearly in the majority.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/march_2010/55_favor_repeal_of_health_care_bill
If you want to claim that the majority of Americans supported this bill, go right ahead. Everyone here recalls that you also want to argue that democracy and a republic are the same, and we’re just content to laugh at your desperation.
“Everyone here”? What, are you guys all in one room together?
That would explain a lot.
” . . . you also want to argue that democracy and a republic are the same.” That is not exactly what I said, but never mind. In any case, I not merely argued, I SHOWED. You ought to try it; it’s quite effective.
@ Parsifal
Ok, your exact words:
“You repeat the common mistake that democracies and republics are two different forms of government.”
Like I said, you tried to argue that a Republic and a democracy are the same thing.
And you haven’t shown anything but the fact that you’re wearing blinders. Look at the polls. Your DC crew is getting stomped. Sorry to break the ultra-bad news to you.
OK, my exact words, not taken out of context:
“A republic is a form of government, as is a monarchy. Both can be democracies, and both the United States and Britain are democracies — solid democracies. So are other constitutional monarchies, such as those in Scandinavia and the Low Countries. A parliamentary system is ipso facto a democracy, if it is honestly operated, as Britain’s is. There are republics that are not democracies and there are monarchies that are not democracies. It’s quite simple, really.”
Some republics are democracies, some are not. It’s just an undeniable fact on the ground. The Islamic Republic of Iran is not a democracy; the United States is. But a republic and democracy are not mutually antagonistic.
As I said before, I try not merely to TELL, but to SHOW. You should try it some time. It would make a nice change.
@ Parsifal
Democracy – Majority rule. 51% of the voters, combined, make binding legislation for everyone.
Republic – Voters elect individuals to represent them. This select group makes legislation for the whole body politic.
If these governments are identical, why do we have two names for them?
You must try to blur the line between democracy and the republic because democracy was expressly warned against by the Founding Fathers…