Friday, January 30, 2009

Along The Great Divide

Throughout our longest campaign season, we were repeatedly told that President George W. Bush was a “divider,” not a “uniter.” Democrat candidates made certain to mention that they would “unite” America, undoing the “divisiveness of Bush.”

All through the administration of George W. Bush’s presidency, he tried in vain to reach out to Democrats, to gain their cooperation and to turn around America’s headlong plunge into destructive socialism. Often he didn’t try hard enough and sometimes, it appeared as if he was the one advocating a socialist goal, or at least, the Democrats main propaganda mouthpiece, our media, made it appear that way.

Bush failed to unify America, just as previous presidents had also failed. The blame cannot be entirely at the president’s feet though, not with one party, the Democrats, wanting nothing to do with actual unity, their vision being everything under their socialist control.

For 18 months Democrats told us they would “unite America.” In March of 2008 the New York Times ran an article, “Can A Liberal Be A Unifier” informing us of Barack Obama’s view on his ability to unify. We were told of his

“promise that he can transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years, end the partisan and ideological wars and build a new governing majority.”

It worked. Not only did Obama end up in the White House, Democrats kept and even gained seats in both the House and Senate, leaving us under a total Democrat control now, Republicans, all too often spineless, relegated to minority status and actually shut out of legislative matters by Speakerette of the House, Nancy Pelosi.

Republicans lost their way of conservatism and all too often crossed the aisle to liberal Democrats, working with them or trying to out liberal them. Their reward for their “unifying efforts” was to be castigated by Democrats and voted out of office. They only had themselves to blame for ignoring the pleas of conservative America to “stay the course” in strengthening America and the party.

Most appalling to me, at least locally, but also nationally, was the attitude displayed by Democrats immediately after November 4, 2008 as they now bemoaned “togetherness” and America “coming together,” but only when they hold total dictatorial power.

If the conduct of Democrats this early on in the administration is any indicator, “unity” is the last thing on their mind.

Nancy Pelosi, bombastic Speaker of the House, early on began the platform of exclusion by steering an early economic stimulus bill to an all Democrat panel, not allowing a single Republican access to the bill to offer alternatives, contrary to decades of legislative cooperation between the party’s. In fact, Pelosi threw out a century’s worth of House Rules in a naked power grab, effectively denying conservatives a voice in House matters.

At a news conference on January 29, 2009, Pelosi blurted out
“I didn’t come here to be partisan. I didn’t come here to be bipartisan. I came here, as did my colleagues, to be nonpartisan, to work for the American people, to do what is in their interest,”
after being asked if not one Republican vote for Obama’s pork laden stimulus plan showed a failure on her part to advance bipartisanship.

Ignored is that there was a bipartisan attitude on the bill, bipartisan opposition in that 11 Democrats crossed the aisle to oppose the bill, which still passed easily. Hardly enough to be a “unifying” moment for the country, but a start if it continues.

We even have former candidate, John ‘F’in Kerry (who served in Viet Nam) blasting Republicans for not voting for the bill after Democrats denied their input and wouldn’t consider any alternatives given by the GOP. Kerry says, “ignore Republicans’ demands about the stimulus plan if they’re going to vote against it anyway.” If this isn’t “our way or the highway,” what is?

Unknown at this time is whether or not John McCain’s Gang of 14 will step in and fold, in another surrender masquerading as a show of unity.

Obama showed his lack of unity while trying to gain support for his pork laden stimulus plan when he told Republican leaders,
“You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.”

A president attacking a private citizen not in the government. An entertainer who broadcasts a political commentary show favoring conservatism, Rush does not represent the Republican party nor do elected Republicans listen to him, obviously.

Of course, this hides the true intent of Democrats to silence dissent from conservatives through the reinstatement of the “Fairness Doctrine,” which is anything but “fair.”

This is seen in not only emails sent out to citizens from the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee, but by efforts by left winged groups such as who ask, “Are you with Obama or Rush?

Unity is not their goal so much as dominance of free thought and instituting a cheap copy of the failed Soviet Union.

Further moves at being an elite class in America, which is as far from unity as one can get, we read of B HO’s cranking up the thermostat in the Oval Office, after ridiculing Americans and citizens of Washington D.C. for not being able to handle cold weather. We sacrifice while he sits comfortably.

During his campaigning in Roseburg, Oregon back in May 2008 Obama told the world,
“We can’t -- drive our SUVs and you know, eat as much as we want and keep our homes on you know, 72 degrees at all times, and whether we’re living in the desert or we’re living in the tundra, and then just expect that every other country’s going to say OK.”

Is it “unity” for us to keep our thermostats cool, requiring us to wear coats or sweaters indoors, yet he will keep the Oval Office “hot enough to grow orchids?”

That he doesn’t pay the bill, we do, isn’t even part of the equation, just that he fails to lead by example, a further example that he doesn’t desire “unity,” but sets himself in a class above the underlings, the ‘proletariat’ of America. He and the Democratic Party leadership.

All this talk of “unity” is just that, “Just words… Just speeches,” that apparently really don’t matter when spoken by the Socialist Demokratik Politburo.

President Bush actually did reach out and try to be a unifier, hoping to bring the country together. He was met with scorn, ridicule and liable every step of the way.

Obama & the Democrats are not even trying, just furthering their dominance of America and push to total Socialism.

The Great Divide of America isn’t the Rocky Mountains, but the schism between political ideologies that are growing further and further apart and in spite of glib speeches and empty promises, seeks the destruction of traditional America as we grew to know and love it.


Angie Lee said...

Why would they be willing to "cross" the divide they themselves created?

They lambasted and turned down with a sneer the Camp/Cantor amendment, the sanctimonious Sander Levin going so far as to PERSONALLY attack Dave Camp (a fellow MI rep) even after admonitions to address the chair (as in PROPER PROCEDURE...), Mr. Hoity-Toity himself. I was ashamed at this exchange by one of "my own," as a Michigan resident. One of the more benign insults (which seemed ONLY to be flung by Democrats, rather than true criticism or discussion or analysis) came from Fortney Stark, calling it a "wrong-headed" amendment.

What was most angering and disturbing had to be the fact that Republicans indicated that Obama's own "money team" felt the Camp amendment was far more economically viable (as in, HALF THE COST) AND would have a greater impact on the intent Obama claimed to be reaching for: Creating jobs (as in DOUBLE the number of those "created" by the Dem legislation). And it was passed with a smile... truly a "bargain with the devil," as aptly named by Rep. Brown-Waite.

LewWaters said...

Angie, I feel it isn't about saving America, but paying off cronies. After all, why should ACORN receive some $5 Billion?

Sharpshooter said...

the 5 billion for ACORN is the payback for the votes they brought to the One's presidential campaign.
And about the thermostat, it is the same old thing with the Left everywhere:
"Do what I say but not what I do". It is the same in Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina, China, and it was the same policies of the former and now defunct (thank God) USSR. The leaders live in the lap of luxury while the populations of these countries have to do without, while they claim that they rule with an Iron fist for their own good. It is the height of hipocrisy.

LewWaters said...

I agree, Augstin, except for the "now defunct USSR" part. It appears that isn't totally defunct, but soon to be named the USSA.

Odd isn't it? President Bush led a long battle in Iraq so they could have free elections and we retain corrupt balloting with groups like ACORN for the Democrats.