Obama, the Republican Darling

I have been combing the news outlets and political blogs recently, trying to gauge the likelihood of Obama winning a second term as President.  I have been convinced for a while that he probably won't win, mostly because I don't think he can be victorious running as a Republican - which, if we are all honest with ourselves, is the only way he could be considered true to his first term record.

When he won in 2008 on the ridiculous "Hope and Change" platform, he grandstanded spectacularly on all the things he would do different than the previous administration.  He had press conferences vilifying the Bush administration while posturing his own as the antidote to it.  And everything was Bush's fault - he inherited all this.  And it was easy enough to dismiss - the inevitable lowering of the bar before any of his decisions and policies have taken hold.  But now that he's in full campaign mode again, the "lay-it-all-at-the-feet-of-Bush" tactic is really grating on me.  He's three and a half years in - when does this become his responsibility?  Bush has been gone for quite a while now.  He has no vote in Congress.  He has no say in anything anymore.  But Obama and the DNC seriously want us to believe that his hands are completely tied by Bush.  Just how far do they think they can extend this blame?

• Bush broke Obama’s promise to put all bills on the White House web site for five days before signing them.
• He broke Obama’s promise to have the congressional health care negotiations broadcast live on C-SPAN.
• He broke Obama’s promise to end earmarks.
• He broke Obama’s promise to keep unemployment under 8 percent - that's why he needed his stimulus bill passed, like, tomorrow - or we're all doomed.
• He broke Obama’s promise to close the detention center at Guantanamo in the first year.
• He broke Obama’s promise to make peace with direct, no pre-condition talks with America ’s most hate-filled enemies during his first year in office, ushering in a new era of global cooperation.
• He broke Obama’s promise to end the hiring of former lobbyists into high White House jobs.
• He broke Obama’s promise to end no-compete contracts with the government.
• He broke Obama’s promise to disclose the names of all attendees at closed White House meetings.
• He broke Obama’s promise for a new era of bipartisan cooperation in all matters.

Yes, it’s all George Bush’s fault. President Obama is nothing more than a puppet in the never-ending, failed Bush administration.  Clearly Bush's hand was the reason Obama disengaged himself from the debt ceiling negotiations.  Bush's hand was the reason Obama disengaged himself from even commenting, let alone doing anything, during the Gulf oil spill crisis.  Bush's hand was the reason Obama disengaged himself from the crisis in Libya and went to South America, only to finally make a decision to act when the UN left him with no other choice.  If only George Bush wasn’t still in charge, all of President Obama’s problems would be solved. His promises would have been kept, the economy would be back on track, Iran would have stopped its work on developing a nuclear bomb and would be negotiating a peace treaty with Israel.  North Korea would have ended its tyrannical regime, and integrity would have been restored to the federal government.  Oh, and let's not forget what it would be like if the Democrats, under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, if they didn’t have the heavy yoke of George Bush around their necks.  There would be no earmarks, no closed-door drafting of bills, no increase in deficit spending, no special-interest influence (unions).  If only George Bush wasn’t still in charge, we’d have real change by now.  All the broken promises, all the failed legislation and delay (health care reform, immigration reform) is not President Obama’s fault or the fault of the Democrat-controlled Senate or Republican-controlled House.  It’s all George Bush’s fault. 

You might recall that when Scott Brown won election to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts , capturing Ted Kennedy's seat, President Obama said that Brown’s victory was the result of the same voter anger that propelled Obama into office in 2008.  People were still angry about George Bush and the policies of the past 10 years, and they wanted change.  Yes - according to the president, the argument could be made that the voter rebellion in Massachusetts was George Bush’s fault (it couldn't possibly be that even the Democrat voters were getting a little tired of the Dems legislating against the will of the people).  Therefore, in obvious retaliation, they elected a Republican to the Ted Kennedy seat, ending a half-century of domination by Democrats.  It is all George Bush’s fault.  Will the failed administration of George Bush ever end, and the time for hope and change ever arrive?  Will President Obama ever accept responsibility for something - anything, besides killing Bin Laden and a health care bill he considers a major victory, but likely to be dismantled by the Supremes next month?

The debt crisis is looming over our heads, and the DNC loves to point out that Bush "doubled" the debt from $5 trillion to almost $10 trillion, while Obama has only increased the debt by half, from $10 trillion to almost $16 trillion by the end of the year.  Yet, they miss the point.  Percentagesaside, Bush added $5 trillion to the debt (a huge chunk of which is the wars and the rebuilding in Iraq and Afghanistan) over 8 years.  Obama has added almost $6 trillion in half the time.  By the end of a second term, Obama's administration will have at least doubled the debt to $20 trillion, if not more, at the current rate.

I'm not advising anyone to not vote for Obama.  Just see the forest from the trees, please.  Years back, I joined an electrical contracting firm as a project manager.  I spent my first week going from job site to job site, being brought up to speed with all the projects going on.  Part of my job was to ensure all inspections were passed (several jobs were having problems).  It was pointed out on a particular job that helpers were doing to majority of the work (for those who don't know, helpers usually assist journeyman electricians in completing their work, but it's the journeymen who actually perform the work).  For every failed inspection, there were journeymen blaming sub-par work or unmet electrical code requirements on the helpers.  The owner would visit job sites once every three weeks to a month as a matter of course.  On the Friday of my first week, he brings out paychecks to this particular job site, who had failed yet another inspection two days before (this job was one of the ones I was appointed to, to help bring them up to spec to pass inspections on the next round).  The owner says hello to everyone and has the job foreman hand out the paychecks.  He then informs the job site that the foreman and all the journeymen were fired - right then, right there - done.  Everyone was shocked, including me.  He states that in seven failed inspections, he's heard all the blame has been put on the helpers - which leads him to assume that the helpers are the only ones doing any work.  So why is he paying journeymen $20+/hour to not work, and a foreman $65,000/year + bonuses to oversee them not working?  So everyone was fired, except the helpers.  Ballsiest thing I've ever seen an owner do.

My point is this:  if everything is Bush's fault, what the hell do we need Obama for?