A Ramadan Dinner edition of an Obama audition.
A major debate is under way. Is President O more like James Earl Carter or William Jefferson Clinton? Matt Labash’s favorite subject, Roger Stone, makes a picture-perfect case for the former. Greta V.S.’s most valuable guest, Byron York, captures O’s resemblance to the latter. Where do the Solomons of Enemy Central come down? Naturally, on both sides, though in so doing tipping the advantage to Clinton, our founding father of triangulation, forever adopting two ways in order to get away with a third.
So what’s O’s angle? He was for the Mosque before he was against it by being for it. For once there is more hope here than chump change. Until recently, the concern was that should our ruling president’s confreres lose control of the Congress come November, he won’t have the smarts and dexterity of his nineties predecessor to triangulate himself out of the electoral disaster his first two years have wrought. It’s good to know might.
Of course, his idea of triangulation could rely on a model closer to his heart. Wasn’t it Dr. Marx who made Hegel’s thesis, antithesis, and synthesis a staple of community organizing? Nonetheless, triangulation will represent political progress in O’s case, a great improvement on the strangulation model that has heretofore monopolized his and our attentions.
It will require him to mend his ways, we can assume. His revival of busing, for instance, has to end. No, not the outdated practice of transferring students across district and county lines in the name of diversity outreach and gun- and drug-free school zones. In O’s case we mean his alleged practice of throwing people under buses, causing not only alignment damage, irregular tire wear, and other problems for the equipment, but skyrocketing health care and insurance costs for those who’ve been rolled upon.
So for starters he will have to be much nicer to dear Joe Biden. No more talk of replacing Joe on the ticket with Hillary. Who will bail him out next Memorial Day at Arlington cemetery? Or travel clandestinely on July 4 to Baghdad? Who will emerge as the voice of relative competence next time everyone else is hiding in the hills? Who will serve the suds at the next Beer Summit?
Next, O will have to promise that on his next birthday he won’t play happy bachelor, hangin’ with LeBron & Co. at the gym while his first lady is checking out the rain in Spain. The NBA has supposedly been cleaning up its act. Maybe it’s high five time he did too.
Finally, he’ll have to take his deep commitment to principle that the Mosque debate has revealed and spread the wealth around. Here’s where it’ll really get interesting. Let’s cut to the chase, as we observe his supple mind at work, albeit in the third person, but understandably so, given triangulation’s three-corner offense:
“Obamacare? Who cares? Can’t afford it. If there’s appeal in repeal, O can be for that too. Obamacare, after all, has broader connotations. It means O cares for the state of the economy, for public concerns, for quality and accessibility, for finding genuine, market-friendly, job-creating, private-option solutions to problems only worsened by government’s cold and heavy hand.”
Now that was easy, wasn’t it? As he said at the White House the other day to those applauding his every word, and maybe to his all-time favorite NBA player as well, Ramadan Kareem.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?