What could be more out of character for President Barack “I’m
not a dictator” Obama than sitting down for a nice meal with a
dozen Senate Republicans?
But that’s just what happened on Wednesday night at Washington,
D.C.’s Jefferson
Hotel where, over foie gras and lobster, the power
elite spoke about what Washington will do next to the rest of
us.
RINOs-in-chief John McCain (AZ) and Lindsey Graham (SC) were
there (hours before they took to the Senate floor to disgracefully
attack Rand Paul), along with more stalwart sorts such as Pat
Toomey (PA) and Senator Ron Johnson, a Tea Party
businessman from Wisconsin who is the best senator nobody’s ever
heard of.
Senators described the evening with terms like constructive,
congenial, and cordial.
And on Thursday, President Obama had a “constructive” lunch with
House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI), with the
committee’s ranking Democrat, Chris Van Hollen (MD) also there to
enjoy the lentil soup and sea bass. (No lobster for Congressmen!)
According to the Washington Post, “Topics included
tackling the deficit and the president’s proposal to replace the
sequester with a deficit reduction package that includes tax
increases.” I wonder if Ryan was able to enjoy his lunch hearing
Obama’s typical economic idiocy, which could make even the finest
occasion seem simultaneously bland and sour.
But why is this happening?
Barack Obama and his fellow Democratic petty tyrants are
(in)famous for going it alone,
thinking that narrow election victories mean they have total
control and free rein to trample the minority.
Obama is pretending to play nice because he, for one of the few
times during his presidency, feels weakness.
The sequester debate was a debacle for him, with even liberal
media outlets and
comedians making fun of the administration’s Chicken Little
attempts to induce panic among Americans.
This just days after left-leaning newspapers (including the
New York Times
editorial page) and
blogs raised obvious ethical questions about Organizing for
Action, the former Obama campaign organization, offering access to
the president for half-million dollar donations to their
hypocritical hate-the-one-percent coffers. (On Thursday, OFA said
it would not take money from corporations, lobbyists, or
foreigners, but I’m sure the SEIU and George Soros remain
welcome.)
The theme of Obama as non-leader is percolating through society
with Fox News’ Brit Hume calling the president’s sequester-related
antics “the most peculiar behavior I have ever seen by a
president.”
In Gallup’s daily tracking
poll of the president’s approval ratings, the most recent data
shows the first drop below 50% since September.
Obama’s obvious lack of ability to lead, or even interest in
leading, further highlighted by his playing golf while his henchmen
were playing up supposed sequester devastation, must be showing up
in the administration’s internal polling as well.
The Obama team nervously recognizes that the Teflon is being
scraped off this ultimate non-stick president. And while Obama did
have low approval numbers during much of his first term, he never
seemed to believe (nor did political betting odds say he should
have believed) that those numbers would translate into electoral
defeat in 2012. But this time feels different, not least because
the president’s remarkable change of behavior seems to acknowledge
a transformation of the political environment.
One might suggest that Obama simply wants to try a new way of
governing, that he really does want to get along with the
opposition. But that belies everything we know about the man. He
has the character of a tyrant, and never cooperates with anyone but
his most loyal subjects… and I do mean subjects.
In short, the Wednesday dinner smells (over the lobster) like
fear. Fear by Obama that the public may be, even if extremely
slowly, catching on to who and what he really is. Fear that
demonizing the Republicans for everything is no longer a workable
tactic after so overplaying his hand on the sequester. Fear that
his dream of taking back control of the House of Representatives,
even though the election is nearly two years away, may already be
slipping through his fingers.
Now let’s talk about the Republicans. They were absolutely right
to accept the invitation to dinner with the president. It is good
politics and at least offers an opportunity, however remote, for
better governing than we’ve had in the last few years. But they
need to recognize and take advantage of the president’s implicitly
admitted weakness.
The image of the dinner will make claims of the Senate GOP being
obstructionist slightly harder for Obama to prosecute, though he
will certainly continue with that line of attack whenever he thinks
it might help him.
While it is unlikely that anything said by the most pro-liberty
attendees such as Senators Johnson and Toomey actually penetrated
Barack Obama’s consciousness, blockaded as it is by a force field
of intense statist ideology and Keynesian econo-ignorance, anything
that helps the two sides understand each other better — even as
people rather than simply on a policy basis — is an exchange worth
having.
But Republicans should remember that this president has
demonstrated an approach to political debate much like the Qur’an’s
approach to honesty: it is permissible to lie to those not already
of the faith (leftist in one case, Islamic in the other) in order
to further the cause. The Qur’an says that if your intention is the
furthering of Islam, “Allah does not call you to account for what
is vain in your oaths.” Similarly, neither the “mainstream” media
nor most Obama voters will take Democratic politicians to task for
prevarications, lies, and all sorts of shenanigans (remember “deem
and pass”?) if done in the name of liberalism.
Another Islamic lesson which Republicans, who have been
outmaneuvered by Barack Obama far too often, should keep in mind:
The
Qur’an says that believers should only have friends among
unbelievers for the purpose of “guarding” against them, as a form
of security, much like Michael Corleone’s sage advice to “keep your
friends close, but your enemies closer.”
The senators who broke bread with Barack Obama must never forget
that to him, they are the enemy. Not the loyal opposition. Not
people with an honest disagreement. Not negotiating partners. The
enemy. To be manipulated until they can be finally and permanently
defeated.
After the meal, Senator Lindsey Graham encouraged Barack Obama
to continue the conversation, raising the image of Ronald Reagan
reaching out to Tip O’Neill. An important difference, however, is
that Obama is not reaching out to congressional leadership but
rather to rank and file, perhaps hoping to peel some votes away
from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Speaker of
the House John Boehner (despite Boehner’s being perceived by many
conservatives as already too willing to compromise.)
One wonders whether a sincere effort to work with Senate
Republicans would include GOP leadership, yet not one of the five
senators listed as GOP leadership on the Senate’s
web page was invited to the meal. Particularly knowing this
president’s history, the Wednesday fine dining and Thursday’s Ryan
repast are more likely political tactics and photo-ops than an
honest change of heart or mind.
There is good news: On Wednesday, for the first time in his
public life, President Obama decided not to stick other people with
the costs of his living large. And in case you had briefly
forgotten just whose side the press is on, both the
CBS News and
NBC News websites led the dinner story with the headlines “At
GOP outreach dinner, Obama picks up the tab” and “Reaching across
aisle, Obama picks up tab at dinner with GOP.” Oh, the
humanity.
And in another first for his presidency, Barack Obama seems to
have found a fairly good deal: The prix-fixe
dinner at Plume is only $85, plus a $5 supplement for the
foie gras, quite a bargain for a fine meal in Washington,
D.C. But then, spending one’s own money rather than everybody
else’s does tend to instill a little discipline, doesn’t it, Mr.
Obama?
