What is it with Obama?

A question from GB:

 

What do Americans really think of Obama?

 

The ether is full of venomous blogs calling him a socialist, a liar, a foreigner, a socialist, a business-hater and much more besides. It’s just as well that US defamation laws are much more relaxed than ours.

 

The degree of vilification is breath-taking. Some of the cartoons are an affront to decency.

 

Was there ever a time when POTUS was subject to this torrent of abuse? American tradition is that regardless of the incumbent the office of President is treated with respect. Dubya took a lot of stick, but it was mostly good-humoured and focused on his malapropisms, many of which were pure invention (he never did say that the French have no word for ‘entrepreneur)’.

 

I note that his approval ratings have gone far south, but they are far above those for Congress. He started with so much hope and enthusiasm. What has gone wrong? His domestic policy is obscure and his foreign policy non-existent.

 

Politics itself seems to be in a bind. The Constitution is predicated on compromise. This seems to be almost totally absent, with Congressmen interested only in re-election without any regard for the big issues. Inter alia, it keeps buggering up O’s painstakingly crafted FTAs. The Tea Party mob comes across as right-wing extremists with no interest in democracy, only in imposing their views on the majority Republicans. The consequence seems to be widespread disillusion with the political process and withering contempt for its practitioners.

 

Politics in the UK is a brutal pastime; PMQs are a blood-sport. But everyone knows the boundaries between what is and what is not acceptable, and the electorate would not accept the character-assassination that is commonplace in the US, or indeed the muck-raking that goes on simply to besmirch a character which surely deters  sound people from offering themselves for election.

 

And, of course, defamation laws are much tougher under English law, with Judges and juries tending towards the plaintiff.

 

A reply from Texas:

 

There has been no marked change in these attitudes except for a minority of thinking people who initially supported O for their own reasons, but who have since changed their minds based on his antics over the past 5.5 years. If an election were to be held today, O would win. Why? Because of  our changing demographics. O has the black vote, the Hispanic vote, the youth vote and enough of the liberal white vote to tally over 50% of the electorate.

 

Our population is kept so much in the dark with respect to international news that we could easily believe O has singlehandedly upstaged China, kept Russia in abatement, brought warring factions in Syria together, put Israel in its place and restarted relations with Iran. The mainstream media continues to dote on and revere almost every word Obama utters while ignoring almost completely his lack of compromise, his abuse of power and the various scandals in which he has been involved, e.g. NCA, IRS, Benghazi, Fast and Furious.

 

Untested rumours abound that Michele Obama is livid with O's carousing and lack of family solidarity She hopes to get even with some post-tenure actions beginning with a divorce. Meanwhile, she is gadding about in designer frocks while bemoaning the status of our burgeoning poor classes.

 

One might say with respect to abuse of power, that the US Constitution is predicated on the concept of compromise. I might trump that by suggesting it is predicated on the balance of power. By averting Congressional oversight through very iffy Presidential Decrees, O has gone way out of line and risks being challenged through impeachment.

 

Although unlikely to be successful, such action would serve notice that our dear leader has gone seriously over the top. It is abundantly clear to many political pundits that O's pen and phone style of leadership violates the Constitution by impinging upon Congressional powers. At the same time, O has pretty much ignored the Supreme Court which, in the end, may well decide against him should embryonic legal efforts to curtail him through adjudication based upon abuse of power.

 

Meantime, back in the Senate, Minority Leader Jon Bohener has managed to tone down Republican antipathy against O to the point where the annual issue over default spending limits will not be contested. This is a wise move as Senate Republicans, especially those of the Tea Party persuasion, were becoming labelled as spoilers and sore heads over their past antics to embarrass, curtail and generally hamstring Presidential spending programs.

 

This is not to say, however, that our ultra Conservative members of the Senate and House have been outflanked. They just got smarter and will surely not pull any punches over future spending and budgetary issues.

 

 

All in all, most Americans who dislike O  are more and more content to wait him out. They will focus immediate efforts at gaining a Republican majority  in the Senate and holding on to their majority in the House while simultaneously planning for a decisive Republic win in 2016.