With due respect to the millions who adore President Barack Obama, I just don't understand what causes people to hear only his lofty rhetoric and appeals for unity while turning a deaf ear to his polarizing language and actions, for example, on the subject of abortion.
In his book "The Audacity of Hope," he seemed determined to address every issue from the perspective of achieving some kind of common ground. We'll give a little bit of this to liberals and a little bit of that to conservatives and all live happily ever after.
I'm sorry, but I believe Obama calculatingly employs this approach mainly as a smoke screen to hide his real agenda, which resides anywhere but on common ground. He specializes in paying superficial respect to his opponents' arguments while proceeding to bury them. The examples are endless.
He calls forced union membership "free choice." He masquerades as a fiscal disciplinarian while authoring nationally bankrupting budgets in perpetuity.
He endorses capitalism as a superior economic system while undermining it with other words and actions. He condemns it as "unfair" and decries achievers as "selfish" and "greedy." He's set on restructuring our economy away from the free market and toward government control, from taking over private businesses to setting executive salaries to subsidizing mortgages to nationalizing health care. But he knows better than to condemn capitalism outright, because if he did, the American people finally would wise up to his endgame.
He tells us his decision to continue using military tribunals to adjudicate terrorists is not a flip-flop because he has put new protections in place. This will fool the uninitiated, but experts, such as Andy McCarthy, have shown these changes are merely cosmetic, designed to provide Obama political cover to conceal his flagrant reversal. And they talked about President George W. Bush's unwillingness to admit his mistakes!
In his speech at the University of Notre Dame, Obama said he doesn't believe people should demonize those holding opposing views and that each group can "make its case to the public with passion and conviction … without reducing those with differing views to caricature." But is that the spirit he and his colleagues exhibited at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner? Is that the spirit he demonstrated on the White House Web site when he "caricatured" all pro-lifers as "right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman's right to choose"?