Conservative Political Commentary

...anti-socialist, anti-globalist, and usually with an attempt at historical and economic context

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Obama’s Enemies List: Are You on It?


President Barack Obama, in a very un-presidential manner, is going about promoting his political agenda in large measure by criticizing, trying to marginalize, and ultimately bring down those whom he perceives to be his political enemies (rather than “opponents”). Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN) has cautioned the President that his actions are beginning to look like those of Richard Nixon, who, seemingly in a paranoia mode, made a list of “enemies” he wanted his administration to go after, and some of whom he did actually attack, using the resources of government. This pursuit of “enemies” led to the eventual downfall of his presidency.

“‘An “enemies list” only denigrates the Presidency and the Republic itself,’ Alexander said on the Senate floor. ‘These are unusually difficult times, with plenty of forces encouraging us to disagree. Let’s not start calling people out and compiling an enemies list. Let’s push the street-brawling out of the White House and work together on the truly presidential issues: creating jobs, reducing health care costs, reducing the debt, creating clean energy.’” [1]

Sorry, Senator. You are correct, but you may be too late. The enemies-list operation is in full swing already. Any people or groups of people who have criticized (to any significant effect) some part of the Obama agenda may very well find themselves to be his target, if they aren’t already.

A partial listing of Obama’s “enemies”:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
– This is yet another example of Obama trying to marginalize and take down a traditionally very influential group. Obama is against any effective lobbying group that tries to benefit the private sector or the American economy. A prosperous people don’t look to government for everything. An impoverished people may.



Fox News – Anita Dunn, David Axelrod and others have been sent out to try to discredit Fox News and even get “mainstream” news outlets to deny that Fox is a legitimate news organization. This will have some effect, perhaps, but Fox News’ ratings are up substantially since this “war on Fox News” broke out.

Rush Limbaugh and conservative talk radio – The administration will probably try some back-door version of the Fairness Doctrine to silence conservative talk radio (and Fox New as well). Mark Lloyd, the “diversity czar” of the FCC has no respect for freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Rush’s ratings are up.

Health insurance companies
– Democrats in Congress are currently working to deny health insurers the exemption from anti-trust laws that they currently enjoy. The objective is to strip the states of their power to regulate insurance and at the same time put the insurance companies either out of business or directly under the thumb of the federal government, and further obfuscate the costs of their health care plan.



Big oil – All energy-related industries, as well as consumers, are likely to suffer as a result of cap and trade, if it is enacted. This will punish our entire country by bringing on another depression. States that are already suffering the most will likely be hardest hit, but all will be hurt. Are you ready?

Auto manufacturers
– Current CAFE standards and the GM and Chrysler takeovers should be punishment enough, if any were needed (which it isn’t), but Obama is going to tighten CAFE standards further and dictate what kind of cars can be made. Many vehicles currently available will be gone.

Fast food – Federal and some local laws will more strenuously regulate fast food providers as to location, nutritional information disclosure, and allowable menus. This is an area where endless harassment of citizens can and will take place.

Conservatives on the internet – Obama is already pushing for authority to take over private networks on the pretext of “cyber-security” concerns. Proposed “net neutrality” rules will further restrict internet freedom. People have remarked on how the internet has not brought about “Big Brother” controls as some have feared, but we haven’t seen the outcome yet. The technology is there for massive abuse and government control. The FCC “diversity czar” is going after internet conservatives also.

According to Investors’ Business Daily, even though “net neutrality” is advertised as creating more opportunities for internet access, “[t]he issue is not access, but control. In February 2008, FCC diversity czar Mark Lloyd, an admirer of what Hugo Chavez did to silence Venezuela's media, wrote about net neutrality in an article titled ‘Net Neutrality Is A Civil Rights Issue’ and published by CommonDreams.org.

“‘Unfortunately, the powerful cable and telecom industry doesn't value the Internet for its public interest benefits,’ Lloyd wrote. ‘Instead, these companies too often believe that to safeguard their profits, they must control what content you see and how you get it.’ Lloyd feels government should be the voice controlling what you see and hear.” [2]

The Republican Party – The Obama White House is trying to marginalize the Republican Party as a non-factor. The main obstacle to this is the fact that the American people, by a majority, support none of Obama’s main initiatives. Republicans could capitalize on this a lot more than they have been doing. But if they’re afraid of appearing too combative, they will instead appear to have rolled over and capitulated. New candidates will be needed if the GOP is to be revived in 2010, even though most voters want that to happen.

Etc., Etc. – Look for more enemies-list activity in upcoming days. They’re just getting started, and they’ve got to move fast.

Then there are those the Administration and Congress are going after a little less directly, without trying to publicly discredit them specifically. They’re not enemies so much as targets to be dealt with in clearing the way for and financing the Obama program:

Doctors who oppose Obamacare – Doctors are going to find their government reimbursements decreased (to lower “costs”), which will lead to more doctors dropping out of government-reimbursed programs, or out of medical practice entirely. But that’s OK with Obama if he gets his government-dominated program going. However, the attempt to cut reimbursements may well prove politically impossible.

The private sector in general – How many more businesses and industries must be taken over by the government? Apparently many more, will be, not necessarily by ownership, but by numerous new taxes and regulations and zealous enforcement from the growing government sector. Corporate profits are the liberals’ piggy bank, they think. They’ll worry about the economy and jobs (along with Afghanistan) later, time permitting.

The “rich” who aren’t part of his support team
– Hollywood liberal elites, professional athletes, union leaders, rich trial lawyers and other liberal donors can hope to fare well in Obama’s fascist crackdowns. Some large companies are said to be cutting deals to try to gain a favorable position. But the rich taxpayers in general are considered ripe for the picking. Obama does not care about unemployment or the bad economy. It’s all about getting his great fascist program in place before the bottom falls out of his popularity.

American Taxpayers in general (investors, professionals and other workers)
– These will do well to be able to keep their jobs or the better part of their investments in the Obama-depressed economy that we’ll see if Obama’s big agenda items are enacted. Forget about green jobs. A few thousand of those will do little to help the 15-million-plus who are unemployed, not counting those who have given up looking for work, or have taken part-time jobs.

The Obama Administration is probably the most activist freedom-destroying and takeover-minded (i.e., “progressive”) administration in our history. Woodrow Wilson and FDR might come close, but at least they could point to World War I and the Great Depression and World War II as excuses for their activism. Obama still tries to blame George W. Bush long after it’s too late to do so. This is not the change most people thought we were going to get. Soon only the most hardcore leftists and Obama fans (and some others bought off or severely arm-twisted) will be able to willingly support the Obama program.


[1] Politico Staff, “Alexander to Obama: No ‘enemies list,’” Politico.com via Yahoo News, 10/21/09, at http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20091021/pl_politico/28549_1.

[2] IBD Editorials, “A Power Grab Called ‘Net Neutrality,’” 10/21/09, at http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=509810.

10 comments:

A Reason-Based Initiative said...

I'm beginning to seriously wonder: Have you any ideas not acquired from watching Fox News? The partisan support for a specific "news" organization may be unprecedented, as is the participatory behavior of Fox News in organizing and encouraging protests against the government (unprecedented in America that is, this sort of thing has happened in Venezuela), but Obama's treatment of Fox News is not only entirely appropriate, but innocuous when compared to George Bush's persistent pressuring of the news media.

George Bush threatened to CRIMINALLY PROSECUTE the NYT for reporting on Bush counter-terror policies, imprisoned foreign journalists, refused to grant the media even basic information about Dick Cheney's whereabouts, and compiled a list of "reliably friendly" news analysts who they could grant exclusives to in order to marginalize those who were critical. The Bush DOD claimed to have developed a group who they could count on to "carry [their] water for [them]."

It wouldn't be all that unusual if Fox News' coverage of Obama was colored with bias. But Fox News is essentially a propaganda and research arm of the Republican Party. If Obama claims to avoid Fox because he doesn't consider it a legitimate news organization, I don't see how you could honestly disagree with his reasoning. Actually, I could. You watch too much Fox News.

A Reason-Based Initiative said...

Also, I might add, it is a GOOD thing for Dems that Fox News and Rush Limbaugh's ratings are up; nothing emphasizes the fanaticism of the Republican Party more to those independents who both parties need in order to win elections. Look at it this way, Fox News dominates the other cable news outlets, and Rush Limbaugh's ratings have never been higher, but according to a WaPo poll only 19% of Americans are confident in the Republican Party. Will the measly 2% of Americans who watch Fox News all vote Republicans? OF COURSE. Luckily in a democracy you don't have to win the loudest voters, you have to win the most voters.

The Democrats don't have to be well-liked, they just have to be less hated than than the GOP. And fortunately Beck/O'Reilly/Hannity/Rush are ensuring that this is the case. It's absurd to say that Repubs aren't "combative" enough. I'm just trying to help your side out right now, unless you enjoy wandering the wilderness of political irrelevancy you should focus more on developing a governing philosophy and less on the nontroversy of the day and Obama's creeping socialism/communism/fascism/secularism.

Eddie said...

Looks like Fox News has struck a nerve. But Bill Kristol is correct that Obama’s problem is not Fox News, but the American public, a majority of whom do not support Obama’s health care plan. Also, the high unemployment rate is not being ignored by the public, nor is Obama’s total ineffectiveness in dealing with it. If he’s really trying to help the economy, he’s a total nitwit. And he’s not that.

As for “Carrying water,” the MSM has been Obama’s loyal servant since he started running for president. Their job is to spin his missteps and make him look brilliant.
I would trust Fox News and Rush much, much more than the out-of-touch, elitist MSM, featuring the doubtful work of Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews. Not many would have much credibility, but there are some. Fox doesn’t ridicule conservatives, so they’re considered right-wing. And of course, their commentators are right of center. You have taken up the party line expressed by Anita Dunn about Fox being an arm of the Republican Party. That is less true than saying that the MSM is the White House Propaganda Department.

George W. was nowhere near Obama in destroying freedom; rather he focused on protecting it for all of us. As for the NYT, someone broke federal laws when that secret information was leaked and the newspaper earns no approval from me for publishing it. Of course, G.W. didn’t have them prosecuted. Bush was the least responsive to criticism of any president I have known of. Obama, on the other hand, is extremely thin-skinned and vindictive. Maybe Bush tried to choose favorable news outlets for interviews, but that is not the same thing as publicly saying that they weren’t valid news organizations.
All presidents want favorable news coverage, and I don’t blame Obama for wanting that too.

What’s wrong with the White House attack on Fox News and the other “enemies” is the attempt to demonize and destroy, rather than simply attack and debate. Bush never did that. If Obama wants to practice “gangster government” then that’s what we’ll have. People can see through his strategy. He’ll soon have more enemies than friends. He probably does already.

Eddie said...

Looks like Fox News has struck a nerve. But Bill Kristol is correct that Obama’s problem is not Fox News, but the American public, a majority of whom do not support Obama’s health care plan. Also, the high unemployment rate is not being ignored by the public, nor is Obama’s total ineffectiveness in dealing with it. If he’s really trying to help the economy, he’s a total nitwit. And he’s not that.

As for “Carrying water,” the MSM has been Obama’s loyal servant since he started running for president. Their job is to spin his missteps and make him look brilliant.
I would trust Fox News and Rush much, much more than the out-of-touch, elitist MSM, featuring the doubtful work of Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews. Not many would have much credibility, but there are some. Fox doesn’t ridicule conservatives, so they’re considered right-wing. And of course, their commentators are right of center. You have taken up the party line expressed by Anita Dunn about Fox being an arm of the Republican Party. That is less true than saying that the MSM is the White House Propaganda Department.

George W. was nowhere near Obama in destroying freedom; rather he focused on protecting it for all of us. As for the NYT, someone broke federal laws when that secret information was leaked and the newspaper earns no approval from me for publishing it. Of course, G.W. didn’t have them prosecuted. Bush was the least responsive to criticism of any president I have known of. Obama, on the other hand, is extremely thin-skinned and vindictive. Maybe Bush tried to choose favorable news outlets for interviews, but that is not the same thing as publicly saying that they weren’t valid news organizations.
All presidents want favorable news coverage, and I don’t blame Obama for wanting that too.

What’s wrong with the White House attack on Fox News and the other “enemies” is the attempt to demonize and destroy, rather than simply attack and debate. Bush never did that. If Obama wants to practice “gangster government” then that’s what we’ll have. People can see through his strategy. He’ll soon have more enemies than friends. He probably does already.

Eddie said...

Sorry about the duplicated comments. I pressed a wrong button.

If you want polls, try Rasmussen. As of October 22, Obama has a favorable rating of 47% of likely voters and an unfavorable rating or 52%. The “strongly disapprove” category is 39% compared to 26% strongly approving. Also, the generic congressional ballot stands at 42% for Republicans and 37% for Democrats as of October 20.

Republicans, that is elected members of the House and Senate, have treated Obama much more kindly and gently than he deserves, and have been nowhere near as obnoxious as Democrats were to Bush. I do think the Republicans have hurt themselves by not being forceful enough and being to reluctant to advance a conservative agenda.

If Democrats want to do well in the next election, they need to consider a few facts. (1) George W. Bush is not in office, nor will he be on the ballot. (2) The American people do not want the socialist policies Obama is trying to force upon them. (3) High taxes and ridiculous regulation, let alone insurance mandates and the like, will not be accepted by the people. People usually find ways around bad laws. (4) Members who support Obamacare and cap and trade had better be in liberal districts, or they are unlikely to be back after the 2010 elections.

As for socialism, fascism, etc., Obama and the Congressional democratic leaders demonstrate little to no respect for the Bill of Rights, and it’s questionable that they understand it very well. It seems that just about every initiative from Obama (at least the major ones) involve limiting or removing freedom and trying to increase government control and power. The federal government is already involved in too many things it shouldn’t be, and Obama is stretching it well past its constitutional limits with no letup in sight.

I don’t get a great many ideas from Fox News, but they often provide good analysis, e.g., Krauthammer in this video. But in straight news reporting, Fox is less opinionated than most network and other cable channel reporters. Since they aren’t so slanted left, they appear more right-wing by comparison.

Thanks for taking the time to write your comments. I do appreciate it.

A Reason-Based Initiative said...

Not able to update my blog as often these days because of my new job. But I did devote some free time that I have to addressing your response to me, because I found it worthy of response. You can check out my response over at my blog. It's a little snarky, and I'm a little too tired to be directly debating somebody, but we have serious differences worth exploring.

Michelle Rosalyn Matthews said...

Great job! I'm gonna link to this article in an upcoming post if that's alright. This is awesome.

Eddie said...

Michelle,

Of course, it's fine. Thank you.

Michelle Rosalyn Matthews said...

I posted your article on my blog. I'm sorry, but it was just so good, well-written, and put-together. I put up a link to your blog as well and your name above the post. I basically did that quote thing so that it could be easily seen upon view. Thank you for writing this! Incredible work!

Eddie said...

Michelle,

Thanks for your kind words. I'm honored to to have this on your blog. Best wishes.

Eddie