Liberals Betrayed By Obama!

In October of this year, I did an article, the third in the series actually, outlining the way liberals think. In that article, I explained that liberals put their faith in their leaders, not their ideas. This is why they can repeat the same old mistakes time and time again without learning a thing -- because they conclude that the failure was the result of poor leadership rather than a flawed theory. Well, things are about to turn ugly for Obama.

Here's why:

As I mentioned in the October article, liberals need to feel worshipful of their leaders, which is why they obsess over them, why they dream about them, why they trying to dress like them and eat the same foods, and why they need to see them as smarter, sexier, and all around superior to everyone else. Basically, liberalism is a cult.

So what happens when things go wrong? Well, like most cultists, they react poorly. They don’t look at the facts and realize that their ideas are wrong -- that they themselves were to blame, no, they don’t do that. Instead, they turn on their leader. They start to see the problems as the result of a failure of leadership, not a failure of theory. And like most cultists, this quickly descends into anger and feelings of betrayal. We’re now entering that stage with Obama.

We declared Obama a failure at the beginning of October of this year. Yet, despite the obvious evidence available, the left continued to hold out. They wrote articles outlining the hopes they still had for him. They talked about his future successes. They awarded him a Nobel Prize. And they tried to believe his failures were temporary and were the result of vile Republicans Judases.

But the left has finally caught up to reality, and boy are they angry.

The leftist Der Spiegel (The Mirror) outlines Obama’s foreign policy failures and worries that he will over-react to avoid appearing “too soft.” They note unflattering comparisons to Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush -- these are not the measured words of analysis, but a virtual rant against a leader who has “lost some of his initial stature” and whose policies “proved to be an illusion.”

Indeed, his foreign policy has come to nothing. The center-left government in Tokyo has pulled out of refueling missions in the Indian Ocean. China gave Obama no concessions whatsoever. It will not reduce greenhouse gas emissions, re-evaluate its currency, or anything else. It will not agree to sanctions on Iran and it will not work toward nuclear non-proliferation. Russia likewise will not agree to sanction on Iran, even after we sold out our Eastern European friends. Israel won’t stop building settlements. Hondurans vote today, and whatshisname is still stuck in the Brazilian embassy.

This has become too much failure to ignore. And Der Spiegel is not alone in seeing this as a failure of Obama personally. Former New York Times reporter and former President of the Council on Foreign Relations, Leslie Gelb, wrote a little piece titled “Amateur Hour at the White House”, which notes everything Obama could have achieved in his Pacific trip, but concludes: “Mr. Obama should have taken a well-deserved vacation in Hawaii.”

And it’s not just foreign policy either. With Obama’s policies being exposed as the unpalatable by-products of fools, and his poll numbers crashing about as low as poll numbers can (he’s below 50% in the latest Gallup poll, with his approval standing at 39% among whites and 42% among people older than 65 -- Rasmussen has his approval ratings at 46%), the utopian dream is over.

The Washington Post notes that:

“Growing discontent over the economy and frustration with efforts to speed its recovery boiled over Thursday on Capitol Hill in a wave of criticism and outright anger directed at the Obama administration.”

According to the Post, the Congressional Black Caucus is “exasperated” by Obama’s handling of the economy, so much so that they blocked Barney Frank’s attempts to regulate the banks in retaliation. Democratic Rep. Peter DeFazio called last week for Tim Geithner to step down because of his handling of the AIG meltdown.

Pro-abortion groups are furious about the health care bill, and they blame Obama for not handling this matter better. Gay groups angrily blame Obama for the failure of the gay marriage proposal in Maine. Environmental groups are using language about Obama that was formerly reserved only for the likes of Bushitler.

Even the comedians are finally taking shots at Obama. . . and they’re getting nastier and nastier.

So what does this mean? Well, if you realize how liberals think, you’ll see where this is headed. They expected Obama to install liberal policies, to fill the world with good intentions, and for everything to work out. He was going to eliminate nuclear weapons, show that talk could solve the issues with Iran and China and North Korea and Russia, generate millions of jobs in green technology, end pollution, give us nationalized health care, tear down the rich, build up the poor, and make a better, nicer, happier, more humble United States. But none of that has happened and none of it will, and they are starting to realize it.

Since liberals do not view government as the implementation of policies, but instead see it as the tool to be used by specific leaders to make the world better, the fault lies with Obama, not liberal policies. Right now they are dazed and confused. Why isn't this working? If Obama is all-powerful and he loves us, why does he let bad things happen? Soon they will see Obama as a false prophet. They will count his broken promises and they will declare themselves misled.

The anger stage is only now beginning. As it continues to rise, watch for articles by leftists that conclude that “Obama isn’t capable of doing what needs to be done.” Shortly thereafter, watch for articles about Obama’s “false promises” and “lies.”

Finally, watch for the magic word: “betrayal.”