The liberal media seem perplexed that President Obama plans to deviate from his usual State of the Union practice of "asking" Congress for a laundry list of policy proposals and "not talking about himself."
You heard me right; the narrative is that Obama hasn't talked about himself in previous SOTUs. If that's their perception, can you imagine what an ego-fest — a virtual orgy of self-congratulation — this could be? But enough about that for now. I just ask that you sympathize with those of us who feel as if we have to watch it because it promises to be even worse than the preceding ones — and that's a very high bar.
The media just can't help themselves. They are also wrong that Obama has generally asked Congress to embrace his policy agenda, as opposed to browbeating it (or the Supreme Court) to kowtow. After his initial honeymoon expired, Obama never really tried to convince Congress of anything. His SOTU speeches were mostly televised harangues at Congress trying to publicly shame it into supporting his proposals. For him, it's never been about bipartisanship.
Perhaps what the media should be saying is that Obama has given up any pretense of convincing Congress through popular pressure he generates from his bully pulpit, emphasis on "bully," because he is a lame duck, emphasis on "lame," and because this is a presidential election year.
Even if Obama did harbor the illusion that he could use his nonexistent magical powers to persuade Congress to assist him in further dividing and destroying the nation, he realizes that can't work this year. Even establishment Republicans are not going to cave on any of Obama's remaining obsessions.
But any change from him will be only pro forma. Obama is an ideological zealot, still hellbent on advancing his leftist agenda. Though he probably won't try to cajole Congress into acting on his behalf, don't think for a second that he's abandoned his agenda.
Being who he is, Obama will not be deterred. You'll note that congressional opposition has never given him pause — and certainly not enough to reconsider whether his ideas are in line with a majority of Americans. It has just angered him enough to grow ever more lawless and impose his agenda unilaterally.
I suppose some people still haven't figured this out yet, but Obama's narcissism doesn't just drive him to establish a presidential legacy. He aims much higher. He doesn't see his transformative potential limited by a mere two terms in office. He seeks to continue laying the groundwork for further radical changes once out of office, both through a Democratic successor and by remaining an active player in the private sector as a "community organizer."
He plans on returning to community organizing when he's out of office, but we know that both "community" and "organizing" are euphemisms. He has no intention of restricting his activities to the community level, and he doubtlessly aims to be more proactive than "organizing" implies.
Ironically, Obama has been remarkably unsuccessful at using his "organizing" skills inside the system — by getting Congress to support his legislative proposals — with the major exception of the budgetary process. But he's been extremely effective at "organizing" people around the country to do his radical bidding — stirring up racial strife and class warfare, fanning the flames of distrust between minorities and law enforcement, and alienating various other groups against each other. He has every reason to believe he can continue to be effective in this regard when out of office — as if this were a worthwhile goal.
Don't just take my word for it. In a video preview of his address, Obama said: "What I want to focus on in this State of the Union address (is) not just the remarkable progress we've made, not just what I want to get done in the year ahead, but what we all need to do together in the years to come — the big things that will guarantee an even stronger, better, more prosperous America for our kids, the America we believe in. That's what's on my mind."
It is important to ask, who is "we"? What is "progress"? What are the "big things"? And what is "the America we believe in"?
We know "we" is not those who believe in the American idea, the Constitution, American exceptionalism or a strong America. We know "progress" is not progress but the forward march of socialism and leftist cultural momentum. We know that some of "the big things" are further advancing socialized medicine, punishment of the "rich," enabling Iran, flooding our borders, further emasculating our military and weakening America, gun control, and environmental fascism. We know that "the America we believe in" is not the America we believe in.
We'd better brace ourselves, folks. This last year of two miserable terms is not going to be better. Obama has big plans for his pen and phone, and his upcoming speech is going to be a bizarre victory lap combined with in-your-face promises of more (and worse) to come.
We can never let our guard down.