The majority of the electorate recognized the
congressional retardation of most of the President's initiatives in the first term simply on the basis of defeating the President without any coherent reasoning on its impact on America.
An interesting quote from Senator McCain was shot out there from
The Hill:
"Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said he 'would have liked to have seen some outreach' in Obama's speech. 'This is the eighth [inauguration] that I've been to and always there's been a portion of the speech where [the president says], 'I reach out my hand because we need to work together.' That wasn't in this speech,' McCain said."
The question to John McCain is what "outreach" are you referring to and is there such a word in Washington, DC? When you held the hand of a foreign policy novice in Governor Mitt Romney during the campaign, you trained him to attack everything Benghazi to the point of putting his foot in his mouth during the debate where the moderator Candy Crowley reluctantly injected the facts to cool his questioning of the President.
Since Benghazi did not lead to your desired results, you mustered all the venom necessary to upend Ambassador Susan Rice's nomination for Secretary of State. Was there any sort of "outreach" to Ambassador Susan Rice to get to the facts surrounding her statements to media that turned out to be actual talking points issued by the CIA? John McCain first assembled a team of Senators and began a campaign to launch an all out assault on the reputation of a career diplomat before all of the facts were on the table.
When Senator Kelly Ayotte barely muffled her shrill voice over the throng of reporters to say she was even more "troubled" about Rice's nomination after meeting with her, we began to realize this had little to do with the facts, but it was a concerted effort to disrupt solely for political reasons alone.
What about Congresses' outreach to "We the people". Congresses approval rating is at an all time low and McCain hails from a party that has seemed to lose any coherent understanding of the aspirations of Americans. The GOP's collective murmurs to the inaugural speech seems to be as out of touch as the rhetoric during the primary debates where we heard a lot about "food stamp President", repeal health care and self deportation.
When Republicans use the broad characterization of "liberalism" to describe the Presidents inaugural speech without understanding the impact of his policy initiatives on people, they remain stuck in the ideological quicksand that will prevent them from not only re-branding, but fundamentally outlining a series of policies that Americans can identify with.
Amongst all of the chatter from opponents of the inauguration speech we don't hear any coherent legislative initiatives or ideas to counter the veracity of the President's speech and actual programs instituted by the President.
Share This Article
