By Jon Matthews, Right & Wrong Radio
Jay Nordlinger recently noted in his article for the National Review (April 2011), the term “the right side of history” seems to be attached to everything in Washington much more these days than in the past. He writes:
“Lately, “the right side of history” is everywhere. We have long had the phrase. But people are doubling down, or tripling down, on their use of it. When they say it, what do people mean? They may mean ‘my side’, or ‘the good side’, or ‘the side that posterity will smile on.’ ”
There is a very viable reason for running this phrase into the proverbial ground in Washington. Nowhere has its use been more abused than when referring to America’s first half-white President, Barack Obama.
Since his inauguration in January 2009 (and even before that when he sported the “President Elect” emblem, itself historical since no other President ever felt the need to make everyone aware he had indeed been elected prior to being sworn in) Obama and his boot-licking media propaganda soldiers have cast almost everything Obama has done or attempted to do as being of “historical proportions”.
Obama himself claimed just days before the 2008 election that he would bring a “fundamental transformation” (meaning historical) to America much the same way he believed Ronald Reagan did during his terms in the 80’s (though for the record Reagan did not change America fundamentally, he just brought it back to where it once was).
In November of 2009 Obama signed into law what the media proclaimed as “historic hate crime legislation” in the form of the “Hate Crimes Prevention Act” as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. It expanded federal reach by giving state and local law enforcement the tools to prosecute hate crimes based on disability, gender, gender identity and sexual orientation. This bill supplemented the current federal hate crimes law, in place since 1968, which authorizes federal aid in cases of hate crimes committed because of a person’s race, color, religion, or national origin.
What we did not hear from the media or critics was the simply symbolic meaning such legislation holds in the mind of elitist progressives like Obama. To him this bill was merely a bone to the homosexual, bi-sexual community in an attempt to shore up this voting block by appearing to care about their quest for self-esteem and social equality. The true “historical impact” of such legislation signed by the man who said he would fundamentally transform America was making it a crime to disagree with this immoral lifestyle.
In July 2010 the headlines read, “President Obama Signs Historic Tribal Law & Order Act Into Law” a bill supporters lauded for providing aid and assistance to tribes on reservations in an attempt to better control crime formerly held to be outside Federal jurisdiction. What they failed to mention was the “historical impact” this bill would now exert upon these tribes in the form of financial liability for expenses incurred by government intervention into their lives.
In other words Obama managed to exert bureaucratic control and taxation on a people that up until this point in history were promised exemption from such interference. Obama basically voided treaties and laws that recognize tribes as separate nations and not accountable to Federal laws and in some cases taxation. Obama succeeded in making yet another segment of society dependent upon big government for its existence. Surprisingly, not a murmur of dissatisfaction came from any of the tribes involved.
In July of this year President Obama announced yet another historical achievement, this time an agreement with thirteen major automakers to pursue the next phase in the Administration’s “National Vehicle Program”. This program is being purported as the solve all solution to fuel prices by mandating auto makers to increase fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon for cars and light-duty trucks by Model Year 2025.
What the political historians are not reporting is the fact these types of agreements are not about solving our energy problem. They are about “fundamentally transforming” private sector jobs into nationalized public sector through regulation and subsidies. In essence this is a trade off of “historical proportions” by using taxpayer dollars to cover bad management practices, save union jobs (otherwise known as big campaign contributors) and bring about Cap & Trade legislation in exchange for federal control of not only what car makers produce but the population that will be forced to drive these hamster powered go carts.
Also in July of this year just after the “historic gay marriage” law passed in New York, President Obama finally completed his self-proclaimed “evolution” (which apparently began right after he was elected) regarding same sex marriage by saying he would finally concede support for the “Respect For Marriage Act”, yet another “historic bill” intended to repeal the “Defense Of Marriage Act” previously signed by Bill Clinton in 1996 and supported by a majority of Americans. This just months after ordering the Justice Department to no longer defend the “Defense Of Marriage Act” and the repeal of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” bill, also enacted by Bill Clinton.
While this debate still rages in Congress on the “Respect For Marriage Act” having not yet been voted on, again no one in the lamestream media offers commentary on the “historical impact” this type of legislation will have in regards to the relentless progressive attack on traditional institutions that have for generations been the foundation on which our exceptionalism exists.
Then of course, there is the “historical landmark” Obamacare health bill. You remember that one, right? The one we had to pass in order to find out what was in it?
AP titled their breaking news article as; “Senate passes historic health care legislation”, stating the following: “Senate Democrats passed a landmark health care bill in a climactic Christmas Eve vote that could define President Barack Obama’s legacy and usher in near-universal medical coverage for the first time in U.S. history.
The tally far exceeded the simple majority required for passage, but clearly showed the philosophical split between Democrats and Republicans over how American health care should be delivered.”
Of course there is no mention of the historical significance of this bill as being passed with very limited floor debate while being negotiated behind closed doors (thus Nancy Pelosi’s famous 30 second sound byte in which she states “…we need to pass the bill so you can find out what’s in it”) was admittedly confessed by more than one member of Congress as being not even being read because it was “…too difficult to understand” and has since been found to not only not do what we were told it would do, but will cost billions if not trillions more to implement than originally stated. But apparently to progressives the fact it being “historical” in its passing is the only relevant thing we need to be concerned with.
And most recently, the “historical debt ceiling deal” that held our attention these past weeks, though at times it seemed like it would go on for all eternity.
The difference with this “historical” event is there are many on all sides of the political spectrum decrying this charade of fiscal responsibility as being on the “wrong side of history”, or as I like to think, “the left side of history” which is always wrong.
The progressives claim victory in that they say the debate revealed the Republicans as ideological Neanderthals willing to destroy our economy for the sake of a few factious extremists that wanted to hold the nation hostage by defending the rich. They claim schism in the both the GOP and DNC proved Obama to be the only adult in the room, that he alone put reason above partisanship.
What they fail to report as “historic” is that this President is the very reason we even had this debate. He has spent at historic levels, quadrupling our debt more than every President up to Reagan combined in an attempt to stimulate the private sector through public funding. He is historically the only President that “maxed out” the country’s credit. He also has to his ledger the largest jobless numbers for the longest period of time since the Great Depression. He has brought with him, not unity but an historic partisan division with his rhetorical public scoldings of those who oppose him politically and brought class warfare to an almost violent level by encouraging those dependent on government entitlement programs to believe they are deserving of the fruit of someone’s else’s labor.
Another feather in Obama’s camp is his “historical” redefining of the English language. Changing history often means redefining its past. Words play an important part of this. “Extremists” are now those who want to retain the American way of government and commerce rather than oppose it. “Balanced approach” means to compromise principles to achieve a populist agenda under the guise of pragmatism in order to progress towards socialism. All these things Obama has accomplished to “historical proportion”.
Shortly after the Obamacare bill passed in March of 2010 Jonathan Chait penned an article in The New Republic” entitled, “Obama’s Place In History”. He offers this skewed perspective of Barack Obama:
“Let me offer a ludicrously premature opinion: Barack Obama has sealed his reputation as a president of great historical import. We don’t know what will follow in his presidency, and it’s quite possible that some future event–a war, a scandal–will define his presidency. But we do know that he has put his imprint on the structure of American government in a way that no Democratic president since Lyndon Johnson has.
The last two generations have no model for such a president. The only two other Democratic presidents of the last four decades are Jimmy Carter, a failure, and Bill Clinton, who enjoyed modest successes but failed in his most significant legislative fight [which by the way was Health Care Reform – emphasis by me] . Obama, who helped pull the country out of a depression and reshaped the health care system, has already accomplished far more than Clinton. (This isn’t necessarily Clinton’s fault–he lacked the votes to break a Republican filibuster that Obama has–but the historical convention is to judge a president by what he and the Congress achieve together.) He will never be plausibly compared with Jimmy Carter.”
Boy, talk about buying into the scam. Actually I think we could sum up Obama’s presidency and his future legacy in a few simple words: “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
That is a statement of historical importance and significance. And it best exemplifies Barack Obama and “The Left Side Of History”.
Jon Matthews, is the President of Terra Productions in California. He produces and hosts the weekly conservative talk show “Right & Wrong Radio” which broadcasts live every Friday at 12 PM (PST) from Puka Shell Studios in Garden Grove, California. View his website for information and show archives at: http://www.rightandwrongradio.com/. You can contact Jon at email@example.com.