Obama Calls Conservatives Extreme, But Who Is Really Extreme?

Propaganda is a soft weapon; hold it in your hands too long, and it will move about like a snake, and strike the other way.” – Jean Anouilh

The more desperate Obama becomes, the more often he appears on tv, or in the newspapers, to tell the American people just how awful the Republicans are. I’ve said it a million times, but it bears repeating: a classic trick of the propagandist is to pin on his enemies his own faults. In a recent interview with Tom Friedman of the New York Times, Obama took numerous swipes at the “extremists” who just aren’t letting him help the country.

What you’ve seen with our politics…partly because of the Balkanization of media so people just watch what reinforces their deepest biases, partly because of big money in politics, is increasingly politicians are rewarded for taking the most extreme, maximalist positions…Sooner or later, that catches up with you. You end up not being able to move forward on things we need to move forward on. We need to reform our immigration system. That would be good not just for our domestic economy but for our position in the world…that ideological extremism and maximalist position is much more prominent right now in the Republican Party than the Democrats. Democrats have problems, but overall if you look at the Democratic consensus, it’s a pretty commonsense, mainstream consensus. It’s not a lot of wacky ideological nonsense, the way it is generally fact-based and reason-based…we’re not pretending that somehow having a whole bunch of uninsured people is the American way. We’re doing things that are pretty sensible.

First, Obama lambastes the Balkanized media, which tells people what they want to hear. Of course, he means Fox News. It’s interesting that he brings that up, considering that Fox is the one, and only television news source that leans right. In the face of every other network, NBC, CBS, ABC, UNIVISION, CNN, HLN, and MSNBC, which all lean heavily left, I think it’s ok to have a singular network that educates its audience from another perspective. More than that, Fox is the most trusted name in news, according to a recent survey by the Public Religion Research Institute. There is partisanship in the news, but the left still operates a majority of the media Americans see on a daily basis. Obama cannot point the finger at Fox while ignoring the outlets rabidly advocating his own views. According to Pew:

In the final stretch of the [2012] campaign, nearly half (46%) of Obama’s coverage on Fox was negative, while just 6% was positive in tone. But MSNBC produced an even harsher narrative about the Republican in the race: 71% of Romney’s coverage was negative, versus 3% positive.”

Obama then moves right on to the second most popular liberal target, “big money.” The left loves to argue that Republicans are in league with “big money,” which they say is damaging to the processes of democracy. What they fail to mention is the volume of money flowing to Democrats via Hollywood, and big leftist donors, such as George Soros, and Tom Steyer. According to Huffington Post, Soros made exceptional donations to the Obama campaign in 2012:

A spokesperson for Priorities USA Action, the super PAC backing President Barack Obama’s reelection, confirmed to The Huffington Post Thursdaythat billionaire investor George Soros has committed $1 million to the PAC. A spokesman for House Majority PAC also confirmed to HuffPost that Soros had given a combined $500,000 to House Majority PAC and the Senate Majority PAC in September.”

And according to William Bigelow of Breitbart:

For those who complain that the GOP is the party of the rich, consider this: according to OpenSecrets.org, in the 2013-2014 electoral cycle, the leading individual political donor in the nation was billionaire Tom Steyer, the leftist hardliner, joined by his wife, who gave a staggering $20.4 million to Democratic and leftist causes. That figure was more than double the second-highest donor, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who gave 95% of his roughly $9.5 million in donations to Democrats and leftist causes…the third highest donor was Fred Eychaner, who gave 100% of his 5.8 million to Democrats and leftist causes.

The left clutches their pearls every time the Koch brothers donate money to conservative causes, claiming that conservative money has too large an effect in politics, yet their side outspends conservatives. Once again, Obama is leaving out some crucial information in his indictment of his opposition.

Obama then treads into nonsense territory, calling out Republicans for holding “extreme,” and “maximalist” positions, something he says Democrats don’t do. He mentions that his party would like to pass immigration reform but that Republicans refuse to help, and that Republicans want a nation of uninsured Americans. Supposedly, the conservative positions on immigration, and Obamacare are extreme. Let’s take a look at that though.

Is it extreme to want a secure border prior to reforming immigration? Is it extreme to call lawbreakers what they are, and want them deported (Australia did it)? Is it extreme to think that we should be allowed to own guns because our constitution says so? Is it extreme to want justice for the Americans killed in Benghazi, when the evidence shows that Obama, and Hillary were negligent? Conversely, it seems to me that the left’s positions are the extreme ones. Obama wants to give citizenship to millions of people who came to the United States illegally. The Democrats refuse to even look at any bill that would first secure the border. The Democrats want to take guns away from law abiding citizens. The Democrats want women to be allowed to terminate their child up to the point of birth. Obama even favors infanticide. Google it.

On to the best part. Obama claims that Republicans want a nation of uninsured people. Apparently, the ACA was Obama’s solution to uninsured Americans–although, it wasn’t a very good one. If the intent of the ACA was to help the uninsured, Obama failed miserably. According to Gallup, even the state in which the percentage of uninsured decreased the most (Arkansas), there are still 12.4% of people without coverage. Moreover, premiums have increased dramatically for many Americans, and many have been forced off of the insurance plans they wanted to keep. Finally, Americans who are paying more are paying for things they don’t need, such as child care, and maternity leave. This is what happens when a government bureaucracy takes over. In contrast, there are several ways by which the cost of healthcare could have been lowered without a government intervention. That’s what Republicans want. They want sensible, market-based solutions, while the left wants the government to handle the entire industry. Which of those two options seems more extreme to you?

According to Obama, he, and his party offer common sense solutions:

It’s not a lot of wacky ideological nonsense, the way it is generally fact-based and reason-based.

But look at each case individually. Are market-based solutions more extreme than Obamacare? Regardless of the effectiveness of Obamacare, or market solutions, one hands the entirety of health care over to the government, while the other does not. Is punishing lawbreakers more extreme than amnesty for millions? Is the conservative media more extreme than the leftist media? Is banning late-term abortion (when the infant is fully formed) more extreme than allowing it? No. The conservative positions in every case are all less extreme.

Obama wants us to believe that conservatives are extremists, but the cold, stark reality is that he is the extremist.