Wide Left

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I watched the New England Patriots beat the Baltimore Ravens in the AFC championship game on Sunday. The Patriots won 23-20 because Billy Cundiff, the Ravens’ field goal kicker missed a relatively short field goal at the end of the game that, had he made it, would have tied the score and provided the Ravens with a chance to win. What does an NFL game have to do with politics, you ask? Well, nothing and everything. Nothing because NFL games are played by a consistent set of rules, something Democrats don’t seem to be able to do. Everything because during his State of the Union address, President Barack Hussein Obama scored with the left/liberals/progressives and the MSM, even though his message was, like Billy Cundiff’s field goal try, wide left. How did he score? Simple! He moved the goal posts so that his message was right on target, centering the goal posts. He has done it before and the left ate it up, so why should he quit now?

How does Obama claim to score? By claiming credit for what may have happened, had he not been elected; by moving the goal posts.

In his first State of the Union address he said, “Over the next two years, this plan [the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or stimulus] will save or create three and a half million jobs. Thanks to our recovery plan, we will double the nation’s supply of renewable energy over the next three years…. We have also made the largest investment in basic research funding in American history; an investment that will spur not only new discoveries in energy, but breakthroughs in medicine, science, and technology…. We will soon lay down thousands of miles of power lines that can carry new energy to cities and towns around the country.” Remember? Well, guess what?! Except for investing (wasting tax dollars), none of the things he promised have happened.

And also remember that in 2009 and 2010, Democrats controlled both the Senate and the House of Representatives, so laying blame on those “Wascally Wepublicans” won’t wash.

All of his economic promises were based on projections; on models. Obama chose to use a model which assumes, despite a body of contrary evidence, that every $1 of government spending will yield $1.50 or more in higher GDP. Based on the model Obama claimed that he has “created or saved” several million jobs. He modeled it, therefore it is.

And what was in Obama’s State of the Union address? More what may have happened, more projections, more grandiose non-specific rhetoric, more of what he defines as fair, more class warfare. Obama talked about his “blueprint” for revitalizing the economy that he says will work for everyone, not just the wealthy; a rebirth for US manufacturing, bolstering domestic energy production, and training workers. He also talked about the principles he brought to public service since he began his career in public service. You know, the same principles that gave almost 20 percent of Obamacare waivers to Nancy Pelosi’s district, the ones that led him to say nothing after Jimmy Hoffa, Jr. called Tea Party people “sons of bitches.” The ones that spend taxpayer dollars so his wife and children can have a few more hours of vacation time.

In short, more goal post moving. Some of you may argue that my goal post analogy is not a valid one. So be it, but it’s hard to argue against and/or dismiss the facts of the promises on which Obama did not deliver. As Ronald Reagan said, “Facts are stubborn things.”


But that’s just my opinion.

Powered by


  • Reverend Hussein Hussein

    Don’t diss My Man Nixon! He was a great Job Creator and we could use more of his kind today. By prolonging the Vietnam War he doubled the fatalities and increased employment tremendously in the funeral business! Especially us Men Of God who really cleaned up in the sunday collection plates with all our mock solemnity sermons.

  • Clavos

    Your reply was nothing but ranting from the fevered depths of your own mind.

    You don’t even make sense anymore, Glenn; yo’re ranting about Nixon, who is repudiated (except for his rapprochement vis-a-vis China and other foreign policy initiatives), by virtually everyone in the country.

    Besides, he’s dead. You’re beating a dead horse.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clavos –

    No, I’m not. #19 was about Nixon’s blunders. My reply was about Nixon’s other actions and positions that would have gotten him run out of the GOP on a rail today.

  • Clavos

    Glenn, as usual you’re a day late and a dollar short. See 19.

  • Glenn Hussein Contrarian

    Clavos –

    Richard Milhous Hussein Nixon was to the LEFT of Obama in several areas. 70% top marginal tax rate, supported (but didn’t move towards implementing) universal health care without the Heritage-foundation-supported Individual Mandate, created the EPA and the Clean Air Act…and let’s not forget that secret visit to communist China!

    Can you imagine what your fellows on the Rabid Right would do if Obama were to, say, secretly visit Iran to try to get them to join the community of nations? But because Obama doesn’t have an (R) next to his name, well, we just wouldn’t be able to call something like that anything but treason, huh?

  • Dr. Dreadful, Obama did not claim credit for Cundiff, his successes or his failures. Claiming credit for ANYTHING Cundiff has done without Obama would show Obama to be the hypocrite he is.

    …So what’s your point?

  • Clavos


    clavos, what about his handling (slow exit and abandonment, really,) of vietnam?

    You’re right. He shoulda carpet bombed all of North Vietnam for a year instead. Maybe even nuked Hanoi.

    support for Pinochet?

    Good point. He should have supported Fidel instead (and sent him lots of money); by now we’d own him if he had, and Chavez would still be a sergeant.

    his use of diplomacy rather than brute force towards the enemy, i mean, the soviet union?

    I disagree. Brute force would have precipitated another WW, and Reagan took care of that “problem” anyway.

    his arms sales to the middle east (particularly iran and saudi arabia)?

    Especially not the Saudis, who would still be camel jockeys if we and the Brits had never given them control of the oil.

  • Clavos


    But, because you have me neatly typecast in what passes for your mind, you can’t conceive of me having anything but right wing stances — this despite the fact you know full well I don’t believe in your imaginary “god,” among other “left” ideas I (gasp!) harbor.

    And once more: I am not a Republican.

  • Re: comment #15, zingzing, I’m SURE you can do better than that! You really disappoint me.

    Re: comment #10, Joseph, Barack Hussein Obama IS his name, like it or not. And until I officialy speak for the Republican party (of which I am NOT a member) does it really matter how I refer to him? And, besides, it is really fun to figuratively stick my finger in the eye of his rabid, Kool-Aid drinking supporters.

    Re: comment #7, Dr. Dreadful, Obama did not claim credit for Cundiff, his successes or his failures. Claiming credit for ANYTHING Cundiff has done without Obama would show Obama to be the hypocrite he is. Dr. Dreadful, please re-read my article, especially the part about what Obama promised in his first SOTU speech.

    Re: comment #5, EB, you are correct, NFL rules change every season. Once approved, the changes are announced and are applied consistently to ALL teams. Those are things with which Democrats have trouble. And the NFL officials do there best at every game to apply the rules consistently, again something with which Democrats have trouble.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Clavos –

    You do realize that in quite a few ways, Nixon was to the LEFT of Obama, don’t you?

  • zingzing

    hey–we should start calling warren “warren xenophobe beatty,” you know, to make sure no one thinks he’s the actor.

    and if warren xenophobe beatty wants to really use obama’s full name, he’ll write “barack hussein obama II.” because that’s his full name. talk about half-assing it. i mean, jeez, you could totally get a royalty-like thing in there with the xenophobia. heaven knows the right wing hates kingish things as much as they hate them damn moslems what all want to kill us, etc.

  • zingzing

    clavos, what about his handling (slow exit and abandonment, really,) of vietnam? his (rather flaccid, but still there–dictatorship above socialism, i guess,) support for pinochet? his use of diplomacy rather than brute force towards the enemy, i mean, the soviet union? his arms sales to the middle east (particularly iran and saudi arabia)? are these things you agree with today?

  • Clavos


    I thought he was good with China and most foreign relations, not so good domestically.

  • Clavos

    Clavos Hussein Castro Hitler Mussolini Chavez

    Just wanted to celebrate all my faves…

  • He won’t answer, Joseph, he’ll just wonder oh so innocently why you bring it up and why it bothers you.

  • “….President Barack Hussein Obama….”

    Warren, why must you constantly refer to the President as “Hussein” in every article you write? As a Republican myself, and one with absolutely no wish to see Obama win a second term, I must say that this makes our Party appear really low-rent.

  • Zingzing

    What did you think of Nixon while he was in office? Be honest…

  • Clavos

    Well, maybe not Manson, but Nixon’s corpse definitely could do better.

  • I’m actually kind of surprised that Warren didn’t blame Obama for Billy Cundiff missing…

  • Glenn Contrarian

    Warren –

    The first several times you posted an article, I would go down the list and show your errors point-by-point. You either wouldn’t reply or would change the line of attack, but you could not defend your errors.

    After a while I saw that you weren’t really interested in defending what you believe…and it doesn’t do any good to argue with a wall, so I mostly stopped going point-by-point down your list of errors. Go back and look at your earlier articles – it’s pretty obvious.

    And “any candidate” is better? Even the one who’s saying he’ll attack Iran? Do you really want another war? Oh, I forgot – in Warren World, even Charles Manson is better than Obama!

  • “NFL games are played by a consistent set of rules”

    No they aren’t. Rules change every season. Nor are the rules consistently enforced throughout games.

  • Re: comment #1, Glenn, you NEVER address the facts that I state in my article. All you ever offer is your opinion, which is worth exactly what I paid for it. Regarding comment #3, ANY candidate will be a vast improvement.

  • Glenn Contrarian

    I’m still waiting to see exactly which of the current crop of GOP nominees y’all think would be better to have in the Oval Office, and why….

  • Clavos

    At least not until theevilbadbadbadsocialistcommununistnazielitist Evil Master, Obama is gonnnne…

    As in outtahere, adios, sayonara.

    Speaking of the sun setting…

  • Glenn Contrarian


    The sun rises.
    The sun sets.
    Warren rails against the evilbadbadbadsocialistcommununistnazielitiest Left and their Evil Master, Obama.

    Some things never change.