Supporters of Obama are telling his critics to relax and give him a chance. They say that if Obama fails, America fails (followed by the rhetorical question 'why would we want that'?). They are so caught-up in the Obama hype, their inclination is to follow blindly and question nothing. They are like the visitors to P.T. Barnum's museum who see the sign that reads "This way to the Egress" and follow with excitement in anticipation of what's around the corner, when in fact it's simply a sign pointing the way to the exit. Put in simpler terms; they're easily fooled. 

In reality, if Obama succeeds, America fails. I realize that, on the surface, it sounds like an ad hominem attack on Obama; but think about it for a moment. Did his supporters forget that it was a statistical fact that Obama was the most liberal senator in the Senate (or does that even matter)? Do they not care that this new “Stimulus” package (with all its hand-outs), puts America on the precipice of either Socialism, or a nation of dependents with their hands out awaiting a government check? Do they not see that this new administration is returning to a pre 9/11 foreign policy, with the closing of Gitmo and the appointment of an inexperienced, unqualified Leon Panetta as director of the C.I.A.? Do they not care that 2 weeks into his presidency, Obama is already breaking campaign promises (not to hire Lobbyists)? Conservatives aren’t launching personal attacks against Obama; heck, I’d have a beer with him (if I drank). We are disagreeing with his policies. There’s a difference between ad hominem attacks and scrutinizing policy. Ad hominem attacks are what President Bush suffered throughout his two terms. We all remember the “Bush lied, people died” mantra. Lost in all the Bush hatred were the facts. One of the facts (lost on the Bush haters) was that, early on in the Iraq war, several of Saddam Hussein’s captured Elite Republican Guard admitted that even they thought he had stockpiles of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The real liar was Saddam Hussein, yet, to this day, most people are convinced that Bush lied. The whole “Bush Lied” fiasco demonstrated the power and influence that a deceitful media can wield.

I think I am beginning to understand how it works: If the President has a ‘D’ (for Democrat) next to his name (as opposed to an ‘R’), we’re supposed to give him a chance (at any cost) and show support for his policies and actions (even if to our own detriment). Too bad for Bush; had he only changed parties and re-registered as a Democrat (prior to the Iraq war), then the whole W.M.D. mantra likely would have been “Bush Tried”, instead of “Bush Lied“ and perhaps even he would have been given ‘a chance‘.

(Hey, what better way to illustrate absurdity, than to be absurd)