Agitator in Chief: Obama Can’t Stand to Govern

Do you hear that? It’s the sound of Air Force One. Yes, Obama is jetting off yet again to campaign for or against something. Does he ever stay in Washington? Maybe he can rent out the White House like some kind of timeshare – pay down the debt.

The odd thing is that he seems to be constantly campaigning against his own administration’s policies. As if he’s still candidate Obama from five years ago and they are not his policies.

So the question remains – why doesn’t he just stay in Washington and demonstrate to all how well he can govern? Even some in the liberal press are asking this.

Well, there are three parts to that answer. (1) He doesn’t really care about the whole governing thing. (2) He is more comfortable on the road because, (3) he doesn’t know how to govern and does not wish to learn. One only needs to look at his background to know this is true.

Before he was a senator for about an hour and a half, he was a State Senator whose votes mostly consisted of “present”. Before that he was a community organizer, and agitator, a rabble-rouser. He was a student of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Not exactly the encyclopedia on governance.

He was evidently highly educated, but by radical professors and by his own admission, he sought out radicals and Communists with which to hang out.

I liken his management skill to another governing mastermind – the great peacemaker Yasir Arafat. Now don’t get your panties in a bunch. I’m not saying our president is a terrorist. Although he plants them quite often, Obama’s IED’s are strictly rhetorical.

Arafat was offered land for peace. He was offered a real homeland for his precious PLO. He rebutted every attempt at peace and settlement.

At one point Israel was willing to withdraw from 97% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip. They offered to dismantle and abandon 63 entire settlements. They even offered Arafat East Jerusalem as the capital of the new Palestinian state, plus right of return and an international fund worth $30 billion for reparations.

As an aside, in my opinion, none of this should have been offered, for many others and I knew who Arafat was and that he would turn it down, which he did. No matter what Israel proposed, it would never be enough. Why? Because Arafat was a terrorist leader, not a governor. He had neither the desire nor capability to govern.

The same trait can be found in the presidential agitator Obama. No matter what the Republicans stupidly offer him it has been and will never be enough, for if it were, he would have nothing to agitate for. He would be out of his element, his comfort zone.

This is why radicals never seem to be satisfied. They can’t be, for they know nothing else.

The president is a radical ideologue, not a manager, not a governor. In fact he is the flip side of Reagan. Like Reagan, Obama is a big-idea man. With Reagan one got the grand vision of growth, prosperity and patriotism – love of country. But you also got a leader – one who relished the opportunity to govern.

With Obama, the agitator, we have a fomenter of hatred, envy, decline and division, but certainly not governance.