cur-mud-geon: anyone who hates hypocrisy and pretense and has the temerity to say so; anyone with the habit of pointing out unpleasant facts in an engaging and humorous manner
The mainstream media has taken up the fight now that Hillary and Barack have gotten their 'thing' settled; at least until the gathering in Denver.
The learned political scientists on our college campuses have nearly unanimously opined that Obama is incapable of being defeated. They have preordained that this election will be among the most lopsided victories for the left that we have witnessed in the entire history of our country. Polls show Obama up by double digits over McCain. It is all over but for the voting.
The election of Barack Obama as our next president is, apparently, inevitable.
So...there you go. We conservatives can simply suck it up, pack it in, and decide how we're going to survive the coming four or eight years. It is divined: Barack Obama is the next President of the United States...and will create a veto-proof majority for Democrats in both houses of our congress.
But wait. Is it really inevitable? Is the smugness of the left such that it will determine the course of history? Is it really time for undefined change simply for the sake of change? Are we in such dire straits that we will anoint Obama without so much as a discussion about that inevitable future? Will the influx of young voters automatically accrue to the benefit of Obama? Have the liberal professors that dominate our college campuses (98% + and counting) so indoctrinated the student body that inevitability is the only outcome imaginable?
Are 'we the people' so enamored of this man of change as to be taken with his oratorical skills in spite of the lack of depth of our knowledge of the details? It is commonly discussed in political circles that the 'devil is in the detail', and yet, so far, there is very little flesh to be found on the skeleton of change.
Will it remain the rule that any question of Obama's positions is akin to unfairly characterizing the man? We smear him when we reflect upon the pastor that he followed willingly for twenty years. We smear him when we talk about his very limited experience in politics, let alone on the national scene. We smear him when we criticize his broadly-brushed position papers. We smear him when he is forced to restate previous statements, sometimes more than once, to 'clarify' what he originally meant to say.
Obama has created a bubble that seems to surround him. It is a protective bubble that keeps the hounds at bay. One is to accept his speeches at face value. One must not question the lack of substance. One must not ask from where the money will come (although we know if we but listen to the tax increase rhetoric). One must not ask which of the ladies in waiting the public would prefer in the White House.
Obama has created a protective bubble with the willing assistance of the liberal media. Will that media be silent as well when we wake up to the second term of Jimmy Carter? Will that media be silent when we throw away victory in the war on terror so that foreign governments will profess to like us better? Will that media be silent when terrorists again begin to strike us in our homeland?
Is it really Obama the Inevitable? Or was the only inevitable thing about all this that the liberal media would fall into lockstep?