Do you feel safer than you did when President Bush was in office? Do you feel more optimistic about the economy than you did then? Do you feel like we are now better suited to win the War on Terror? Do you feel all hopey and changey?
What about your job? Is it more secure? Do you feel more likely to buy a GM than you did a year ago? What about Guantanamo, do you still think it should be closed and its inhabitants brought to the mainland?
In other words, do you feel that the right people are in the right positions to steer this country forward? And if you do, why? What tells you that we are improving?
Well, apparently, more and more of you are beginning to rethink their vote and really, not a moment too soon. Obama's approval ratings have fallen below 50% for the first time and his handling of the economy has fallen to 30%. His bullying tactics against the blue-dog Democrats, mixed with his racial gaffe at calling the Cambridge Police Department "stupid" before knowing the facts (as if knowing the true facts would have changed his mind anyway), are beginning to finally penetrate the aura of invincibility he has built up around him.
Of course, for any real change, it will take a mass-awakening by the mainstream press - which, sad to say, is hard to imagine.
To prove my points here, I turn to two outstanding commentaries, written by two of my favorite writers. The first one, written by ever-so-brilliant Thomas Sowell, is titled "Disaster in the Making":
After many a disappointment with someone, and especially after a disaster, we may be able to look back at numerous clues that should have warned us that the person we trusted did not deserve our trust.The second article is written by the talented and insightful Michelle Malkin. Now, many on the Left despise Malkin and often use racially derogatory adjectives to describe her (just look at the Huffington Post, Daily Kos or Democratic Underground on a daily basis - or watch Keith Olbermann to know how right I am). But the venom they blithely spew only proves that - number one - she's hit a nerve, and - number two - they fear her. For if they didn't, they wouldn't spend so much time and exert so much effort to try and destroy her (see Palin, Sarah).
When that person is the President of the United States, the potential for disaster is virtually unlimited.
Many people are rightly worried about what this administration's reckless spending will do to the economy in our time and to our children and grandchildren, to whom a staggering national debt will be passed on. But if the worst that Barack Obama does is ruin the economy, I will breathe a sigh of relief...
Michelle's article is titled "Bully Boys: A Brief History of White House Thuggery":
Six months into the Obama administration, it should now be clear to all Americans: Hope and Change came to the White House wrapped in brass knuckles.
Ask the Congressional Budget Office. Last week, President Obama spilled the beans on the "Today Show" that he had met with CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf — just as the number crunchers were casting ruinous doubt on White House cost-saving claims. Yes, question the timing.
The CBO is supposed to be a neutral scorekeeper — not a water boy for the White House. But when the meeting failed to stop the CBO from issuing more analysis undercutting the health care savings claims, Obama's budget director Peter Orszag played the heavy.
Orszag warned the CBO in a public letter that it risked feeding the perception that it was "exaggerating costs and underestimating savings." Message: Leave the number fudging to the boss. Capiche?
Both articles should be read sitting down. But both should definitely be read.