From the far left liberal and the coerced union steel worker to the political fence sitter, these people defended their decision to pull the lever for a novice and vehemently denied all the concrete arguments against him.
So, what are they saying now? Well, one article is blaming his inability to place blame. This NYT article is definitely worth the whole read (but make sure to keep checking back as the Gray lady has been forced to keep publishing corrections!):
What Happened to Obama
"Americans needed their president to tell them a story that made sense of what they had just been through, what caused it, and how it was going to end. They needed to hear that he understood what they were feeling, that he would track down those responsible for their pain and suffering, and that he would restore order and safety. What they were waiting for, in broad strokes, was a story something like this:
“I know you’re scared and angry. Many of you have lost your jobs, your homes, your hope. This was a disaster, but it was not a natural disaster. It was made by Wall Street gamblers who speculated with your lives and futures. It was made by conservative extremists who told us that if we just eliminated regulations and rewarded greed and recklessness, it would all work out. But it didn’t work out. And it didn’t work out 80 years ago, when the same people sold our grandparents the same bill of goods, with the same results. But we learned something from our grandparents about how to fix it, and we will draw on their wisdom. We will restore business confidence the old-fashioned way: by putting money back in the pockets of working Americans by putting them back to work, and by restoring integrity to our financial markets and demanding it of those who want to run them. I can’t promise that we won’t make mistakes along the way. But I can promise you that they will be honest mistakes, and that your government has your back again.” A story isn’t a policy. But that simple narrative — and the policies that would naturally have flowed from it — would have inoculated against much of what was to come in the intervening two and a half years of failed government, idled factories and idled hands."
But, the BEST past paragraph of the piece:
"Those of us who were bewitched by his eloquence on the campaign trail chose to ignore some disquieting aspects of his biography: that he had accomplished very little before he ran for president, having never run a business or a state; that he had a singularly unremarkable career as a law professor, publishing nothing in 12 years at the University of Chicago other than an autobiography; and that, before joining the United States Senate, he had voted "present" (instead of "yea" or "nay") 130 times, sometimes dodging difficult issues."
Really? Didn't they deny all this stuff to the death when we had the gall to point it out?
And, as this author pens all the reasons that Obama isn't living up to the expectations of his far left base (or even just the people he wooed into believing he could create a socialist utopia) he forgets one scenario. Now, I am not a likely defender of this President, but maybe...just MAYBE now that the CIC has access to unfiltered advice and classified information--he doesn't want to follow through with some of the lofty proclamations he made while uniformed on the campaign trail...