This is in response to a foolish argument made a year ago by Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual activist who calls himself a conservative, but in truth is actually as much of a liberal fascist as Nancy Pelosi. Here is what he said in part:
I think the notion that this administration is ideological is bizarre. Did it nationalize the banks when it could have? Nope. Did it withdraw troops immediately from Iraq and Afghanistan? Nope. It followed Bush's timetable on Iraq and has massively - and foolishly - doubled down on counter-insurgency in Afghanistan. Did it prosecute the war criminals of the last administration? Nope; it has covered for them. Has it raised taxes on anyone? Nope. It merely wants the already-sunsetted Bush tax cuts on the wealthy to expire on schedule. Did it provide a Krugman-style stimulus? Ask Krugman. Is Obama a peacenik? I suppose we have forgotten that he used the Nobel ceremony to defend Reinhold Niebuhr, has retained extraordinary rendition, and ramped up the troop-levels in Afghanistan to far beyond anything Bush ever contemplated. Has the president publicly backed marriage equality or pot-decriminalization? Au contraire. Has he even risked an iota of political capital to end the ban on gays in the military? No. In fact, it is now more likely than not that gays will still be persecuted by their own country by the end of Obama's first term. Compare that to Clinton's early efforts - in a climate far more conservative on the issue. "No ordinary Democratic administration." You mean - like LBJ's? This is preposterous piffle.
Preposterous piffle? How silly can you get?
Barack Obama is a rigid ideologue. The article suggests he is not because he has not gone as far to the left as one could (conceivably) have. But he went far enough to the left to garner a historically enormous backlash.
Obama is called a rigid ideologue because of the extent of his inflexibility on various issues. Anyone who disagrees is invited to watch him with a GOP congress. There will be little in the way of compromise because of Obama's ideological rigidity. I still think it is possible that the enormous "no-confidence vote" he will receive this November might even cause him to resign.
Barack Obama essentially nationalized a massive amount of the auto industry. It was effectively stolen from investors and bond holders and given to the union. His regulation of the banking industry will cripple it. His regulation of the health insurance industry will cripple it and raise rates significantly. His Cap & Trade scam (based upon the AGW hoax) would probably cripple our entire economy. Barack Obama is not a pure Socialist or Marxist and we can be thankful for that. In some ways he is more Fascist than Socialist, he sometimes controls private industries rather than nationalizing them. Socialism and Fascism are pretty much equally destructive to a free market.
As for the GWOT, he is not really following the Bush policies, he has adopted a misguided policy of trying to defeat the extremists by befriending the moderates. This policy will fail, and the rules of engagement our troops are now under is a military disgrace.
Furthermore, his repeated habit of blaming others for his mistakes apparently prevents him from recognizing his own mistakes. His inability to recognize his mistakes and alter his course makes him rigidly follow a course that has already failed. He exhibits a rigidity in the way he appears to believe he is right despite a mountain of mounting evidence.
Do not confuse "rigid ideologue" with "pure Socialist" or "hard-line rigid Socialist". Barack Obama's ideology is statist and authoritarian, and even tyrannical, but it is neither classical Socialism, Marxism, nor Fascism. Rather it a combination of those, along with a strong dose of 1950s anti-colonialism (the ghost of his father), and other disturbing aspects of anti-Americanism.
Barack Obama exhibits the rigidity of a person who is in way over his head, a person who's incompetence, inexperience, and ineptitude makes him feel inferior. Like so many with deep feelings of inferiority, he compensates by affecting airs of superiority and infallibility.
This man is the picture of a rigid ideologue, and this is what makes him a menace to freedom.