Wall Street Journal Continues to Pile on Mr. Obama, Because Once is Not Enough

Vitriol is Contagious on the Opinon Pages of the WSJ

Earlier in celebration of the Conservative triumph over rationality in the deficit reduction/debt ceiling agreement the editorial/opinion pages of the Wall Street Journal engaged in a full bore personal attack on the President. 



Anatomy of the WSJ Opinion Writer When
Mr. Obama is the Subject



The problem though, from the Journal’s point of view was that not all of its columnists were on deck, and so missed out on the fun.  So this past week several more columnists jumped on the “bash Mr. Obama” bandwagon.  First up with the venom was William McGurn.  He thinks he can attack Mr. Obama by comparing him with former President Carter.

For amid the partisan bickering, there remains one principle on which all Americans are agreed: Any comparison to Jimmy Carter is always and everywhere a put-down.

And then goes on to cite a litany of other columnists who have complained about Mr. Obama.  His conclusion is that Mr. Obama is not even as accomplished as Mr. Carter. (And no Mr. McGurn, comparisons to Jimmy Carter are a put-down only in your paper.) That is what passes for intellectual discussion by Mr. McGurn.

Next up is Bret Stephens, writing on the President’s intelligence. Guess what his conclusion is.



I don't buy it. I just think the president isn't very bright.



Which One Isn't Very Bright?



No Mr. Stephens, the President may not be a good politician, but his failings result from failure to obtain a noble goal, getting government to work in a bi-partisan manner.  And if you want a President who is not very bright, you really don’t have to look far in the list of predecessors, do you.

Finally we have James Tranto, who after a long rant on Mr. Obama’s personal failing revisits the “loser” charge.

Everyone loves a winner, and progressives are angry and disconsolate with Mr. Obama because they increasingly see him as a loser. But if the president is a loser, it is precisely because he is one of them

The editorial/opinion pages of the Wall Street are disregarded and disrespected because they are not an honest attempt to educate and explain, but are a partisan propaganda machine designed to influence elections, truth be damned.  Fortunately for Mr. Obama, the personal attacks are counter productive and  if the themes in the Journal are picked up by his opponents, Mr. Obama may well bask in the backlash of re-election.  In that case the Journal would have achieved its goal of determining the outcome of an election, just not in a way they intended.