Obama has been the architect of one failed, costly program after another. His scorecard as president doesn’t beckon lots of HOPE. Here’s a smattering of highlights.

Obama’s background sets him apart either from the blue-blooded upbringing of our Bushes and Gores, or the folksy everyman heritage of a Clinton or Reagan. More than that, it sets him apart from…well, just about everybody.

Score one BIG for Obama on the birther issue. In releasing his birth certificate. Obama not only magnified the “silliness” of the matter but the racism associated with it. Short form, long form, and all the rest, the president given enough proof of his citizenship. Let’s be very clear: if President Obama wasn’t black, no American would be challenging his citizenship and “unalienable” right to be president just like his white predecessors.

Equally grotesque is the mainstream media’s reluctance to even hint at the obvious racial undertones to the birther movement against the president. (While the birther movement was started by Democrat supporters of Hillary Clinton, it is conservatives who have strengthened it, keeping it alive and brewing.)

This was a brilliant, calculated public relations move by Obama not only because it blunted Donald Trump’s insipid rants on the topic. But more importantly it reinforced the public’s perception that the Republican Party is a den of racists loathe to have anything to do with inclusion. The numbers support this notion. A recent CBS/New York Times poll found 45% of Republicans don’t think Obama was born in the United States. This kind of thinking has been lambasted by prominent conservatives like Karl Rove and George Will because they know this kind of incendiary rhetoric doesn’t win elections much less the hearts and minds of voters.

The natives are restless again. It seems the more I try to sell what’s good about the Republican party to my liberal and black friends, fiscal responsibility, limited government and lower taxes, the harder it gets.

Look at the train wreck of losses Obama’s policies caused Democrats in the 2010 mid-term elections. The tally of wins for Republicans was stunning and equally ominous for Democrats. Let’s review: Republicans took 64 seats in the House from Democrats, this is the biggest gain by any party in the House since 1948 and the highest of any midterm election since 1938. In the Senate, Republicans won six seats, the largest gain since the Gingrich revolution in 1994. And the carnage continued in the states. Republicans won 17 governor’s races and 19 state legislatures flipped to the GOP.

After witnessing the beating Democrats took or “shellacking” as President Obama jokingly called it Wednesday during his press conference, one would think Obama would eat some humble pie and admit the American people rejected his policies. Nope, the President insisted people are just “frustrated” by “the pace of our economic recovery” and “they want jobs.”

Appearing on CNN with Anderson Cooper, film director Spike Lee implored President Obama to infuse his handling of the Gulf oil spill with more emotion. Demonstrating the astute analysis we have come to expect from the director, Lee implored Obama to “one time, go off.”

Perhaps he is of the same mind as Bill Maher, that the authentic black man is one who is always armed and resorts to violence and loud-talking when things do not go his way. (Note to self: On the way home from the liquor store, I must pick up my Glock from the gun shop.)

Both Lee and Maher seem to share the opinion of a great many progressives that emotion is the same as leadership and that problems are most easily solved by decree. It is no mistake that following criticism by Lee and others, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was declaring to the media that he had “seen rage from him [President Obama].” Apparently, when Obama gets angry, he clinches his jaw.

The last week has provided a riches of embarrassments within the political arena. I sometimes wish I had a daily column, but somehow I will attempt to consolidate these embarrassing events into a coherent piece that will adequately do justice to each issue.

Let’s start with Republican senate candidate, Rand Paul (from Kentucky). His public musings about his disagreements with certain aspects of the 1964 Civil Rights Act were appalling. But, more appalling to me was the slowness of any public response by Republican senators and Black Republicans.

With some journalists you just have to know what to expect. Tom Friedman brings “big ideas” that lack logic and rely more on raw enthusiasm than, say, actual facts. Peggy Noonan, however, is quick to use her speechwriter’s wit but slow — or in some cases unable — to employ an editor’s comprehension of the facts and sense of balance.

Case in point: Noonan chides President Obama in her recent article “He Was Supposed to Be Competent.” She cites three factors as being the most damaging to Obama’s presidency, and the cause of her swift, and decidedly terminal, disagreement.

There was much laughter following the presidents signing of the health care bill. Democrats were positively giddy over having successfully secured America’s decline. There were fist bumps and back slapping; the champagne flowed.

Democrats were not alone in their celebration. Republicans too shook hands with constituents and lapped up attention and praise for, let’s face it, having done very little. But, hey, why let that spoil a good time? My fear is that not only will Republicans not “repeal the bill” should they take control of congress after the mid-term elections, but that in the very near future Republican candidates will also be running on promises to nurture it. Such is my confidence in the current GOP.

Inasmuch as we are toasting the expansion of the administrative state (and thus the demise of our American Republic) we should perhaps also raise our glasses to Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain. All these nations are on the verge of economic collapse due to their fiscal promiscuity. They too love their entitlements and are demanding them even as the ship of state sinks. Portugal is currently running a deficit that is 9.3% of GDP with a debt that is 80% of their GDP. Greece has a deficit of 13% and a debt of 113% of GDP. Just for laughs consider that they are appealing to the United States for financial aid. The U.S. currently carries a deficit that is over 12% and debt that is 94% of GDP.

A reader recently sent me an email admonishing me for not being more supportive of President Obama. For reasons that were not immediately clear, he also raised the issue of my confessed Christianity.

The “aha” moment came when he asked, “Do you pray for your leader like you’re instructed in the good book?” I responded that while I have prayed for the president, I do not do so regularly. That, in his mind, was evidence of my Christian hypocrisy.

This is an elementary school argument, but sadly one that is far too commonly made by the religious left and their secular allies. All Christian stumbling is demonstration of falsity; individual failure to practice principles is ipso facto proof of the bankruptcy of those principles. Sophistry of this sort allows the new left to dismiss ideas they disagree with and evidence they find inconvenient with a simple label: “religious right-wing extremist.” That sure beats actually having to make a substantive argument. What remains unclear is why the regular and unabashed support the religious left offers candidates whose policies are incompatible with or in direct contradiction to Christian principles is not more damning evidence of their Christian hypocrisy.

Aside from the fact that the left takes it as a given that they are both smarter and morally superior– one answer might be that the religious left now preaches moral relativism as opposed to the objective truth of God.

“Tavis said it right: if Black America’s recognized leaders are unwilling to push President Obama on these issues now, how can they expect to hold the moral authority to question any other president henceforth about issue directly pertaining to Black America? The answer would be that they couldn’t.

Governor Palin is an ethnic escapist dream where simple rural girls best slick urban intellectuals.

It is said that when Alexander the Great visited the philosopher Diogenes he asked the wise man if there was anything he could do for him. Diogenes is said to have replied, “Yes. Stand a little less between me and the sun.”

I thought of Diogenes as I read portions of the president’s speech from Cleveland, Ohio. The New York Times reports that the president used the word fight or some version of it more than 20 times.

Mr. Obama vowed to fight for jobs; he promised to fight for quality education; he promised to fight for health care; fight for transparency in government. He promised to fight! Fight! Fight! And never stop fighting. “So long as I have some breath in me,” he said, “so long as I have the privilege of serving as your President, I will not stop fighting for you.”

Such pronouncements of chivalry no doubt came as a surprise to the parents and children of the opportunity scholarship program.

Also known as the D.C. voucher program the OSP was started in 2003 as a program to provide children from low income families scholarships of up to $7500 to attend non-public K-12 schools within the district.

When radical liberal groups like the NAACP, or the Congressional Black Caucus say that Lott’s comment were racist and Reid’s were not; what they mean is they agree with how Reid votes, therefore he can’t be racist. I disagree with most things the Catholic Church stands for, but does that make me anti-Catholic? Why can’t Lott disagree with Blacks on affirmative action, King’s birthday, or certain government programs without being labeled a racist?

How many of you know that Lott was one of the main sponsors of a bill that allocated over a billion dollars to Black universities to update their technology infrastructure? Blacks must be more strategic and less emotional. Just because one disagrees with a person’s voting record does not mean the person is a racist. This is part of the reason for the push back on a lot of racial issues by whites. They don’t want to be vilified simply because they have a different view. Any fair minded person would agree. That’s why dialogue is very important in matters like these.

In calling out Fox News, the president exposes some of rather bitter irony given his history of relations with the press. During his 2008 presidential campaign, then-candidate Obama was frequently lauded as one of the most (if not THE most) media-savvy candidate in the history of American politics. It also didn’t hurt that more often than not, he was the beneficiary of flattering coverage and a press corps eager to curry favor with a fresh and exciting candidate.