President Bush was both loved and loathed for his resoluteness of purpose. But his successor has taken that trait to an entirely new level, to the point that he’s become obstinate in the face of a clear reality.

President Obama, his lieutenants and media allies claim that prevailing public anger is rooted in frustration over a Washington that’s “getting nothing done.” They are wrong. As I explain in my Human Events column today, most of the outrage is the result of a Washington that’s doing too much to push policies that have always failed.  Thank you.

Millions of Americans watched the 30-second Focus on the Family Super Bowl ad last night featuring Pam and Tim Tebow. While there was nothing remotely offensive about the ad (in fact, the right to life was not even addressed directly), pro-abortion groups are on the attack today trying to use the ad to stoke outrage and solicit donations from their supporters. NARAL sent an email this morning urging supporters to “throw a post game penalty flag at CBS” for allowing Focus to air its “anti-choice” commercial. What does NARAL want its supporters to do to punish CBS? Donate to NARAL, of course.

Not to be outdone, NOW president Terry O’Neill told the Los Angeles Times, “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it.” O’Neill was referring to the end of the ad, when Tim “tackles” his mom, who then playfully chides him for interrupting her. I hope that the likes of NARAL and NOW get as much airtime as they want to vent their reactions to the ad. Because with each extreme remark, they expose more of their extreme agenda.

CBS’s decision to air a Super Bowl ad that tells the story of Heisman Trophy winning quarterback Tim Tebow’s miraculous birth has caused an uproar among liberals. NOW condemned the commercial, which details Tim’s mother’s decision to give birth to Tim despite a doctor’s recommendation to abort because of possible health complications, as “extraordinarily offensive and demeaning” and “hate masquerading as love.” The Feminist Majority Foundation launched a campaign to get the “anti-choice super bowl ad removed.”

The Left is complaining that the ad is too controversial. But as I explain in my Human Events column today, the real reason for their outrage is exactly the opposite: that the commercial is so inoffensive and, in fact, so inspiring that they worry it might actually win hearts and minds for the idea that all human life is sacred. You can read my column at www.humanevents.com.

Yesterday, President Obama went on the attack against two favorite enemies – corporate greed and Wall Street. Obama stepped up his rhetoric against banks and financial firms, attacking large salaries and bonuses yet again and proposing a new bank fee. The president’s revisionist history regarding the cause of the financial crisis was astonishing. It was matched only by his over-the-top pitchfork populism. Here’s a sample:

“We want our money back, and we’re going to get it.  And that’s why I’m proposing a Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee to be imposed on major financial firms until the American people are fully compensated for the extraordinary assistance they provided to Wall Street.  If these companies are in good enough shape to afford massive bonuses, they are surely in good enough shape to afford paying back every penny to taxpayers.”

The deception is breathtaking! Sure a number of big banks got bailouts, but most have repaid those loans with interest. And those still in debt to Uncle Sam are answering to the “pay czar,” who is capping salaries and bonuses. Most of the money owed to the American people is owed by the unions for the takeover of General Motors and Chrysler. But instead the president wants to pick winners and losers. The winners are his union buddies, and the losers are [the] now-profitable banks.

But if the president is so upset about extravagant pay and bonuses and so committed to protecting the taxpayer, where is his outrage at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? The president is so concerned about the $120 billion shortfall in the TARP program, but Fannie and Freddie have put the taxpayers on the hook for $2 trillion. Meanwhile, the top executives at these government-run outfits are getting $42 million in compensation, with bonuses of $2 million!

I’m pleased to report that 70 conservative members of Congress are demanding that the administration hold executives at Fannie and Freddie to the same standard to which they hold other private firms. But don’t hold your breath. Over the years, Fannie and Freddie executives have been major donors to liberal candidates (with Barack Obama being one of their top beneficiaries), and they have been run by well-connected liberals like Rahm Emanuel and Franklin Raines.

Rather than intimidating and investigating Big Business, we need to stop punishing success, stop picking winners and losers and start investigating Big Government!