Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Barack Obama is just a good ol' politician, the sort that will say anything to get elected (a fact elaborated on in detail by the New Yorker, precisely on the issue with the "controversial" cover that some many Obama worshippers were contorting themselves about).
I, however, feel glad because as a Clinton fan I can now say that we won anyway.
And without making a single "CHANGE YOU CAN BELIEVE IN" donation!!!
BTW, was Obama's aunt (the really elderly and infirm one, the super-poor one, the one that was on public assistance and that nonetheless donated like 2000+ to his campaign) deported back to Kenya or not?
I think you're wrong in suggesting the Clinton team actually "won."
The Clintons, notwithstanding their "new" Democrat label, both had one foot in the Roosevelt/Truman/Humphrey past. That led them to raise taxes in '93 -- a controversial move at the time -- to implement national health care in '94. The Clinton presidency really ended, in a sense, in November of '94. They had no chance to enact the "dream" beyond that point.
Mr. Obama, by contrast, does not seem to have one foot planted in that dream. Of course, he favors big government generally: Robert Gates pushed the DOD over $500 Billion last year; the new Treasury Secretary is as much a borrow and bail fiend as Henry Paulson; and we are now looking at trillion dollar annual deficits, with $200+ billion in interest payments alone, and rising exponentially. But what would the New Dealers think; i.e., the idealistic social planners of the past? Or today, those who pine for Euro-style univeral higher education and health care? I don't see us getting much closer to either of those goals, with this level of short-term borrowing.
Finally, I don't think Clintonism, or the absence thereof, holds the answers to big problems like the auto industry. First, we were told Mr. Obama wanted a bailout, while Mr. Bush insisted on a swap for Columbian Free Trade. Then, we saw polls showing just 30% support for the UAW . . . oops, I mean, the automakers generally, so in response we are going through a cycle of ritualistic (and pointless) humiliation for the executives because they fly on company planes. Detroit is now preparing for something like the Poor People's March of 1968, with vendors, workers, and executives all riding proverbial mule trains to Washington to sit in the mud and beg for money, in advance of their December deadline. It will take more than coolness -- or Clintonism -- for Mr. Obama to get this one right.
he could'a cleaned up by backing the notion that 'obama is a politician', just before the election. now, already too late, not even in office, and he stays away from bodies of water lest he be asked to walk on it by unbelievers.
nations don't change course unless they are severely beaten up and occupied by patient victors. obama may be a 'good king', better hope so as the last was so bad the e.r. team are shaking their heads. but he's just another king, for 4 years or 8, and the wheel turns again. in america, the wheel of history is more like the cylinder of a six-shooter- the nation plays russian roulette every 4 years and half the chambers are loaded.
america needs a law-giver, a constitution writer, a prophet- and needs to listen. not likely to happen, and juggernaut will keep rolling to destruction.
obama will just be one name on the role of kings. if mankind survives archeologists will surmise he was a particularly bad one, since the american empire visibly collapsed just after he took the purple.
A Dear Leader is imposed, not elected. Oh they might have sham elections like in Cuba or Venezuela or North Korea, but that's just an excuse to get people to stand in line and smack them about some more. No, a Dear Leader is pushed down by force. From birth. Children are raised to worship the Dear Leader, to sacrifice anyone even their own families for the good of the state. Or at least its will.
The only question I have, is, do you know this or are you just disappointed it won't happen here?
Remember when "the best and the brightest" took America into Vietnam? (See David Halberstam's book.)
I agree that the "dear leader" tag seems a bit of a low blow.
I have criticized Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters, including Oprah Winfrey (who suggests he is the second coming of Jesus Christ) and Donna Brazile (who compares the president-elect to Jesus, and Sarah Palin to Pontius Pilate). I know apolitical people who went absolutely berserk over the election this year. In Fort Wayne, Indiana, where I attended a Sarah Palin rally, there is a mural on a downtown building with one word on it, "hope" -- kind of a Chavez-esque tribute. I suspect there are many others like it around the country.
Having said that, I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. Some conservatives think Mr. Obama is trying to create a quasi-fascist youth corps through his national service projects. Their predecessors said the same thing about FDR and the CCC/WPA. Kind of hard to imagine, honestly. One of my favorite FDR-penned articles from Warm Springs, Georgia, involves his mockery of such criticism, even before he was elected president. (Incidentally, there is no greater critic than me of the Obama tax rebate plan for those who pay no federal income tax; I just don't think even that makes him a "dear leader").
The murals, and the adulation, also remind me a bit of Jean Aristide of Haiti, whose illiterate supporters were encouraged to identify a rooster on the ballot (the symbol of Aristide's party). Any time you are dealing with symbols instead of words, or with murals of a political figure, it is not imprudent to start exploring foreign stock funds. :) But again, this is America, after all, and I think a lot of this was just plain silliness. Mr. Obama may even be more clever than we think, in understanding this silliness and acting cautiously at the outset in response to it.
I personally think a lot of apolitical centrists got on board the train over (i) Iraq and (ii) the significance of electing our first African American president, and did not want to deal with the cognitive dissonance of any contrary facts. And, of course, there were the pre-train boarding euphorics of people like Ms. Winfrey and Ms. Brazile. It's been a kooky year, but I suspect we'll get through it all right. Unless, of course, Mr. Obama turns out to be more Manley-esque than we thought.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
