Loose Change
Since I have been consistently questioning Obama's candidacy this blog has doubled its traffic. In the small world of this blog that ain't much, but I notice such things and if nothing else it proves there is a small, but growing, group out there that are willing to question the fervor surrounding him. I am not balanced in my complaints. But I don't pretend or intend to be. I believe my biases to be grounded in a reality based view of the world and the massive clamor to anoint this man President is not. I repeat this over and over again: the two prongs of Obama's support are A. hopeful projection and B. a seething sexism directed at Hillary Clinton that no one dares own up to. The Huffington Post and MSNBC is where this sexism reaches its zenith.
There are reasons NOT to support Hillary Clinton. They can almost never stand alone, always needing an unjust jab at her husband or an attack on her war vote (though, aside from one speech, Obama's war record is identical) to shore the arguments up. It is not, in the final analysis, hatred of Senator Clinton. It is hatred and fear of women in powerful positions. Sexism is the ghost in the machine. How do you say to people "the reaction you are having is not because she is ambitious - it is because she is a female and ambitious." ?? Other than to just say it and incur the wrath of the hapless P.C tron who can't see his or her denial. It is so contrary to what the PC crowd now supporting Obama believes about itself that it cannot be accepted.
But it is true.
The devaluing of talent, work ethic, merit,and experience are the natural by product of the unwillingness to examine this last divide in American life. Women are still considered less worthy of powerful positions. In policy terms there is barely a whiff of difference between Clinton and Obama. One would think that a sane nation would then judge these two based on experience and accomplishment. But quietly and without noticing it we have accepted that the Presidency is only a show anyway. That real power in America lives elsewhere. This has not always been the case. Theodore Roosevelt announced that he would use the "bully pulpit" that he had been thrust into. But everyone understood that the bully pulpit was part of his job - not its entirety. Flash forward to Bush 2, in which being a bully in a pulpit was all Bush has done. Those with real power got what they wanted and Bush just acted as cheerleader and con man for the nation.
Because the current chant for change seems utterly rudderless I suspect it won't withstand the gale of real power. Washington is a mean place. It always has been. To ignore this is to fantasize about history. Anyone who thinks a junior Senator can change D.C. by simply being in the White House is - as I keep repeating - delusional. What sticks in my craw about Obama is that I don't actually think he believes he can change the way the nation is ordered. None of his policy statements do anything but nudge one way or another. All are within the expected and accepted norms of current American politics. I don't know that I fear him at all. A talented "jawboner" in the White House can accomplish quite a lot. If he stated without reservation he intended to remove the corrosive power of money in D.C. I would have the HOPE so many now insist he is restoring. Barring that - not much will change in the capitol.
I do fear his followers - or what his followers represent. Bill Clinton ran on hope in 1992 and we took a risk. It paid off, as he turned out to be smart and hardworking. But 1992 is not 2008.
The country is desperate for change now. The words "change" and "desperate" in the same sentence is what alarms me.
The most vocal seem to believe "Obama is magic" to paraphrase Sarah Silverman's comment about Jesus. Luck often plays a part in politics. Magic never does. The only change Obama is willing to promote thus far is entirely personality driven. That is dangerous territory for a democracy. By this time in 1932 FDR was running as the happy warrior AND on the New Deal.
What, exactly, is Obama's New Deal?
If he turns out to be a new FDR I will say "oops, I was wrong" and follow it with a hearty "yippee!"
The New Depression is closing in fast. All things being equal I would rather have the lady with brass knuckles at the helm.
On a lighter note watch the video below. It is a worthy distraction.
There are reasons NOT to support Hillary Clinton. They can almost never stand alone, always needing an unjust jab at her husband or an attack on her war vote (though, aside from one speech, Obama's war record is identical) to shore the arguments up. It is not, in the final analysis, hatred of Senator Clinton. It is hatred and fear of women in powerful positions. Sexism is the ghost in the machine. How do you say to people "the reaction you are having is not because she is ambitious - it is because she is a female and ambitious." ?? Other than to just say it and incur the wrath of the hapless P.C tron who can't see his or her denial. It is so contrary to what the PC crowd now supporting Obama believes about itself that it cannot be accepted.
But it is true.
The devaluing of talent, work ethic, merit,and experience are the natural by product of the unwillingness to examine this last divide in American life. Women are still considered less worthy of powerful positions. In policy terms there is barely a whiff of difference between Clinton and Obama. One would think that a sane nation would then judge these two based on experience and accomplishment. But quietly and without noticing it we have accepted that the Presidency is only a show anyway. That real power in America lives elsewhere. This has not always been the case. Theodore Roosevelt announced that he would use the "bully pulpit" that he had been thrust into. But everyone understood that the bully pulpit was part of his job - not its entirety. Flash forward to Bush 2, in which being a bully in a pulpit was all Bush has done. Those with real power got what they wanted and Bush just acted as cheerleader and con man for the nation.
Because the current chant for change seems utterly rudderless I suspect it won't withstand the gale of real power. Washington is a mean place. It always has been. To ignore this is to fantasize about history. Anyone who thinks a junior Senator can change D.C. by simply being in the White House is - as I keep repeating - delusional. What sticks in my craw about Obama is that I don't actually think he believes he can change the way the nation is ordered. None of his policy statements do anything but nudge one way or another. All are within the expected and accepted norms of current American politics. I don't know that I fear him at all. A talented "jawboner" in the White House can accomplish quite a lot. If he stated without reservation he intended to remove the corrosive power of money in D.C. I would have the HOPE so many now insist he is restoring. Barring that - not much will change in the capitol.
I do fear his followers - or what his followers represent. Bill Clinton ran on hope in 1992 and we took a risk. It paid off, as he turned out to be smart and hardworking. But 1992 is not 2008.
The country is desperate for change now. The words "change" and "desperate" in the same sentence is what alarms me.
The most vocal seem to believe "Obama is magic" to paraphrase Sarah Silverman's comment about Jesus. Luck often plays a part in politics. Magic never does. The only change Obama is willing to promote thus far is entirely personality driven. That is dangerous territory for a democracy. By this time in 1932 FDR was running as the happy warrior AND on the New Deal.
What, exactly, is Obama's New Deal?
If he turns out to be a new FDR I will say "oops, I was wrong" and follow it with a hearty "yippee!"
The New Depression is closing in fast. All things being equal I would rather have the lady with brass knuckles at the helm.
On a lighter note watch the video below. It is a worthy distraction.
posted by John Smart at
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
PERMALINK
<< Home