Obama's being sworn in right now, and when I felt a twinge of the Fever that's running rampant, I decided it was time to say something. I mean, this excitement is infectious, but so is avian flu.
Constant media-induced aggrandizement has elevated a President-Elect (not a President who has done anything, mind you) to the status of Savior of the Free World in a matter of two short months. I obviously have a problem with heaping praise on anyone before they've earned it. But let's table that issue for the moment. The bigger problem here is that it's rare to hear someone say with any clarity or specificity how Obama might actually become worthy of their praise. That is, relatively few people are saying, "I can't wait until Obama does ______." They're simply saying "I can't wait until Obama." This is lazy thinking at its worst. So many people out there have only vague notions about our new President, notions like "notBush" and "firstblackpresident" and "ohboychange" and "holyshitimbrokemaybeobamawillfixthat," and somehow these vague notions were enough to earn votes. Obama voters who can actually justify their choice are in the minority.
I imagine this atmosphere of mindless Obamania will lead to some interesting results. I expect he'll start his term with a couple of high-profile "game-changers" that won't actually change the game in any significant way at all, but will make a lot of noise in some circles and quiet a lot of noise in others--that's the "Change" we've heard so much about. Once people realize he's not a messiah and isn't going to "fix" the world (because that's not really his job, after all), I anticipate a two-year, nationwide period of cognitive dissonance that should be all sorts of fun to watch.
Let me be clear: I don't have any major fears about Obama's presidency. In fact, I'm hopeful about at least one of his plans. If he actually closes down Guantanamo Bay, that would be a good thing. We're not the freaking Inquisition here.
Yes, he'll try to socialize health care and I don't care for that. But if we're being honest, the country has been moving in that direction for years now, and if it finally happens on Obama's watch he still won't be solely to blame for it. (On a side note, the very act of establishing a government is a step toward socialization, so the world has been on this road for a while, like it or not--and I don't.)
No, I don't anticipate any significant reduction in gun rights, at least not within a single term.
Yes, I think that, to the rest of the world, it makes us look good to have a black president, and to a certain extent I may even agree that it's a big step for us. However, the world is fickle and racist and has relatively little interest in Obama as a person or political figure, only as a member of a particular race, so screw them.
No, I don't interpret the election of a democrat as a sign of the End Times, any more than I would interpret the election of a republican as such. In fact, in a country that enjoys polarizing itself (and if that sounds dirty, it's because it is), we actually must have a democrat for a few years to balance out all those republican years. If we were willing to elect reasonable, moderate candidates, we wouldn't have this problem. But, alas, despite my vote for the impeccably-mustachioed Bob Barr (said vote being, as I understand it, one of several tens of tens), we will, apparently, continue on in our zigzag journey, first riding an elephant that consistently veers to the right and then a donkey that tends toward the left of the Path of Reason, which runs arrow-straight toward The Future. We'd get there a lot faster if we were on a Segway--those puppies only veer if you do.
12 years ago
4 comments:
yup.
The only thing that I have heard that I like so far is the "We will look at each government program -if it works leave it, if not end it."
Yeah, that caught my attention, too. But don't all presidential candidates promise to "cut spending" and "eliminate waste" and then do nothing? Do you think Obama actually means it?
I think that HE means it, now it is a matter to see if the governmental system can allow changes on such a sweeping scale.
One fairly high hurdle to overcome is the fact that Republicans don't want Obama to succeed. So now they will try as hard as they can to limit change, especially useful change. Because, you know, the point of government is for your own party to get elected, not actually to make things work.
So the answer is no, Obama can't change much of anything. Real change will come when parties have to start doing good rather than just waiting for the other one to screw up.
But I still want Obama to try.
All I can say is Obama blessed Denver with a visit to the Museum of Nature and Science and signed a bill to put in debt for the rest of (al least) my life time. In so doing, his big AirForce One left more of a carbon footprint in one flight than I can leave in a lifetime of driving my truck -- and as far as I can tell, the secret service allowed him only 250 invited guests, so we didn't even get to see adoring crowds thronged around our savior. Behind the scenes, the anti-gun people were ramping up HR-45 which will severely limit our second amendment rights. (But I'll feel safer, because then only criminals will have guns) Whoop-de-doo-dah. Oh, and while heaping praise on our local bleeding heart democrats for helping him get a lot of votes in Colorado, he demonstrated that he can't even say Diana Degette's name properly. Come to think of it, I've paid so little attention, other than contempt, to Diana Degette, I'm not sure how to spell her name.
I'm of the opinion expressed by Ookami Snow that the only thing parties try to do is get elected. It seems like no one even tries to make things work. We are a very politically sick country.
Post a Comment