Well, we are getting ready to enter the campaign season. We are looking at one of the most important elections in our nation's history and it is such because it will determine whether we are a free market, property rights respecting, state government oriented, society that has the "disadvantaged" at the centre of its social agenda ---- whether they live within our boundaries or struggle for a meaningful life in countries that are, truly, foreign to us and our way of life. The problem is increased because of the tension of "living within our means" versus certain foundational (read: "Constitutional") issues, not to mention the need to help those who cannot do for themselves.
Understand that the United States of America had is beginnings both in a desire for freedom and a certain intellectual rendering not common to any other world power. Indeed, there was a fight for freedom, but more than that, much more than that, we thought ourselves into existence. Our original concerns were not always consistent with stated doctrine, but our founding documents gave us a political and intellectual base upon which to continue the great American experiment. The very notion of "American exceptionalism" is embedded within this reality. And part of that sense of national exceptionalism was and is the "pursuit of happiness." Because it is a part of the Constitutional statement, the pursuit of happiness is not simply an individual right, but a shared national experience. Too bad we think this means we must legislate its existence into some sort of political reality.
When Obama and those of his intellectual ilk deny American exceptionalism, they do so out of a sense of disgust with our historical beginnings and an irreverent view of the Constitution, its Preamble statement, and the Federalist Papers with which the Great American Debate was initially launched.
Obama came to his adult age without knowing what or who he was. His white mother was an atheist and his black father was a foreign national and a Muslim. He was raised as a privileged white boy but did not have a sense of belonging in that world precisely because he was "black." As an adult, he did not participate in the movement for the advancement of Black civil rights and has never attached himself to that movement in terms of position and effort. He went to the white man's school and, somewhere along the way, met an attractive 100% black woman (Michelle).
Everyone noticed his ability to talk. No one noticed his lack of the profound.
He had a spiritual inclination that would not be denied. His concept of efficacy, however, evolved (some might say "devolved") into a very specific sense of self-efficacy, allowing him to say things such as "now is the time when the earth begins to cool and the oceans begin to recede." The fact that he was the first American candidate to campaign for the American presidency on the world's stage, gave us all a window through which we could measure how he was viewing his own sense of self worth.
His view of God and Jesus became a distorted concept of reactionary black theology (also known as Black Liberation Theology); a view he came to accept after 22 years of sitting at the feet of Jeremiah Wright; a view he holds but without the sophistication of studied theology.
In Obama, I personally see a sense of anger that goes back to [perhaps] a disappointment in never having really known his father. His individual persona is something he has created for himself; it was not given to him by rite of familial association or breeding.
While there is a certain noteworthiness to all this, he possesses a degree of social immaturity that has allowed him to be "used" by the Establishment he sought to redefine. In the end, he has been swallowed up by the political forces that put him in office and now demand continued payback for their efforts. There are more [green] lobbyists that ever before. His disdain for congressional review and legislative order has become more than obvious. His contempt for "American exceptionalism" bespeaks a personal criticism for the white man's mistreatment of the black community. He reached his ideological pinnacle just before his election. He [almost] immediately forfeited his ideals with the stimulus/pay back bill of February of 2009 and the terribly dysfunctional legislative process that birthed the health care bill. He has never recovered his sense of idealism.
Here is an opinion of a flaming liberal supporter and it, somewhat, gets to the heart of what is wrong with Obama. It ties in with my claim that his liberal/one world/ social agenda was taken over by the Establishment Liberal community:
It’s all nonsense. Obama is smart, decent and tough, with exactly the right instincts about where the country needs to go. He has accomplished a lot more than he’s gotten credit for — with an opposition dedicated to making him fail. But lately he is seriously off his game. He’s not Jimmy Carter. He’s Tiger Woods — a natural who’s lost his swing. He has so many different swing thoughts in his head, so many people whispering in his ear about what the polls say and how he needs to position himself to get re-elected, that he has lost all his natural instincts for the game. He needs to get back to basics. ---- Thomas Friedman, NYT, August 23.
Whether it is true or not, the supporters, at least, of Obama believed he was and is a man of ideas. Read this comment from Michelle Obama, spoken in May of 2008:
MICHELLE OBAMA: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."
Many of us knew of this and similar comments and our opposition to Obama's election was directly related to such political nonsense.
But, none of this happened. He did not change America for the better nor did he install a new world order. If Michelle and others were accurately describing the Barack they knew, he certainly lost his way during that first year in office. He has devolved into a partisan, hateful, novice, stuck in a position of leadership for which he is painfully unqualified.
All this being said, the temptation to make the coming election about Barack Obama must be resisted.
Bush 43 was a big spending Establishment Republican; a wonderful fellow but an Establishment Republican, none-the-less. If the GOP is not about ideas and thoughtful solutions in this election, then we all lose in the coming campaign. The Grand Old Party cannot remain as it now presents itself. The Establishment (i.e. John McCain and others) has no ideas/solutions that successfully deal with the immigration mess in which we find ourselves. No amount of increased taxation can give us escape from the need to cut our spending by 80 to 90 percent. And what are we really going to do about increased health care costs? They continue to rise, 8 to 12 percent in this year, alone. ObamaCare did not solve the problem and most within the liberal community are now admitting that this health care "reform" law will cost the nation more than 3 trillion dollars in its 2nd decade, beginning in 2020. If we win the abortion war, what do we do with the 1.3 million children suddenly put into the system each and every year, children that are obviously unwanted? The solution is not impossible, but if we ignore the question, nothing good will be gained by the potential "pro-life victory."
What am I saying? The GOP needs leadership that goes far beyond what we are currently arguing about. Increasing taxes on the rich is a rather stupid idea in view of the fact that such increases will miss total revenues needed to balance the budget by more than 92% !!. And, debating Obama's vacation time when compared to Bush 43 does nothing for this country, either. It is completely beside the point.
Democrats cannot formulate "solutions" that do not include spending trillions of dollars. But, Republicans have few solutions apart from a "you're on your own" mentality. Personal responsibility is critical to this country dealing with its problems, but there are millions within our population who cannot help themselves.
While I am not talking about welfare or an increasingly large entitlement state, I do believe this: to whom much is given, much is required.
Can we solve our societal problems apart from a legislative agenda that increases the size of government and orders us all to do so? I think we can and, more than that, I believe we must. And the "New" GOP must put forth leadership in these matters. To date, the GOP is painfully lacking in this regard.
No comments:
Post a Comment