There is an amazing disparity right now between an overwhelming support of the American people for Obama the president, and a similar majority in opposition to many of the man’s key policy initiatives.
Perplexing.
After giving this unusual discrepancy some thought, I am drawn to the conclusion that it might have everything to do with Obama’s amazing rhetorical style. He speaks with such utter confidence – such conviction – I have only ever witnessed similar power coming from the pulpit on Sunday morning.
And there is a sort of religious quality to Obama when he speaks. One gains the sense that his moral compass is unerring – that, long ago, he gained a firm grasp of Truth, in all its complexity. This isn’t communicated so much by his words – which are often muddled and contradictory – as it is by how he says them. How many sermons have you listened to (if Christian) that were mostly inane, but were delivered in such a tone as to make them seem utterly essential and of the deepest profundity? The cadence of speech -- faster, slower; the rise in volume to deliver a loud exhortation, the fall to near whisper to strike the heart – the certainty of a teacher instructing his students.
Now, maybe, Obama has filed off some of the extreme edges of the preacher’s rhetorical devices (things like the ecstatic whisper and the red-faced bellow), but he does ring, sometimes, with the cadences of salvation – he does speak as if he is channeling higher Truth…he does clip his sentences like a teacher, unimpressed at having to recap the lesson.
American people respond to this voice. Whether actively Christian, or just retaining some of the cultural residue of our common heritage, we naturally are inclined to submit to leaders who exhort us with moral confidence……And Obama has adopted the mantle of moral leadership with the confidence of one who has been anointed.
How long will this effect last, I can’t say. His morality is that of an ideologue. He preaches the “Truth” of the Leftist, yet he does it in a way that lulls poorly-grounded conservative spirits to yield…he speaks with such certainty – such seeming clarity -- that he seems to have transcended mere ideology.
Messiah complex? ………………He certainly seems to have the ego for it.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Does Obama want America to succeed?
That’s a broad statement. What does American success look like? I suspect the devil is in those details.
In my perception, Obama's idealism does not so much include a sense of America "the competitor" as it does America the "moral leader." This is a fundamental problem. Competition is intrinsic to nature. Whatever ceases to compete, dies – plant, animal, city, corner store…or country.
The classic liberal sentiment is that America is such a successful competitor that we have gained, kind of, a monopoly on success – at the expense of the rest of the world. This is the source of “liberal guilt.” To them, “moral leadership" consists of working to raise the standard of living throughout the rest of the world -- and the "morality" comes through the sacrifice of it all, the sacrifice of America's wealth and competitive advantage.
So, they’d have us compete…but for the other team.
That's no mere speculation; it's the only interpretation of countless policy actions that span the last several decades:
· Persistent, detrimental trade imbalances
· Countless billions in foreign aid -- IMF, World Bank, and numerous individual countries
· Massive loans, never expected to be repaid
· American capital and technology used to establish competitive advantages for other countries…at the expense of our domestic industries
· Trade agreements where America loses big
· Unchecked immigration
...these are just a few methods...and all of them represent a wealth transfer from the American people to the rest of the world, courtesy of the American politicians…whom we elected – ostensibly – to serve our best interests
Now, I'm not trying to argue the merits of helping our neighbors; what I am saying is that A) it hasn't been our decision, and B) we're only now starting to suspect the radical nature in which it has been done.
Americans, with their young sense of history, have felt a sort of complacency about their dominant role in the world – their higher standard of living. So we’ve been very willing to help those less fortunate than us – we’re like the rich kid who says they could care less about money, not understanding that we can only say that because we’ve never gone without it.
So does Obama want the US to succeed? I have no reason to believe that Obama is anything other than the far-left liberal that he has always claimed to be. I think it’s far more probable that Obama wants the world to succeed, and American success – to him – will be measured by how well we help to accomplish that. Translation: we’re going to have to “put some skin in the game”.
Liberals love to throw around the supposed statistic that "America is 5% of the world's population, but consumes 40% of its resources" To me, Obama's policies seem far more geared towards rectifying that imbalance than they do in maintaining America's prosperity.
How else can you explain his energy policy?
Taxing energy for the explicit purpose of making it much more expensive? Opposing drilling, refining, and new power plants nearly everywhere?
Energy is the life-blood of an economy, and Obama has loudly communicated through word and policy that he intends to starve us.
We’re already on the ropes…what is he thinking?
Consider this: experts know that an oil crisis of crippling proportions is directly upon us – math, not opinion. Do the research. It is also a fact that alternative energy sources are – at minimum – a decade away from being able to make any significant impact on our energy needs. We are going to run into a brick wall – imminently. In fact, we had already begun smacking into the wall when this financial train wreck granted us a reprieve. I have a hard time believing that Obama isn’t aware of this – just like it seemed utterly improbable that they didn’t see the credit crisis coming a mile away. I have to allow for the possibility that Obama is foolish and/or locked into a defunct paradigm, but my overwhelming suspicion is that he has every intention of taking America out at the knees…….some bushes you have to cut back to the roots to make way for the new growth.
I don’t think American prosperity even makes it onto his list of moral imperatives…The thought -- as a guiding concern -- is probably, to him, actually immoral.
…unless it can one day be accomplished with minimal consumption, minimal impact upon the environment, and without great disparity when measured against the living conditions of the rest of the world
…but we’ve got to recede a long ways before we can find that place
In my perception, Obama's idealism does not so much include a sense of America "the competitor" as it does America the "moral leader." This is a fundamental problem. Competition is intrinsic to nature. Whatever ceases to compete, dies – plant, animal, city, corner store…or country.
The classic liberal sentiment is that America is such a successful competitor that we have gained, kind of, a monopoly on success – at the expense of the rest of the world. This is the source of “liberal guilt.” To them, “moral leadership" consists of working to raise the standard of living throughout the rest of the world -- and the "morality" comes through the sacrifice of it all, the sacrifice of America's wealth and competitive advantage.
So, they’d have us compete…but for the other team.
That's no mere speculation; it's the only interpretation of countless policy actions that span the last several decades:
· Persistent, detrimental trade imbalances
· Countless billions in foreign aid -- IMF, World Bank, and numerous individual countries
· Massive loans, never expected to be repaid
· American capital and technology used to establish competitive advantages for other countries…at the expense of our domestic industries
· Trade agreements where America loses big
· Unchecked immigration
...these are just a few methods...and all of them represent a wealth transfer from the American people to the rest of the world, courtesy of the American politicians…whom we elected – ostensibly – to serve our best interests
Now, I'm not trying to argue the merits of helping our neighbors; what I am saying is that A) it hasn't been our decision, and B) we're only now starting to suspect the radical nature in which it has been done.
Americans, with their young sense of history, have felt a sort of complacency about their dominant role in the world – their higher standard of living. So we’ve been very willing to help those less fortunate than us – we’re like the rich kid who says they could care less about money, not understanding that we can only say that because we’ve never gone without it.
So does Obama want the US to succeed? I have no reason to believe that Obama is anything other than the far-left liberal that he has always claimed to be. I think it’s far more probable that Obama wants the world to succeed, and American success – to him – will be measured by how well we help to accomplish that. Translation: we’re going to have to “put some skin in the game”.
Liberals love to throw around the supposed statistic that "America is 5% of the world's population, but consumes 40% of its resources" To me, Obama's policies seem far more geared towards rectifying that imbalance than they do in maintaining America's prosperity.
How else can you explain his energy policy?
Taxing energy for the explicit purpose of making it much more expensive? Opposing drilling, refining, and new power plants nearly everywhere?
Energy is the life-blood of an economy, and Obama has loudly communicated through word and policy that he intends to starve us.
We’re already on the ropes…what is he thinking?
Consider this: experts know that an oil crisis of crippling proportions is directly upon us – math, not opinion. Do the research. It is also a fact that alternative energy sources are – at minimum – a decade away from being able to make any significant impact on our energy needs. We are going to run into a brick wall – imminently. In fact, we had already begun smacking into the wall when this financial train wreck granted us a reprieve. I have a hard time believing that Obama isn’t aware of this – just like it seemed utterly improbable that they didn’t see the credit crisis coming a mile away. I have to allow for the possibility that Obama is foolish and/or locked into a defunct paradigm, but my overwhelming suspicion is that he has every intention of taking America out at the knees…….some bushes you have to cut back to the roots to make way for the new growth.
I don’t think American prosperity even makes it onto his list of moral imperatives…The thought -- as a guiding concern -- is probably, to him, actually immoral.
…unless it can one day be accomplished with minimal consumption, minimal impact upon the environment, and without great disparity when measured against the living conditions of the rest of the world
…but we’ve got to recede a long ways before we can find that place
Friday, June 05, 2009
Can man conquer evil?
Upon watching the address that President Obama and Elie Weisel gave at the former concentration camp in Buchenwold, one observation stood out...and I think it gets to the very heart of what divides the left from the right: it's this idea that humanity can one day transcend evil. You hear it when Elie laments his shattered hope that the horrors of the holocaust might have been enough to vanquish war from the face of the earth; and you hear it when Obama says that "while history is unknowable it arches towards progress."
It's easy to let Obama’s statement slide. After all, technology is rushing forward all around us at breath-taking speed; but, technological progress was not what Obama had in mind when he made that comment. It was said in a moral context, and it was a statement of faith in an idea of the human spirit – one that believes that we are constantly seeking -- and attaining – moral improvement, refinement..that the heart of man is steadily growing brighter.
It's a central tenet in the faith of secular humanism that mankind is evolving socially – it’s a compelling narrative to complement the theory of evolution. We are constantly moving towards greater complexity, awareness, symbiotic harmony. This is why the failures of Socialist experiments in the past leave the left undaunted -- the mistakes of the past only propel us forward. And it is why they have only marginal respect for the Constitution -- newer is always better.
Never mind the fact that this last century has seen horrors unheard of in history, or that various states murdered more of their own people than the death toll from all of the wars combined in the last century. Never mind that only today do we witness such bewildering acts of evil as children murdering their classmates.
It’s an article of faith.
And there is a countervailing article of faith as well – one that the evidence supports much more strongly. It contends that evil is an intrinsic component of human nature. It will always be with us, and it will always need a vigilant defense against – both from within and without.
It's easy to let Obama’s statement slide. After all, technology is rushing forward all around us at breath-taking speed; but, technological progress was not what Obama had in mind when he made that comment. It was said in a moral context, and it was a statement of faith in an idea of the human spirit – one that believes that we are constantly seeking -- and attaining – moral improvement, refinement..that the heart of man is steadily growing brighter.
It's a central tenet in the faith of secular humanism that mankind is evolving socially – it’s a compelling narrative to complement the theory of evolution. We are constantly moving towards greater complexity, awareness, symbiotic harmony. This is why the failures of Socialist experiments in the past leave the left undaunted -- the mistakes of the past only propel us forward. And it is why they have only marginal respect for the Constitution -- newer is always better.
Never mind the fact that this last century has seen horrors unheard of in history, or that various states murdered more of their own people than the death toll from all of the wars combined in the last century. Never mind that only today do we witness such bewildering acts of evil as children murdering their classmates.
It’s an article of faith.
And there is a countervailing article of faith as well – one that the evidence supports much more strongly. It contends that evil is an intrinsic component of human nature. It will always be with us, and it will always need a vigilant defense against – both from within and without.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)