My habit of reading the news each morning has changed fundamentally since Jan. 20th, 2009. Time was, I'd cringe at the policies originating from the White House. I'd cringe at the way Bush represented our nation abroad. The environment, civil rights for gays, the economy, the war, stem cell research, and military spending--on all of these issues, President Bush was dead wrong, but what compounded his errors was his personality and style of leadership. Instead of listening to his critics, he stonewalled, obfuscated and tried to punish his critics. President Bush is one of the few American leaders that actually sanctioned torture. All of this came from a man that made much noise about his religious beliefs and how they instilled him with a profound sense of morality. A more immoral Administration, it would be difficult to find in U.S. history. I can only imagine how embarrassing the Bush Administration must have been for devout Christians, to see a man that prayed in public, yet committed so many abuses, outright crimes, lapses of judgment and pure negligent behavior.
Now I look forward to reading the news in the morning. I feel something akin to euphoria when I read about all the good things that Obama is doing. There's something more to Obama, however, than his policies. He's a great representative of this nation.
Just to hear Obama speak is to be impressed by his maturity, eloquence and calm confidence, a confidence that is justified by his intellect and learning. Such was not the case with Bush, whose confidence came off as ignorant arrogance, because he was unskilled in language or speaking, and woefully ignorant of history, science, art, religion, geography, math, technology, economics, military strategy, and public relations.
Bush has a female clone in Sarah Palin, whose ignorance about geography and history is even more palpable than Bush's. Maybe people are conservative due to simple ignorance. Education results in people becoming liberal in their views. Even the right-wingers that produce South Park confess to being ignorant about almost everything except video games.
My point is this. Even if I disagreed with Obama across the board on every issue, I would still appreciate his skill in representing this nation abroad and in communicating with the American people. He is a good guy to have on television speaking about our common values and shared beliefs. When Obama talks, I have the feeling I'm listening to a man who deserves to be on our currency. However, the twenty dollar bill should be reserved for Barney Frank. I suggest putting Obama's visage upon the $1 bill, because it is the most used bill in our currency. I have nothing against George Washington, but maybe the time has come to relegate our first President's likeness to the $50 bill, displacing Ulysses Grant, whose administration was almost as immoral as that of George W. Bush.
As for those who say they want Obama to fail, that smacks of treason. Aren't these right-wingers the same ones who were quick to call us liberals "traitors?" I have had my patriotism called into question almost every time in my discussions with conservatives and resented it. Now it seems like patriotism is just a football to be played by the right wing. They don't care a fig about the country, just about their agenda. Think about it--if Obama fails, where does that leave the United States of America?
Recently, FOX News shot back with an article suggesting that Democrats wanted Bush to fail. That is absolutely false! I wanted Bush to be a rousing success! In fact, I half-expected Bush to be a good caretaker of the economy, at least, despite being conservative on important social issues. He wasn't even that. Most Democrats I know would have been pleased, not to mention better off financially, if Bush had been a success instead of the miserable failure that he was.
Getting back to the wonderful things Obama has done, I think we should begin with the Obama Administration's reversal of many of President Bush's narrow-minded policies, such as the one concerning stem-cell research. Anyone who has relatives that died of cancer or other diseases can appreciate the need to assist, rather than hinder scientists in their efforts to find treatments to combat the diseases that afflict all of our families.
Reducing the emphasis on abstinence in sex education removes religious dogma from the equation. Young people need to know what a condom is and how to use it. There are people even today coming down with AIDS due to having unprotected sex.
Obama lifted the prohibition of health care providers even mentioning information about abortion. This Bush-era policy did a disservice to poor women impregnated by abusive boyfriends.
I have a story to relate here. I was contacted once by a young woman from Africa, visiting this country, who asked me for a ride to the abortion clinic. She did not have a car, and the clinic was over ninety miles away. She was a young college student from a very conservative family. Her boyfriend had turned out to be a scoundrel, and they were no longer together. I gave her the ride, and she solved her problem without anyone being the wiser, not her parents, friends or anyone else that might have cast judgment upon her behavior. I certainly never told anyone, and even in this recounting of the story, I haven't mentioned which country she was from.
Young people make mistakes, especially in the area of sexual behavior, as we all should know. Think back to when you were young. Slick and smooth-talking seducers sometimes worm their way into the pants of young people, knock them up and then move on. Should these smooth-talkers be rewarded by having a poor young woman raise the kids on her own? Do we need a future generation of smooth-talkers? No, we don't. Abortion is often the best alternative in situations where the boyfriend is MIA and didn't possess any of the qualities that a young woman might want to see in her children.
I support the Obama Adminstration's decision to end the illegal DEA raids on medicinal marijuana clinics in California. Conservatives only talk about states' rights when it suits their agenda. When California voters passed a law allowing the prescription of medicinal marijuana, suddenly states' rights did not matter anymore. Under the Bush Administration, DEA thugs smashed the medicinal marijuana clinics, destroying computers, arresting everyone, seizing anything of value--loot and pillage, like barbarians, leaving sick and dying patients without their medicine. Under Obama, the DEA has been instructed to end these illegal raids.
On the subject of the war, I'm less pleased with Obama, who has put off returning our troops from Iraq. However, his hands may be tied. If the United States withdrew its troops now, and the situation in Iraq deteriorated, all of the armchair generals across the country would be in an uproar. Too many conservatives are under the impression that Iraq is the 51st state of the Union. Obama doesn't want to be judged as losing Iraq. My own opinion is there isn't any winning or losing to be had over in Iraq, just a continuous drain on resources that might be better invested here in the real United States.
As for the bailouts, I'll be honest, I have my doubts. I don't like handing over public resources to companies like AIG and the automakers, all of whom deserve to sink into the abyss where they belong for their incompetence, greed, and myopia. Isn't that what capitalism is supposed to be about? Weeding out the weaklings? Once again, in the United States we have welfare for the rich, and tough love for the poor.
However, unlike me, Obama is a consummate politician, and I think he recognizes that he has to do something about the economy. To do nothing would look too much like Bush. The people want action and they want it now. Bush neglected the country for eight long years, focusing upon Iraq instead of domestic concerns. The stimulus package addresses long-standing problems that went neglected under the Bush Administration. Without getting into specifics, I see good and bad in it as well, but here again I think Obama is reaching out to conservatives in both parties and trying to build a consensus rather than pushing a liberal agenda that would please people like me.
To date, I find Obama to be middle-of-the-road in his policies, not liberal at all, but moderate. I don't agree with everything his Administration does, but feel that he has good intentions. Many of the areas where I disagree are more than likely due to Obama trying to represent all of America, rather than just liberals. He's a gradualist in many ways, and perhaps that is what we need right now given the current situation with the economy.
The conservative pundits who claim that Obama is trying to do too much are quite mistaken. Bush did absolutely nothing to help the country, and consequently there is a backup of important projects that should have been tackled eight years ago. Obama is merely cleaning up the terrible mess left in his hands by the Republican Administration. He's also considerably further to the right than the Republican party would like to admit. Reaching out to Republicans and trying to appease them was doomed to failure, but by doing so, Obama scored political points, appearing conciliatory whereas the Republicans were partisan as usual. The very fanaticism that Republicans value so much in their moral and spiritual leader, Rush Limbaugh, is what will serve to alienate the American voter.
Obama is willing to rise above his own political agenda in order to broaden his appeal among Americans, an intelligent strategy that will reap dividends in the upcoming elections of 2010 and 2012, at which time I hope to see Democratic majorities in both the House and the Senate that can withstand a filibuster. I also hope to see more Democrats in political offices throughout the country. The time has come to transform the country from a war-mongering bully to an economic powerhouse that produces goods and services that the rest of the world wants to buy. The world does not want our bombs and bullets.
No comments:
Post a Comment