Obama’s dark picture of America
The Economist says that Obama, for all his talk about being the candidate of hope and bipartisanship and a new way forward, he ”can sound pretty darned depressing.”
[T]he front-runner’s speeches have begun to paint a world in which laid-off parents compete with their children for minimum-wage jobs while corporate fat-cats mis-sell dodgy mortgages and ship jobs off to Mexico. The man who claims to be a “post-partisan” centrist seems to be channelling the spirit of William Jennings Bryan, the original American populist, who thunderously demanded to know “Upon which side shall the Democratic Party fight-upon the side of ‘the idle holders of idle capital’ or upon the side of ‘the struggling masses’?”
There is no denying that for some middle-class Americans, the past few years have indeed been a struggle. What is missing from Mr Obama’s speeches is any hint that this is not the whole story: that globalisation brings down prices and increases consumer choice; that unemployment is low by historical standards; that American companies are still the world’s most dynamic and creative; and that Americans still, on the whole, live lives of astonishing affluence.
But he’s not the only one who paints a gloomy, sad picture of America. His’s opponent does, too. McCain is the only candidate on either side that has said anything about the necessity of globalization and how some jobs won’t be coming back anytime soon. This is Obama’s weak spot: the necessarily dark picture of America he must paint to justify change, hope, and him. If McCain can turn that argument back on his opponent (either one), he could do well for himself.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Special Student Discount for WORLD!








Click to Print
Include Comments










back to top23 Comments to “Obama’s dark picture of America”
Given Obama’s economic and national security policies this dark picture could be a self fulfilling reality. He’s talking about not renewing the Bush tax cuts and renegotiating current trade agreements including NAFTA that actually have been on balance a stimulus for job-growth. Also, despite his frothy rhetoric about change, he had the most liberal voting record in the Senate during 2007; he has no proved record of making the compromises necessary for effective change.
He, also, is on record advocating a hasty troop withdrawal from Iraq without regard to conditions on the ground. My guess is that, as Giuliani remarked, Obama would play defense against the Jihadis rather than the tough offense of a McCain.
Maybe the Republicans could in the long run benefit from a disastrous Obama presidency, as they did with that of Carter; however, I wouldn’t want to risk this.
Report comment to moderator
Oh, I wouldn’t get the knickers too tight on this one. Even The Economist got this part riht in the subhead: Is Barack Obama a populist, or just pretending to be one?
The answer can be found elsewhere, e.g. in yesterday’s Globe and Mail.
Peter raises another significant point about NAFTA. What is interesting is how American security policies at the border are threatening to undo this — that’s nine pages later in the same issue of The Economist. The difficulty with NAFTA, and so the source of the Dem populist rhetoric on the same, is that there have been winners and losers. Or, as McCain remarked during the Michigan primary, “some of these jobs are not coming back.” That’s the ugly economic truth faced by Michigan and Ohio as they necessarily retool their economy. Almost certainly this reinvigorating of nation’s industrial base is being hindered also by the fiscal drain which is the Iraq war.
Report comment to moderator
This is because Barak Hussein Obama’s wife, Michelle, says she can’t possibly be proud to be an American unless the voters put her hubby in office.
What a doofus……..
Report comment to moderator
True enough, if heaven’s your home, the light towers over the motels and gas stations look bright enough. But if you’re not on a road trip, and that’s where you live, the lighting is lurid and America is pretty dark.
Report comment to moderator
I find exploiting ignorance to foment hate a reprehensible practice. Whether the KKK talking about minorities, National Socialists about non-Aryans, or 911truthers about the USA all play upon the ignorance and gullibility of vulnerable people for the propagandists’ own ends. Exploiting ignorance of economics is no different. This style of politicking feeds on hate where the hope lies in the salvation of a political leader.
Report comment to moderator
The Economist says that Obama, for all his talk about being the candidate of hope and bipartisanship and a new way forward, he ”can sound pretty darned depressing.”
Well, if you don’t paint a depressing picture then there’s no reason for voters to look for hope. This is the last place that I thought that concept would need to be spelt out. I mean, try sell salvation without mentioning sin.
Report comment to moderator
Hello, we are at war in two countries paying with borrowed money while the rich get tax cuts. Some places have 17% unemployment. We are certainly entering a recession. Gas is going to over 4 dollars a barrel. Christians are focused on the gays of all things. Our military has been run into the ground.
Things ARE gloomy. Obama feels that as a leader, he can turn this around and make things NOT gloomy.
Report comment to moderator
Several years back Ben Wattenberg penned a book called “The Good News is The Bad News is Wrong”. The NAFTA treaties pushed so fervidly by the Clintons have been a benefit to Texas. But Ohio? Not so much. A splendid Opinionjournaldotcom article spelled out the differences quite clearly.
Politicians in Ohio and Michigan saw the old rust belt industries as “cash cows” and piled on all type of taxes. The unions too seemed to feel that they could add costs to those industries and all would be well. For a time it was.
But the taxation, high regulatory compliance costs coupled with costly pension and health benefits killed the golden goose.
We still have manufacturing jobs.. they’ve relocated to Alabama and other non-unionized low tax states.
I agree with McCain though. Michigan needs to bid a long farewell to the industries which wont be coming back. Then, figure out the “next big thing” and begin retooling the schools to train future workers for those jobs
Report comment to moderator
I loved how Obama claimed to win the Michigan primary when he wasnt even on the ballot in that state!
Report comment to moderator
Of course Barack Hussein Obama has to peddle how horrible the American Republic is (and how horrible any Americans who do not agree with him and his handlers are). And of course that is essentially true for Hillary Rodham Clinton as well, with the exception that she is not quite as overt in her ideology as he is.
That is the standard page out of the Marxist-Leninist playbook of the far left-wing which currently controls the Democrat Party and much of the media.
A vague and essentially undefined call for ‘change’ to an increasingly uneducated and media-led populace is the traditional left-wing code-phrase for socialization of the economy, deprivation of civil liberties, and the creation of an all-powerful State completely controlled by an individual or a small group of individuals.
Same tune Hugo Chavez sung a while ago, I think.
Hopefully America has enough citizens left who can actually think for themselves to put an end to this amazing charade come November.
Although McCain is no great shakes to me, either. He has shown incredibly bad judgement on a number of issues ranging from cannibalizing baby stem cells for medical research, first amendment rights, to the unprincipled support of the current left-wing global warming/human activity ’scientific’ scam.
McCain is not great but is still a long sight better than having an avowed Socialist with undisputed ties to Muslim extremists (i.e. through his ’spiritual advisor’) as a President of the United States.
Report comment to moderator
“Christians are focused on the gays of all things.”
RDean seems to return to his obsession in every post while the Christians he decries spend almost no time or energy in this area except in response to provocations by posts like his. Projecting a little?
Obama speaks of bringing unity and bipartisanship. Someone should alert him that he is running for President of the US, not North Korea, which is undeniably and quintessentially unified and free of bipartisan controversy. But at what a cost.
Give me the fervent ferment of bipartisan rancor over the totalitarian impulses that lurks behind Obama’s empty platitudes. Iron sharpens iron.
Fortunately his rhetorical aversion to bipartisanship is patently disingenuous. His voting record reveals that he is the most doctrinaire leftist in the Senate. To bring the country together in a spirit of cooperation would require him to abandon many of his extreme positions.
Report comment to moderator
When Obama listens to the mainstream media, he is composing his view of merica.
Report comment to moderator
Why are you saying that Senator Obama is selectively reporting the facts? Why? It’s obvious. It’s because you’re a RACIST!! I mean, the guy is BLACK, for gosh sakes! Have you no shame?
Report comment to moderator
ZZ, who’s fault is that?
Report comment to moderator
Drill (#10) is absolutely right.
Democrats in this country have some kind of subconscious, suicide death-wish and they want to take the rest of us over the cliff with them. Down at the bottom of the cliff lies the wreckage of failed Marxist states like the USSR, East Germany and others.
The track record of Marxism is an utter failure economically, socially and morally. Millions upon millions of people have been imprisoned and brutally murdered in these regimes. Millions more have been starved to death.
Yet the leftists in American universities and the Democrat Party continue with their siren song of Marxism. Never has the following passage been more true:
Rom 1:21, 22 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Report comment to moderator
Maybe America is a dark place.
Report comment to moderator
Only the 50% that’s “liberal” is dark, HRW.
In Europe, the people accepted and continue to accept Marxism, and in doing so, they turned their back on God. Because they don’t know God, they haven’t been on watch — Islam rolled right in. And who is behind Islam?
Report comment to moderator
NJL
Much of Europe has no interest in the LORD.
We were traveling abroad and met a couple from Denmark, we spent time talking to them on several occasions out on the beach. In one of the conversations, the woman declared “in Denmark we are just heathens” she didn’t say it to cause attention, or to be rude, she was just stating a fact. I never forgot her remark, or the tone in which she said it.
Report comment to moderator
Much of Europe has no interest in the LORD.
Thank God!
Report comment to moderator
#10: Of course Barack Hussein Obama has to peddle how horrible the American Republic
Flat out lie. Our country isn’t terrible, our current circumstance most certainly is. Dig your head out of the ground, take a look around.
Housing
war
recession
Republicans
and on
and on
Report comment to moderator
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr is typical: capitalizes on the negatives in order to get the votes. Hillary Rodham Clinton is doing the same. It’s all cheap rhetoric manufactured to get the mindless reactionaries to pull the lever for more government, higher taxes and “entitlements”.
Very sad: as America dumbs down she will inevitably be damned. Or doomed depending on your worldview.
Either way, we’re slumbering away to nowhere.
Report comment to moderator
#19: Thank which God? The One you don’t believe in?
Report comment to moderator
The ironic thing is that Barack Hussein Obama’s criticisms are accurate, and his candidacy is about solving the problems he describes. Predatory lending? Offshoring of jobs that Americans used to hold? You don’t think these are important things to address?
You guys complain that he hasn’t said what he plans to “change,” and now you complain that he does.
And none of you are going to give even a second’s thought to voting for him anyway.
It would be easy to get up and make speeches about how perfect America is. It would also be denial, and voting for such a candidate would guarantee at least four more years in which nothing gets better.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!