I'm impressed with the following submission from reader Randy Turner, and we would both appreciate any feedback you may have. Randy, because it's the first time he's posted here, and me because I want to know if I should offer him an official, unpaid job. My standards are not too high. I simply require my unpaid labor to be better than the majority of editorials featured in the New York Times. Have at it...
A guest submission by Randy Turner:
So lately, I have been in a funk and I know it's in no
small part due to the inauguration and all of the hype surrounding it.
I'm disappointed that, even on the day that should be about celebrating
the peaceful transition of power and the historical event that is
taking place, Pres Bush continues to receive no respect. As an American, I am extremely proud that our country appears to be beyond race, even if there are individuals who aren't. But any sense of joy that I would have on
this day is lost not only in the treatment of Bush but also in my
disappointment in what I believe the election of President Barack Obama means.
Change?
We heard it throughout the election that an Obama
Presidency would bring change the tired, old politics of yesterday. The
hope that Barack Obama is not just a visual difference but
that he represents a new, progressive shift in the way our government will
serve its people. However, based on his cabinet selections and
intimations that he would continue many of President Bush's policies, it's
obvious now that all of those promises were nothing more than campaign
rhetoric. He's even acknowledged as much (here and here) and seemingly offered that he shouldn't be held accountable for
things said during the heat of a campaign. Obama recently said in an
interview:
"I want to be realistic here. Not everything that we talked
about during the campaign are we going to be able to do on the pace
that we had hoped."
I wonder what reality President Obama was living in when
he made those promises. Did we not have two wars and a looming,
potentially catastrophic, economic crisis before the election? Indeed,
he made it his mission to stoke the fire of fear as he made everyone
keenly aware of that reality with his blame for the previous
administration. He promised if we elected him he would bring to office
the recipe to cure what ails us. He has since
been doused with a more fierce reality. Why else would an agenda that was
advertised as the solution just four months ago not have the same
healing powers now? It's no surprise then that President Obama and his
acolytes have since been in the business of expectation management.
Sell the bar as being so low that any improvement (such as jobs
created or even saved) will be a result of Obama's Presidency. Is that
change you can believe in or politics as usual?
Or same ol' same ol'
Looking past the lack of credentials that would
make one believe he is actually qualified to hold this office, Barack
Obama's supporters believe he is highly intelligent, that he has
an incredible grasp of nuance and is wise enough to listen to his
expert advisors. Of course he's
intelligent, he managed a revolutionary campaign that allowed a man
whose past acquaintances would no doubt have denied him a top secret
clearance (judging by the standards I was subjected to). Yes, Pres Obama is a master at nuance; a point that no doubt gives
him remarkable aplomb within the political realm. He must be a master
politician because, despite little experience by which to judge him
otherwise, he has held no other job for as long as the office of which
he is about to enter.
So, I like many others can only find in Barack Obama hope.
In his inaugural address, President Obama stated that, "On this day, we
gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over
conflict and discord…" I found it ironic that he, his party, and the
mainstream media were largely responsible for fueling that fear,
conflict and discord; nevertheless, he's right. We have chosen hope
because we can't possibly know what he stands for otherwise. He's a
political chameleon who, despite his long-standing liberal political
roots, suddenly dines with conservative pundits and picks Bush-era
realists to run his wars.
A New Hope?
Ronald Reagan famously quipped that the nine most
terrifying words in the English language are "I'm from the government
and I'm here to help." I guess even the great communicator--who in 1984
won 525 of a possible 538 votes in the electoral college--would have
had a tough time getting elected against Barack Obama and his promise
to more intimately involve the government in the lives of its citizens.
Today, Obama said, "What the cynics fail to understand is that the
ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments
that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask
today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but
whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent
wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified."
This is a
far cry from Pres Kennedy's "Ask not what your country can do for you…"
While Pres Obama asks the country to embody the spirit of service and
the "willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves",
he contends that affordable health care is not a choice but a right. I guess the founding fathers weren't quite prescient enough to
include health care next to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I will concede one point in President Obama's speech, that we
must ask whether or not our government works. To that I answer a
resounding no. As a member of the military, I have firsthand experience
dealing with one idea of state health care. While I applaud the
individuals that try to make it work, the system, borne of government
bureaucracy and inefficiency, is a mess. The same can also be said of
social security which will probably be bankrupt before I am able to
draw from it.
In fact, I will challenge you to find one system of
government that works well or cannot be replaced by a more efficient
system. The IRS? The DMV? The postal service? I'll give you one and
only one; the US Military. But even the military, filled with the best
and brightest this country has to offer and who represent the
willingness to serve that Pres Obama refers to, has a number of
shortcomings which can largely be blamed on bureaucracy, politics, and
other shortcomings pervasive in our government.
And this is why I am concerned. Welfare is broken and
outdated. Public schools are failing. Medicare is crippled. Every time
the government injects itself, the results are usually off the mark,
over budget, and past deadline. But Pres Obama has filled the country
with hope. Hope that he and his new administration of change can
correct the compounding issues of the day. Hope that his election marks
a turning point and suddenly people will be called to action. Hope that
ALL Americans will suddenly demonstrate a willingness to work harder
and serve others.
Sorry, but if all those things could happen, then there
would be no need for government at all. Instead, my pessimism and
understanding of the human id as naturally self-serving prevents me
from acknowledging that hope. People will continue to look after their
own self interests and will continue to find ways to abuse and exploit
one another potentially to the cost of $850 billion in wasted government
programs that will accomplish little more than holding us more
dependent upon the government.
I'm disappointed because by holding on to this hope, it
indicates that rather than taking greater responsibility of their lives
and risk being held personally accountable, more and more Americans
would rather ask the government to step in take over. Are Americans
turning away from the belief that hard work and determination would
lead to prosperity? Isn't this the spirit that made us great in the
first place? I guess I have hope too. I hope I'm wrong.
Recent Comments