Hope and Change was left behind long ago.
The public has come to know three Obamas. But which, if any, of these portraits is real, and which are fantasies?
Aside from those who automatically support Obama because he is a redistributionist Democrat, and those who automatically oppose him because he is an unapologetic Great Society liberal, there are currently three general takes on Obama.
I. Self-Portrait
Obama’s own judgment on his tenure is now all too clear: He saved us from another Great Depression, and he has made the United States more secure and more popular in the eyes of the world than we have been at any time in our recent history. Obama “ended two wars” (in the sense of pulling troops out of Iraq and steadily bringing them back from Afghanistan). According to Obama, America has never been more liked abroad, largely because his lead-from-behind policies have ended the image of the U.S. as bully. He hunted down and “got” Osama bin Laden. At last, an American president has crafted a comprehensive plan to navigate Iran away from nuclear-weapons acquisition. The Middle East is no longer defined as an obstreperous Israel and triangulating Gulf monarchies dominating American policy — on the basis of a “special relationship” in the former case, and the American need for oil in the latter. Europe has been weaned off dependence on the United States and, in tough-love fashion, is emerging from its past infantilization. Obama has isolated Putin and warned the Chinese about their rough elbows that cause tensions to flare. Obama ended the controversial “war on terror,” and, as a result of his inspired outreach to the Muslim community, there has been no repeat of 9/11.
At home, Obama saved the economy after the September 2008 financial meltdown, which he did through massive infusions of cash into the economy and by growing government to record levels. Unemployment is now low, and energy prices have declined. The government under Obama at last is behind climate-change legislation. The declining deficit is no longer at its customary $1 trillion in red ink. A new nationalized health system will extend coverage to millions of people who were previously uninsured. The president offers a balanced voice on racial tensions, and is seen as a valuable negotiator between the anger of minorities and the apprehensions of the majority. His administration has been largely scandal-free (in the sense that no major figure has yet been indicted). He has tried to solve the immigration problem by bringing millions “out of the shadows” through amnesties and promises of more. As the first African-American president and the first to win a Nobel Peace Prize, Obama will be remembered as an iconic leader. He certainly has refashioned the Democratic party and finally rebranded it as, first and foremost, a progressive movement aimed at ensuring social justice and equality.
II. The Majority Take
Obama has not polled a 50 percent positive rating in two years. George W. Bush is now more popular than Barack Obama. It is easy to see why. By the time Obama entered office the war in Iraq had already ended; the country was quiet, but in need of U.S. stewardship, in the manner of South Korea circa 1953–54. For the sake of a campaign talking point, Obama pulled out all American troops, Iraq sunk into chaos, and ISIS was birthed — an Islamic fascist movement that he deprecated as a “JV” team. He telegraphed his plans to leave Afghanistan, and its fate will likely be similar to Iraq’s. His false red lines in Syria, the bomb-and-run destruction of Libya, the Benghazi disaster, the needless estrangement from Israel, the alienation of the Gulf monarchies, and the courting of Iran by dropping sanctions and not insisting on full inspections as part of nuclear talks have all helped to demolish U.S. influence in the region, and contributed to the most unstable Middle East since World War II.
The U.S. is no more popular now than it was under past presidents. Euphemisms and outreach — such as the apology tour and the Cairo speech — had no effect on America’s image abroad. At home, there are constant efforts by Islamists to kill Americans — some broken up, some not, like the Boston Marathon bombing and the Fort Hood massacre. Obama trashed the Bush–Cheney anti-terrorism protocols, but then ended up adopting most of them as his own — his unique contribution being increasing about tenfold the out-of-sight, out-of-mind Predator-drone assassination attacks. Even our allies know that Iran will soon get the bomb — although perhaps, out of deference to their benefactor, the Iranians will wait to set off a nuclear device until Obama has left office. China is creating artificial atolls in the Pacific to expand its influence, and our smaller allies are increasingly faced with the unpalatable choice of begging the U.S. for the continuance of traditional security guarantees, offering China concessions, or going nuclear themselves. Putin was rewarded for going into Georgia with “reset,” and the result is the absorption of Crimea and part of Ukraine, with the Baltic states next. Lead from behind, empty red lines, rhetorical deadlines and step-over lines, reset, and pivot are all now recognized as synonyms for an American recessional.
Obama entered office four months after the financial panic, by which time all the major remedies were already in place and working. The recession ended six months into his term, as such downturns usually do after two or three years. Unlike the Clinton–Gingrich budget deal, Obama’s slashing defense and raising taxes resulted not in balanced budgets but in serial half-trillion-dollar deficits, given unchecked entitlement and other domestic spending. Only zero interest rates — which have punished the middle class and blessed Wall Street — have allowed Obama to service $7 trillion in additional debt, whose total is now nearing $19 trillion.
The U.S. has a bitter appointment ahead with draconian budget belt-tightening and entitlement reform. The private sector, through fracking and horizontal drilling, has brought America more gas and oil — despite, not because of, Obama, who stymied new oil leases on public lands, froze the Keystone pipeline, and talked down carbon fuels, only to take credit for falling gas prices. His green initiatives went nowhere, as even a Democratic Congress balked at cap-and-trade legislation. What was left was rhetorical Goreism and insider cronyism of the Solyndra brand. Obamacare — along with massive new borrowing, constant presidential jawboning against entrepreneurial success, and a labyrinth of new regulations — stalled the economy, which experienced negative growth last quarter, along with record rates of non-participation in the labor force and static family income. All the Affordable Care Act’s promises — reduced premiums and deductibles, individuals’ being able to keep their doctors and their health plans, radical cost-savings — proved empty, and were seen as empty through the president’s own pre-reelection suspension of many of the mandates. Obamacare will likely soon be quietly dismantled and replaced by a more free-market alternative.
Obama was neither a progressive crusader nor a neo-socialist who wrecked the country, but mostly a sad pretender going through the motions.
Obama resorted to illegal executive orders of just the sort that he himself once warned against. He destroyed border enforcement in a transparent scheme to alter the electoral demography of the American Southwest. Race relations have not been worse since the 1960s, as the firebrand Al Sharpton is a regular White House visitor, and both President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have spiked racial tensions through unnecessarily provocative editorializing on race. Hope and Change is not a legacy, but instead will be remembered as a cruel Pied Piper tune that led the masses over the cliff. Obama has wrecked the Democratic party, by losing both houses of Congress and ensuring that a large majority of state legislatures and governorships are firmly Republican. His second term will see no lasting achievement, other than a series of executive orders designed as much as anything to spite his opponents. The Obama presidency was a tragic failure.
III. Being There
A third view of Obama is neither so rosy as the first nor so melodramatic as the second. Obama may well have been an unapologetic progressive wolf in centrist clothing, but mostly he was a continuation of what he had been in the past: an unimpressive state legislator, a one-term partisan senator without any accomplishments, a lackadaisical executive who in his own words had to worry most about not appearing lazy and distracted. Obama as president simply pushed the right progressive buttons, all the more easily once his own party lost the Congress and he was freed to sign executive orders that enraged his enemies and moved the country leftward. He cares little about the scandals involving the IRS, VA, AP, NSA, GSA, TSA, EPA, Benghazi, and the Secret Service, other than ensuring that they stay far away from his own godhead.
Mostly, President Obama likes the ceremonial perks of his office — the public spotlight to pick sports winners, the regal access to the links in sporty golf attire, the huge plane and entourage, the video clips of his catlike descent down the stairs of Air Force One, and the captive audiences for his often ahistorical and confused ramblings about America’s past and present shortcomings. Rarely has a president entered office so inexperienced and unprepared, yet with such great hopes and expectations among the public. That he squandered such good will through petty spite and inexperience should not be surprising, given his meager qualifications and thin résumé. Most of Obama’s career in community organizing, academia, and the Illinois legislature was predicated on leveraging his race, name, and unique background with the pretensions of liberal America to land opportunities for which he knew in advance that he would never be held accountable.
Hence his presidency proved entirely predictable: Obama was neither a progressive crusader nor a neo-socialist who wrecked the country, but mostly a sad pretender going through the motions. The more that he kept silent and was not seen, the more the public liked the idea rather than the reality of Barack Obama.
Most readers will see elements of truth in all three Obamas. Portrait III, however, seems the most accurate — with the caveat that a listless and detached president can still achieve enormous change by outsourcing to legions of diehard progressive ideologues the implementation of his hazy notions of redistributionist social justice.
And while he leaves a mess behind on the global scene, he and his cronies will take on more wealthy and powerful positions around the world continuing to stir the pot for social unrest, and in America, the entire governmental infrastructure will be dramatically more infested with socialist rats in every corner of every wasteful department.
We will need God’s hand to help and bless us if we are to recover the effects of this Loser of a President and his supporters.
The gap between Obama’s self-assessment and the reality of his inept and incompetent performance is stunning. Another superlative analysis by Dr. Hanson.
You forgot to mention his lying in bed at the outset with the Muslim Brotherhood and have many of their operatives still in the WH, especially at his conference earlier this year which is ridiculously called, “Violent Extremism,” as opposed to “Radical Islam.”
When did the nation vote to spend funds for education to replace the 1776 to 1900 “Tragic-Liberty Worldview” education… with mandatory K-12 and university “Progressive-Serfdomite Worldview” education?
Why is “Progressive-Serfdomite Worldview” education (i.e. Common Core) like a low-flush Eco-toilet, where you have to keep flushing over and over, and still it won’t go down?
The answer is clearly to elect representatives who will defund “Prog-Serfdomite” education, since Obama is a perfect example of that dangerous, false-reality, group-suicide sub-teaching. The answer is to return to “Tragic-Liberty Worldview” education K-12 and university. (Progtard ruination can thus be reversed.)
Barak is Enabler- in-Chief. He has a preternatural ability to sense what is most self destructive for America and Americans and enable that. He is so good, he can accomplished this with his eyes closed, his hands tied behind his back, while playing golf.
I have always thought of Obama’s terms as president in a Walter Mitty kind of vein…just Walter actually gets the chance to do the things he dreams of. But he’s still Walter Mitty, not some grand, decisive leader.
He certainly is a true believer in the University-inflected brand of progressivism he espouses.
But at the end of the day, he’s not a leader. He’s a failed community organizer. He’s a do-nothing back-bencher who rose to power faster than we could arrive at a consensus about who he is. He’s a blank canvas onto which we can project whatever relationship we have with his ideology.
Well said, JT.
A divider that uses people with absolutely no conscience!
I go for #2.
“Hence his presidency proved entirely predictable:”
Predictable to you and those paying close attention in the run up to 2008 but, on the basis of the incontrovertible evidence of 2012, unpredictable to, and undetected by, a majority of American voters mesmerized and rendered incapable of sound judgment by a media enthralled with Obama’s charismatic image; “his catlike descent down the stairs of Air Force One” for one of many instances of widely publicized images of physical prowess and glorification.
Obama, “The One,” is perhaps the greatest, most successful and most devastating political con job ever perpetrated on a nation of complacent, disengaged, disinterested patriots exercising their constitutional right, however superficially, to vote. Contrary to the popular admonition to vote, no matter what, Americans would be well advised not to vote unless they are well versed on current events, the major issues involved and the candidates approach to deal with those issues. A few hours of attention given to review the favorite local or national news sources in the last week or two before the election in order to form and solidify an opinion (set the hook trolled by biased news sources) is grossly inadequate as two terms of Obama proves. Of course, as a pragmatic, effective solution to the problem of voter ignorance this approach leaves much to be desired.
Obama is not the only U.S. president to win a Nobel Peace Prize.
Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were both awarded
Peace Prizes, in 1906 and 1919 respectively. Two secretaries
of state, George Marshall and Henry Kissinger, have also
been awarded Peace Prizes.
Of course, many Americans pay little attention to history
and could well believe that Obama is the only one.
Good article, I think Obama #2 rings the most true.
Billions of adults on this planet and no one else could have written this article.
Thank you for this article!
Number one is mostly the fairy tale of Hope and Change that the MSM and Obama’s supporters believe is the truth.
Number two would be the most accurate description and evaluation of Obama if one applies the necessary critical thinking.
Number three is really an addendum to number two.
Saying Obama is a Neo-Socialist who is hellbent on imposing a state controlled, massive central government is not an overstatement. The damage his Justice Dept. and EPA are inflicting on States, municipalities and individuals, nevermind the alphabet soup of scandals that have been put in service to maintaining power, is ample evidence of not just his detached amateur leadership but of an ideologue who doesn’t respect the rule of law. It’s utterly astounding to me how a majority of Americans could have failed to notice his far-left intransigence after the associations with Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers and Frank Marshall Davis were revealed by Fox or other conservative news outlets during the 2008 election cycle, or his glaringly thin resumé of voting “Present” 129 times in the Illinois state legislature and of achieving very little either as a US Senator or as an Ivy League educated lawyer/community organizer. The MSM certainly played a critical role – eg: why did we only find out AFTER the election that he had been a chronic stoner in high school, and why is the LA Times still refusing to release the video of Obama honoring Israel hater Rashid Khalidi? – and continues to carry water for him and Hillary. Another interesting lead the MSM could have followed up on was how did he transfer into Columbia university as an undergrad? My father-in-law went to Ivy League schools and says it’s highly unusual for them to accept transfer students, especially stoners for whom high school was a blur. There are also the related issues of his transcripts and, as VDH has pointed out in the past, his dearth of outstanding essays while editor of the Harvard Law Review.
With respect to his narcissism and arrogance, I’ve often wondered what our country would have been like had our Founding Fathers chosen a parliamentary system of government instead of a Montesquieuian form. A french style ceremonial presidency would suit Obama and his wife as they would be free to jet around the globe, entertain dignitaries at the WH and generally pretend they are important while leaving the serious business of governing the nation with the more democratic House of Representatives. The Senate could also be largely ceremonial too, just like Britain’s House of Lords, it would rarely obstruct the will of the people. This may give a Nancy Pelosi temporarily a frightening amount of power, but with an active opposition and votes of No Confidence, you would have more fluid shifts in power and a government that can express the will of the people and speak with one voice. I think this would be far preferable to the current gridlock that has failed to repeal Obamacare and produced the CRs that have lead to massive budget borrowing and nearly $19 trillion in debt. A parliamentary system would also give us a more coherent, grown-up foreign policy, instead of the casual ideologically driven mess we’ve been suffering through for the past 6.5 years and to which our adversaries are taking full advantage. Another benefit would also be better oversight and accountability of government. A demand for a proper independent inquiry into the asinine activities of a Lois Lerner or a Hillary Clinton wouldn’t be left up to the purview of the president’s buddy running the Justice Dept.
I grew up in Britain for about ten years during the 70’s and 80’s. Although I was only a teenager at the time, I do remember the fierce exchanges between then opposition leader Margaret Thatcher and PM James Callaghan that forced a vote of no confidence and saved the UK from looming financial disaster. Before she came to power, Britain was at the mercy of the Unions and the socialist Labour party. Strikes were rampant, unemployment was high and Britain was even forced to take out an IMF loan in 1976 as bankruptcy became a distinct possibility. I sure wish we had a leader today who understood the danger we are in and had the courage to speak truth to power.
Those who wrecked the country were those who were foolish and blind enough to vote for him not just once, but twice. They would vote for him a third time, but they can’t, so they will take whichever candidate they see as the closest example. I don’t see much changing and being that there were enough voters to easily put him in office, plus the pathetically horrible job the Republicans have done twice, why should I feel confident for our future?
Do you all think that the rest of the world only likes or dislikes the USA because of our presidents? Don’t be foolish. People around the world have poor views of the American people by meeting them. Unfortunately, these views are based primarily on encounters on foreign soil, where Americans who can afford to travel meet people in other countries. Monolingual, self-centered, and insensitive to cultural differences are often the regular opinion.
What do you expect, then? And, what do you all recommend to solve our countries social problems? Should we gas the illegals? Should we stop funding public schools? What about all that hate floating around? Why don’t we just kick everyone out of the country that is NOT a millionaire?
People get what they deserve.
Why should being “monolingual” be counted against anyone? I can express myself in French and read elementary Latin, so does that mean I’m more acceptable? I don’t think Americns in general are any more “self-centered” or “insensitive to cultural differences” than anyone else in the world who is travelling abroad, but if you have some evidence to support these outageous claims then by all means share it with us. I would love to see it.
And who is suggesting “we gas the illegals” or “stop funding public schools”? Again, provide your evidence. I would love to see it.
If you want to have a serious discussion about illegal immigration and its effects on our education and healthcare systems, or why the educated, bilingual immigrant with capital to invest is more desirable to our nation than the uneducated, welfare dependent, semi-literate who paid a Drug Cartel to smuggle him into the country then first dispense with the cheap, odious rants.
I have traveled to many countries where the local population likes to have USA tourist come because they spend a lot of money. But, the general opinion that I have encountered is a “dislike” for the way they behave.
In your internet browser write, “what does the rest of the world think of the united states” or “what does the rest of the world think of americans” and you can peruse a variety of blogs and sites.
And, by the way, I take it as a personal offense to your comment about the semi-literates smuggled into the USA. I have been an English as a second language teacher in urban public schools for 20 years. You obviously have had little contact with these “human” beings.
Portraits II and III absolutely must incorporate the recent disclosure that Obama, as a result of his PSD-11 (Presidential Study Directive) ordered that his administration’s foreign policy in the Middle East should prioritize alignment with the interests and goals of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a huge development with ominous implications which hitherto was apparently held secret. It helps to explain Obama’s surreptitious arming of rebels in Syria- with gun-running through Turkey- the overthrow of Gaddafi, the fall of Libya into hands of al-Qaeda spinoffs, the failure to come to the aid of the four Americans in that country during the Benghazi attack, Obama’s refusal to share intelligence with the el-Sisi regime in Egypt on terrorist threats to both countries and endorse his call for a “revolution” in Islam, pressures on Israel to return to pre-1967 borders, and his attempt to convert Iran from sworn enemy to “neutral” ally by easing its path towards the acquisition and launching capability of nuclear weapons. Worse yet, the shift in U.S. policy provides a blueprint for a potential Clinton presidency, since both Clintons aided and abetted the strategy of PSD-11, reaping handsome rewards through their Foundation in the process.
I would describe Obummer’s descent down Air Force One’s steps as fag like, rather than catlike.
Like his pal, the murderer William Ayers, Obama has murderous rage and hatred in his heart.
For those people that didn’t spot this, the creator of President Hussein’s ‘Hope’ poster, now says that he’s run out of hope for this president.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/28/politics/barack-obama-shepard-fairey-hope-2008/index.html
sirs:
put simply, obama is a shit head, and a wanna be bolshevik shooting people in the back of the head, in deep dark basements. but, he hasn’t the balls to do so.
but, the bleakest assessment of the truth, is that we haven’t had the balls to hang him from the yardarms by his heels, (any lamp post would do.)
stand off.
john jay
Why did Obama have his college records sealed? I just read this in the Hill.
I take issue with take III, over characterizing Obama as a “sad pretender”. He’s not pretending, or sad. He’s a hardcore ideologue basking in the glow of accomplishing the transformation he promised six years ago. America has become unrecognizable in 10 years, take II is much closer to reality than either of the other takes.
As an aside, I always regarded the election of 2006 as the birthing of tha TEA Party, when a significant part of the base stayed home as protest of a well established Republican congress spending the people’s money like drunken sailors. Anyway, it might not be the TEA Party was named as such 10 years ago, but the spirit was stirring. Happy Anniversary TEA Party types!! We’re pretty much screwed now, they wouldn’t/won’t listen…
Obama is the usual Progressive.
He wants to punish and humiliate his enemies. Beyond that, there’s nothing he particularly wants to *accomplish*.
Progressives are driven by dreams of *status*. They have nothing they particularly want to *do*, they just want to *be* somebody.
There’s a fourth choice: Obama as Trojan Horse, sleeper agent, Manchurian candidate, the Destroyer, inculcated with Marxist ideology mixed with Third World Nationalism and equal doses of Islam and Liberation theology; bred and raised to bring down an America and Western civilization based on the God-given natural rights of man and the Nation-State by Communist grandparents, and to replace national, racial, and economic hierarchy with an all encompassing global socialist governance structure led by the international elite.
If you take Obama as he was presented at the 2004 Democrat National Convention and as a 2008 presidential candidate, and see him at that time as a wholly fabricated image marketed to appeal to Bush fatigued America by the Democrat Party, itself a Marxist organization, as transcending race, nationality, a non-threatening messiah, as the best chance to affect non-violent, Cloward-Piven-style socialist revolution upon an unsuspecting America since at least the fall of the Soviet Union; and then juxtapose that with Obama the moment he gained entry to the White House- undermining the constitutional government of Honduras in favor of a Chavista dictator, banishing a bust of Winston Churchill from the White House, and his consigliere, Eric Holder, calling America “a nation of cowards”, while the DHS declared that returning Iraq and Afghanistan veterans may be domestic terror threats – and it seems less likely that this is but a ship of fools engulfed in their folly, but a designed plan. Why, anyone would want to destroy America by racking up $20 trillion in publicly held debt, $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities, hiding fiscal insolvency through printing money and Quantitive Easing, creating a false reality with a sycophantic media, by dismantling the United States military while ratcheting up global tension through appeasement and capitulation, releasing terrorists like Ali Daqduq or the Taliban 5 and prosecuting Navy SEALs for punching them in the face, setting the stage for World War III, all while importing ten’s of millions of illegal aliens threatening racial and ethnic balkanization, and undermining the very fabric of American law, culture and cohesion embodied in the US constitution, is beyond me. But, Obama has done exactly that.
Obama knew when he was elected that he entered the White House on a heretofore unknown wave of popularity and wishful thinking, well wishes held even by many Republican’s and political opponents. Obama could have done anything he wanted for, he could have been the best president ever, if he had just stuck to tried and true practices of governance. But, Obama decided to rule as a tyrant against common sense and over 200 years of history of America as a nation that held freedom and liberty as sacrosanct moral purposes, even to the point of violence and civil war. Obama knew that going in, and sought to “fundamentally transform” the Country nonetheless, and as such, he has largely been a success to the detriment of those of us who love it.
I think it is safe to say that the Obama administration is the most evil and insidious in American history, and that mere incompetence does not explain the situation America finds itself in by virtue of just pointing to the regime’s maniacal administrative proficiency and executive accomplishments. This analysis fits with Obama’s history, his affiliations with Bill Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis, Saul Alinsky, the Nation of Islam (organizing the Million Man March), Valerie Jarrett, George Soros, Rashid Khalidi, Khalid al-Mansour, and his still obscure past and ideology. Obama and his cabal know exactly what they are doing, the question is why are they being allowed to get away with it?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/09/bombshell-no-wonder-obama-bowed-to-the-saudis-they-likely-funded-him-at-harvard/
http://www.defenddemocracy.org/media-hit/the-daqduq-dilemma/
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/timeline-ali-mussa-daqduq
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2014/11/30/50-years-after-none-dare-call-it-treason-david-horowitz-rises-to-the-occasion/
I would personally opt for II. The Majority Take.
Obama’s impact has gone beyond just bad policy and lawlessness.
His influence has been almost insidiously demoralizing, damaging the spirit, the very soul of our society. It has grown to become something beyond Orwellian.
As an example, my brother and sister-in-law, through hard work and sacrifice, have become relatively successful. They have also now become, under Obama and I presume Clinton, enemies of the state: convenient scapegoats for all the nation’s ills.
These are people who have done everything traditionally considered “right”: overcame single-parent, financially-challenged upbringings; loved and served our country; are very diligent and caring parents and have always treated everyone with dignity and respect.
But in Obama’s America this is not right but wrong. Their unpardonable crime is that
they are financially comfortable…and white. End of discussion.
This is one case reflective of countless throughout the country.
One can only imagine the long-term ramifications of this.
I’m astounded you missed this. Obama was the *second* US President awarded a Nobel Peace Prize, the first (in 1905) being Theodore Roosevelt, who negotiated an end to the Russo-Japanese War.