Obama and the Politics of “Hope”
I watched Obama’s victory speech on youtube this morning, and was struck by two things: the way he moved the goalposts on universal health care, and the way he talked about hope, which to me is a codeword for “better luck next century”.
On health:
I’ll be a president who finally makes health care affordable and available to every single American the same way I expanded health care in Illinois by bring Democrats and Republicans together to get the job done.
[snip]
When we’ve made the changes we believe in, when more families can afford to see a doctor, when our children… inherit a planet that’s a little cleaner and safer…
Notice how he moved the goalposts: the language about universal health care is now “making healthcare affordable and available for every single American”. That’s the language of “universal insurance”: in this vision (correct me if I’m wrong) it becomes illegal to go without health insurance, and if you can’t afford a market based plan, the government guides you into low-cost [private, for-profit] insurance. Is that correct?
So in Obama’s plan, “more families can afford to see the doctor”. Why not “all families have a right to see a doctor”? Why should anyone have to figure out whether they can “afford” to take care of their health? Families don’t have to do that in any other industrialized country: it’s a right, and it’s paid for with taxes that spread the cost among millions of citizens rather than nailing businesses and individuals with costs they can’t afford on their own.
I also didn’t care much for how he believes he’ll do these things: “by bringing republicans and democrats together at the table like I did in Illinois”. I’ll be the first to admit that there is plenty of wheeling and dealing possible at the state level. However, DC is an entirely different venue, and has been since the 1990s (at least). “Bring Republicans and Democrats together at the table”?? We spent 2007 trying that: it didn’t work. The GOP EXPLICITLY said they were going to fight tooth and nail and obstruct anything the democrats tried to do.You can’t negotiate with the GOP or Big Business: what compromise can be found with companies that are willing to let a 17 year old girl die for that sake of a buck? “All for me and none for you” is not a compromise, yet that is what the GOP demands, and that’s what the Democrats give in to, over and over and over again. So you’ll have to pardon me if I don’t place much faith in the “let’s-all-hold-hands” strategy.
I’ll be a president who ends the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas …
Great! I’m glad to hear that Obama is going to undo NAFTA, Democratic President Clinton’s signature policy that gave “tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas.” I know everyone likes to blame the GOP for this one, and they certainly exacerbated the problem, but it was the Democrats who pushed this one through.
I’ll be a president who harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientists and entreprenuers to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.
Work with farmers and scientists to get us off foreign oil? What, with ethanol? Cus unless Obama’s ready to shift over to diesel and biodiesel from waste (a hell of a lot more efficient than ethanol, which takes just as much energy to produce as it supposedly saves), that’s a recipe for famine.
And I’ll be a president who ends this war in iraq and finally brings our troops home.
I’ll believe that when I see it. Just google “obama would keep troops in Iraq” and you’ll see numerous flip-flops on the topic. See here as well.
Obama stands for business as usual with a younger face. I continue to think he’s full of it. He won’t be as bad as Clintoon if elected, but there will be no substantial changes under an Obama presidency: we will still be in Iraq, we will not get universal health care, the poor will remain poorer, and the middle class will continue to shrinking.
However, for me the most offensive part of this speech is the claptrap about hope.
Years from now, you’ll look back and say that this was the moment, this was the place where America remembered what it means to hope. For many months, we’ve been teased, even derided for talking about hope. We always knew that hope is not blind optimism, it’s not ignoring the enormity of the tasks ahead, or the roadblocks that stand in our path, it’s not sitting on the sideline or shirking. Hope is that thing inside us that insists that despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better await us if we have the courage top reach for it and to work for it and to fight for it.
That is NOT what hope is. What Obama is describing is dedication, taking the long view, and plain old stubbornness and perserverance. You know what hope is? t’s an illusion: hope is what allows you to put off until tomorrow what needs to be done today.
Years from now, you’ll look back and say that this was the moment, this was the place where America remembered what it “maybe someday”. For many months, we’ve been teased, even derided for talking about “maybe someday”. We always knew that “maybe someday” is not blind optimism, it’s not ignoring the enormity of the tasks ahead, or the roadblocks that stand in our path, it’s not sitting on the sideline or shirking. “Maybe someday” is that thing inside us that insists that despite all the evidence to the contrary, that something better await us if we have the courage top reach for it and to work for it and to fight for it.
In other words, the sun’ll come out tomorrow. Betcher bottom dollar that tomorrow… When a politician start talking about “hope” you know that the here-and-now is going to get shafted.
No wonder the GOP and the conservatives like Obama. Sure he’s a black guy and a democrat who gets the naive little liberals all excited with his inspiring (and empty) rhetoric. But since he’s indicated he won’t rock the boat, and since the GOP has decided in retrospect that Bill Clinton wasn’t that bad after all (again, use your google), he’s not a threat to the status quo.
Yes, Hillary would be far worse for progressives, but Obama is not the knight in shining armor his supporters make him out to be. Susie nails it: “Obama lacks the fighting spirit to stand up to the Republican attack machine. Nothing in his post indicates he’s ready to lead – only that he knows how to read a audience. Now, you may think that’s the kind of nominee we need, and that’s what the primary process is all about. Me, I want a fighter. That’s why I support Edwards.
I’ll also point out that I expressed similar doubts about John Kerry, and I was right.”
