Jump to navigation
"I don't know if this can make sense to you because much of this is visceral and emotional rather than anything else."
That level of visceral emotion would be okay in the classroom, Sean, but it sure as shucks would not reach out to the unemployed U.S.workers for whom Obama is trying to get extended unemployment benefits...but the GOP is blocking it. Perhaps we here in old Canada are just too far removed from the personal experience of Americans to know the effect on millions of individuals. Or is that just too subjective for the planners of the fate of millions?
Not every comment is intended to reach out to the unemployed.
I acknowledged a lot in my post. I felt that, described in the personal, there was value in exploring and explaining why some of us are more charitable dealing with Obama than any real difference in policy would explain.
I am sorry you either missed or dismissed the point I was making and that you felt it necessary to apply such a practically high standard to posting here (that the each post has to assist a George Victor point. Not every post has to have the same purpose and mine was an attempt to explain why people often feel positively towards people like Obama.
There is absolutely nothing that I said that contradicts ANY point you are trying to make. The fact that I did not make YOUR point for you is not either my responsibility or a defect on my part.
Oh and BTW I am not a planner of millions and I consider the emotional motivations behind the reception of figures like Obama to be relevant. Perhaps not as relevant as real policy differences but I acknowledged that and that point has already been made by others.
Also when I say charitable-- it does not mean total appreciation -- it does mean that my opinion is better than it otherwise would be given my awareness of the context. that is what charitable means. If I just thought Obama was the greatest then I would nto be saying I was being charitable now would I?
George you also seem to have missed my point as a Canadian. American domestic politics are for them to figure out. I dislike Obama because he is an imperialist. That the GOP is playing politics with peoples unemployment benefits is a domestic issue. I am sure the voters will get a chance in due course to punish those GOP Senators at the polls. Whether they will remains to be seen but again that is for them to decide.
What you are missing is that the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan and Somalia and Iran are not to blame for America's appetite for power and resources and that is what counts for non-Americans. After twice invading Iraq the US is leaving a garrison and hired thugs behind to protect a walled city of US diplomats and oil robber barons. Obama is no different in his view of foreign politics he believes he has the right by virtue of being the President of one country to rule the world. I find that anti-democratic, imperialistic and not to be supported.
I agree with a lot of the analysis on MSNBC in terms of domestic american politics but their talking heads from all sides of the american political spectrum, like most of that society, believe with their whole beings that they should rule the world because they are the most just society every invented. They are part of the elite consensus in America that both Obama and Rice also spring from. Manifest Destiny inspires americans as a concept. The concept actually means I lose my country so I see their politics though a different lens.
As a Canadian nationalist from before the days of the Waffle, I heartily agree. My big brother, in his days as labaour organizer for the Steelworkers, could sing: Here's to the American Eagle, that grand and noble bird...that on Canada drops its turd. It's a rollicking ditty, you perhaps know it.
But that was 60 years ago, and things have become worse. Labour organizers here do not sing insulting songs. And Obama, in his 2nd year of his first term cannot be expected to turn it all around on a dime. He would not have been elected had he said he would. Nope, there's no disagreeing with the fact that America is a malevolent presence on the world stage. But if that dumbed down nation does not recognize the difference between Obama and Bush (and by the way, Jeb is now a prospect for 2012) it does not mean we have to follow suit. Theirs is explainable as a racist antipathy, ours would have to be a blind rage...and it becomes a boring repetition of catch phrases like some Cold War playback. Meaningless.
Jeb in 2012! Whoo hoo! Finally a progressive in the White House!
Obama, in his 2nd year of his first term cannot be expected to turn it all around on a dime.
This is what is so puzzling, George: everyone else in the world understands that Obama has never had any intention to "turn it all around" (something he's made very clear to those who chose to listen rather than project their fantasies onto him). The rest of the world, who aren't blinded by the pissant party politics of the US, understand and see very clearly that Obama is utterly irrelevant when it comes to the management of the Empire. You, and other Obama apologists, dreamers, and well, suckers, just cannot wrap their heads around this basic fact.
The bottom line is that if Obama is "successful", the rest of the world is in grave danger. If he is a failure, the the rest of the world is in grave danger. It just doesn't matter. For the Afghan farmer being waterboarded right now in Bagram, or the "suspected terrorist" and their family being wiped out by the Hellfire missile from a drone over Pakistan, or Omar Khadr facing a Obama kangaroo court, the excuses and lies Democrats and Republicans tell themselves to cover for their ongoing complicity in atrocity don't matter one fucking bit.
Closing for length.