I Was A Witness, I Thought
As a self-styled centrist, my political leanings aren’t really leanings at all. They’re negotiable. I’m like a pretty girl at the bar after a bad breakup – it won’t take much to get my number.
When Barack Obama peeked his head into the searchlight of public consciousness, I thought I’d hit the nightlife jackpot. He was eloquent and slick – a politician through and through – but behind his words was a measure of conviction. At the end of a long night of meaningful conversation, I couldn’t wait to give him my number.
He never called. Now I think him to be just as spineless, heartless, and worthless as every other American politician.
As evidence, I could point to Obama’s cop-outs, failures, and broken promises: we’re still embroiled in costly, hopeless wars in countries most Americans couldn’t find with a map and the help of a seasoned cartographer, the detention center at Guantanamo Bay remains as open as the legs of a Bachelor runner-up, his health-care plan was a botched compromise that is easily flayed open by anyone with an IQ north of Sarah Palin’s (so, almost everyone), and I haven’t yet caught wind of a single White House sex scandal. (Seriously, Barack, you’re young, black(ish) and thin. You can’t get Rihanna to stop by for a late-night tryst?)
But I’m more interested in the here and now. And the here and now is this:
Barack Obama screwed up on Egypt. And he’s about to screw up on the deficit.
It’s Time For A Literary Device
I hate it when I read: “There are two types of people in this world, X and Y.” Which means that I’ll be filled with self-loathing as I write:
There are two types of people in this world, stupid people and not-so-stupid people. Admittedly, the United States has more than its share of stupid people. On the face of things, it would seem that these “folks” (as Obama likes to call them) are the reason our president feels obligated to dodge and weave when it comes to foreign and economic policy. Those “folks,” the thinking goes, can’t handle the intricacies of Middle Eastern politics or of our own budgetary concerns. Thus, it is better to be insipid and say things like, “The United States urges the governments of Bahrain, Libya and Yemen to show restraint in responding to peaceful protests, and to respect the rights of their people.” (Actual quote.)
Or, “We’re going to have to make some tough choices. The only way to make those tough choices historically has been if both parties are willing to move forward together.” (Another actual quote, in reference to recommendations by the White House’s deficit panel.)
If we learned nothing else from the zany George W Bush, it was this: stupid people respect simple, clear motives. How many people did we hear say, during the reign of King Bush the W, “he may not be that smart, but at least he sticks to his guns”?
So even though stupid people may not understand exactly why we need allies in the Middle East (because of oil and Israel) and even though they may not understand why politicians are afraid to discuss the impact of entitlements on our economic future (because of old people who vote), they do understand simplicity. And the thing about simplicity is that it’s remarkably similar to truth.
Now, About Those Freaks Who Wouldn’t Need A Cartographer’s Help…
Smart people might seem a little trickier. They’re not. You can tell the truth to smart people. They might have understood something like the following:
“Here’s the thing: We always supported Mubarak because we thought he was the lesser of two evils. We want Egypt to be a democracy created by its people, but we’ve always been afraid that the government would be dominated by religious zealots and, well, we’ve seen how well that has gone for us. But now that the people have awakened, we’ll support whatever they choose, especially because our country was founded on the principle of popular revolt.”
In the same vein, the President might say, about the deficit:
“Have you noticed something about my rivals – the Republicans? When they’re trying to get elected, they say I shouldn’t have the authority to make big changes. But after they take office, they say that the tough choices need Presidential leadership. Fine. I’ll lead on this. But before I do, a warning, and one I want you to remember. After I propose these harsh changes, the Republicans are going to get onboard, but then they’ll campaign against me later, with ads that say, ‘Obama wants to hurt seniors.’”
And then he could go on to propose that we raise the retirement age to 70, that we cap spending on preventable diabetes at $40,000 per person, that we’re taxing the bejesus out of sugary soft drinks, whatever.
The beauty of this revolutionary solution of mine is that it works for both groups, because the truth is always more straightforward than lies.
But it doesn’t appear that Obama wants to utilize simplicity or truth, at least not in his current job. Maybe he will when he’s on the board at Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
Oh, Damnable Reality
I was rooting for Obama. I thought he might be the President that redefined what it is to be American. But halfway through his first (and probably only) term, he’s proven to be that most reprehensible of nouns – one that describes men who are afraid to speak their minds, who are afraid to tell the truth, who worry about the effect of their words instead of what those words actually are.
Barack Obama is a coward.
Hope?
There is still time, I suppose, for him to change course. Maybe he’ll take the lead in making hard choices about the deficit. Maybe he’ll wake up one morning and wander onto costofwar.com and say, “Whoa, $1.1 trillion is a lot to spend for wars that have gotten us nowhere.” Maybe later in the day, he’ll think, “Well, holy shit, that $1.1 trillion would have done nicely against the deficit.”
Nah
But all signs point the opposite direction.
And so, come 2012, when Obama is campaigning on a record of middling accomplishments and incomplete policies, he’ll again look my way in the bar. I’ll watch his eyes for a moment.
Then I’ll turn away, ready to make my next centrist’s mistake.
For more from Paul, click some of the fun buttons below…
Past work on FlipCollective.com.
To follow him on Twitter.
To befriend him on Facebook.
For someone so center, you sure did write an entire page about how you want to see Obama be more left.
Oh and yeah, can I get your number?
“After I propose these harsh changes, the Republicans are going to get onboard, but then they’ll campaign against me later, with ads that say, ‘Obama wants to hurt seniors.’”
And then he could go on to propose that we raise the retirement age to 70, that we cap spending on preventable diabetes at $40,000 per person, that we’re taxing the bejesus out of sugary soft drinks, whatever.”
I am very conservative. There is a 99.9% chance I vote against Obama next election. But if he came out and did this, I would have a damn hard time doing it, because in that case, everything he said would be right (for once).
Obama polarizes are evokes such anger from us because we BELIEVED it would be something different. But he is the same as every other politician out there. D’s and R’s are all the same, just playing a part.
Nobody believes anything, they just want to be right.
I’m not sure what Obama believes in. Maybe nothing. He’s more concerned with writing a good speech.
Which is why Sarah Palin will be our next President — she’s the hot, dumb slut in the bar giving everyone a flirtatious wink.
I don’t have any problems with what you wrote, I agree with most of it. You talk down to certain Americans that couldn’t’ find US Warzones on a map without the use of a cartographer, because you are oh so smart. At the same time you were easily duped into believing in Hope and Change in 2008, all the warning signs were there if you took the time to look past Obama’s grand speeches full of platitudes and sensationalism. You elected a man with little experience who had never managed anything more than a small office (if that), why in the world did you think he COULD handle something as complex as Egypt or the deficit. Next column, why were you so stupid to buy into the myth of Obama (voting for Obama because you hate McCain is a different issue, but it doesn’t sound like that was the reason you voted for the “One”).
(by the way, look up deficit expansion since dems took control in 06 vs War spending. The point here is that the war isn’t driving the 14 trillion dollar deficit, massive increases in spending and a lousy economy are).
Paul,
Since you’ve put yourself out there, please consider the following:
1. You are not a “centrist” as you claim, you just think that makes you sound intelligent and well-informed.
2. That BO is either “eloquent” or “slick” is a myth, created by the media and furthered by “non-centrists” like yourself. He is simply good a reading a teleprompter and ‘looked the part’ well enough to get elected.
3. BO is neither spineless nor a coward. He is simply a go-along/get-along politician, who was installed by Those Who Control Things precisely because he could be controlled and counted on to do as told. Really, he is no different in that respect than any President we’ve had in a long time.
4. There really is no more “we” (as in, “the U.S.”) as you use in your post repeatedly. American society is completely Balkanized, and Those Who Control Things use that to our collective disadvantage.
5. The main objective of both major political parties is to ensure that revenue in the form of US tax dollars keeps rolling into Washington D.C. to fund a government that keeps the rich wealthy and in control. There really is no other goal for either party.
6. There is a big difference between the political parties (and those whose interests they guard) and the common citizen who may (or may not, in the case of a ‘centrist’ like yourself) support either of those political parties.
7. The sooner you realize the truth behind #5 and #6, the better chance you have of moving out from one of the two groups (Stupid v. Not-so-stupid) in which you currently reside (hint: you’re not in the better group).
8. Your writing was interesting and worth reading when you provided an “insider’s” look into your life as an NBA player. Now, not so much. You should quit trying so hard to write like the insufferable Bill Simmons. In fact, you should quit writing altogether until you’ve got something thoughtful to say.
9. For an example of “real” writing, please take a look at Matt Taibbi’s latest: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216.
Best to you and yours,
DRM
Wow, Dave is kind of a douche, huh?
My view on politics: They’re all liars just in it for the power trips and the pussy (or, as is often the case, young intern dong). If you get one that doesn’t lie TOO MUCH and keeps it in his pants for the most part — or at least is smart enough to keep it quiet — then you’re pretty lucky.
JerkFace’s comments remind me of my favorite politician: former Maryland state senator Clay Davis. “Sheeeeeeeeee-it!”
firebagger
whenever you are disappointed, and i’m sure it happens a lot, you may want to examine your expectations. instead of being so mealy-mouthed about it, buck up. how is he going to mess up egypt? how is he going to mess up the deficit? these are multi-causal issues and you’re purporting to lay all of the blame at someone who let you down. you really think “speaking his mind” will make things better? that he can unilaterally change things if he only had the spine?
its you that lacks the spine shirley. at least have the courage of your “convictions” (whatever those are). you just come off as a whiner–as usual.
This essay was so scatter-brained that I don’t even know where to start. I’m disappointed with BO too, but blaming him for Egypt without explaining how he did so makes your argument weak and complaining about the deficit without even mentioning defense spending kind of shows that this essay wasn’t well-thought out Paul.