BREAKING NEWS
Reserve Bank raises official interest rate to 3.5% ... Read more
Close

The Obama myth

Last updated 09:24 08/08/2012

I hit Mitt Romney pretty hard last week. I mean, I meant it, but I thought it was about time to talk a little about Barack Obama.

David Foster Wallace told this great story once in a commencement speech to an American university in 2005 about an atheist and a Christian debating the existence of God in a bar.

The atheist says to the Christian that he has reason not to believe in God, because this one time he was caught in a blizzard and it was 50 below freezing and he got down on his knees and prayed to the heavens for his life.

"Well then you must believe now," the religious man says. "After all, here you are, alive."

The atheist rolls his eyes. "No, man, it was just a couple Eskimos happened to come wandering by and showed me the way back to camp."

I think this story sums American politics up pretty clearly at the moment. There's two divergent takes on everything.

ObamaBrewThe release of last week's employment figures for July was either a blow to the middle class, or further proof that Obama has continually added jobs to the economy.

There's no easy truth about Barack Obama. There's no easy truth about Mitt Romney, either.

A few people pointed out in response to my recent post that Mitt Romney is a qualified and distinguished man with a storied career in business. The strange thing is, you were arguing against me, but I agree with much of your thoughts.

What you forget is, can't Romney be both a successful American person and a lousy political campaigner?

Political discourse allows for no grey area. You're either pro-candidate A, or you're out in the streets calling for his head and espousing the heroic qualities of candidate B.

YESWECANI think that by design of my birthplace I am biased toward Obama. I've talked about this before, but New Zealand politics plays out (mostly) several degrees to the left of America.

My beloved father, of whom I am endlessly fond and who also has been known to scrap it out in the comments section here under a nom-de-plume that I will not out (hi Dad!) is a way, way back, dyed-in-the-wool National supporter. 

But even he finds Romney a little hard to swallow.

I think if the world got to vote in the American elections, New Zealand would go 3-1 for Obama. Romney, as it stands, places too much stock in conservative moral politics, is too much of a chest-beating, military hawk, and too removed from the economic fairness we generally cherish as a country to ever be popular in New Zealand.

Of course, we don't really count. I just think American elections are fascinating, and think that you do too, for the most part.

I'm of the ideal Obama! age. I was in my early 20s when I first started paying attention to him. I got swept up in the energy of 2008: the oratory... the music videos... the Will.I.Am hologram... He spoke and moved unlike any other political leader I'd seen, with an intellect that could speak to both young and old minds alike.

But despite this national and demographic disposition that pushes me toward still supporting Obama, November 2012 feels pretty hollow when compared against the '08 juggernaut. 

It's a mixed bag.

DevilBarackThe Guantanamo Bay prison remains open. Torture (in America's name) has ended, but the Obama administration's programme of drone use and assassination puts it to the right of Bush II on national security. There's the unprecedented level of prosecutions being levelled against government whistleblowers, while the government seems to have hypocritically leaked information at will, without punishment, which was politically flattering.

But still, I mark Obama up on pushing America toward smaller, targeted military action over the broad, unilateral actions of the sort Bush engineered in Iraq and Afghanistan. I give him points for nailing Bin Laden, even if it did come at the expense of international sovereignty.

The economy still sucks. There are two strains of thought on that: either a) Bush started it, give Obama a break or b) he's made it worse.

It has been four years plus since the global financial crisis and American recession and Obama has had many chances to make it better than it is. But most evidence points to the very stimulus package he's decried for having stopped the bleeding at least, and probably not being large enough to cause any real bounceback.

Obama is then hampered in seeking any effectual solution to national economic woe, or even a good compromise, by the very partisan hackery he promised that he was going to end. He's protected the Bush-era tax cuts, but extended unemployment access for the needed.  

There're Obama's much-touted healthcare and financial oversight reforms, but as prizes for his administration to me these look like the pecked-over carcass the old fisherman brings back to shore in Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea. They're bloated and confusing, to boot. But again, the country is caught between adoring them and deploring them on principle, without assessing the reality.

Obama has dropped the ball on any real environmental reform, but made some small improvements (green building standards, increased demands on American fuel efficiency). 

He has been an impeccable diplomat. He's restored America's reputation at the UN, and stressed multilateral negotiation in the face of global dilemma. He is also socially progressive in a way - and mark my words on this - that will put him on the right side of history with his endorsement of gay marriage and ending "don't ask don't tell".

He's succeeded, and he's failed. But why can't this be the reasonable discussion? Why does it have to be "he's a success" or "he's a failure"?

Obama hasn't been a runaway hit, and he hasn't been the second coming of socialism in America.

Romney isn't a faultless business manager and politician, and he's not the antichrist that wants poor people to starve in the streets.

Circa 2012, I'm still more characteristically disposed to support Obama than Romney. But the important difference is, and why it seems hollow to think about this election in comparison to 2008, is that the insurgent outsider of 2008 is just another politician now.

Go and watch that "Yes We Can" video clip. The link is here.

It dates as well as any other meme from four years ago (i.e. badly).

The really crushing blow of the Obama-era in American politics is not the product of his work in office - which I'd give him about a B/B- for, but the end of the false hope of the underdog candidate and great man riding in to save the government and showing everybody that politics isn't actually one giant fool's errand.

Maybe early in every person's 20s they need to get behind one candidate wholeheartedly and put real hope for actual change behind them only to have their hopes dashed.

Politics in America is more divided now than it was four years ago. Obama might not have been the one to make the culture of politics worse, but he has not done anything to make it better.

Become a fan of Voyages in America on Facebook: you'll get blog posts to your news feed, some great photography, and some good chatter. You can also follow the conversation on Twitter, or send an email and share your thoughts. 

30 comments
Post a comment
Richard   #1   09:45 am Aug 08 2012

Like you said, I like most NZers prefer Obama's policies. On the other hand, the reason I came here (aside from the beautiful countryside) was the jobs, the economic opportunity and to work in the most dynamic companies in the world.

I'd like to have a fairer society in the US, but I'd like to avoid the complete mess Europe is in. I have some friends in Italy and its nearly impossible to find a good job (even before the GFC), while here in NY we're having trouble finding anyone qualified to fill our roles. By protecting people with strict rules and minimum conditions often hurts people more in the end.

Will higher taxes, free healthcare & better benefits for the poorest in the country will make a better society or will it just turn the country into just another a quite nice but stagnant has-been. Obama is a gamble.

Steve   #2   09:51 am Aug 08 2012

Your views are very strange. The US under Obama has never been more bankrupt, oil thirsty or devoid of "freedom". He constantly reads off a prompter and is at a loss when it's not there. I dont know where you get your information about him (probably CNN, NBC...etc), but if you did your research you'll realise that no president has been as ineffectual or turncoat as Obama.

As for Romney, if you have to pick between two evils i'd go with Obama - what does that say!?

Cartman   #3   09:52 am Aug 08 2012

South Park called it right within 24 hours of the last election ("About Last Night..."). Except the Ocean's 11 bit obviously.

His aims were noble, but pretty naive - he was always going to be a disappointment after the excess hype during his campaign!

What a Wookie   #4   10:09 am Aug 08 2012

I'm confused- You mean Obama isn't 'The Messiah'??? All you verocious Obama supporters loudly told us that he was going to 'change the World' in 2008. It still amuses me that you seemingly thought World Peace was just around the corner simply because this guy is a snazzy public speaker. In reality he is no better or worse than the last President, or the one before him...

Big H   #5   10:15 am Aug 08 2012

Granted Romney isn't great, but why anyone would vote for Obama again is beyond me. As soon as he is elected for a second term there will be war in Iran. He robbed the American people to pay out his banker friends when the investment banks should have been dissolved, he even made it impossible for them to be prosecuted for fraud.

He signs executive orders that are un-constitutional. He can take your property even in peace time, he using drones all over the world and approves of them over American soil and has thrown out the right for free trials.

A 12 term congressman was running for presidential nomination who has to be the most honest politician America has seen for 100 years. He wanted to end the wars and restore America to what it was, the greatest country in the world.

Obama said he would end the wars as soon as he became president "and you can take that to the bank",he also said he close G-bay. How come American like sound bite over facts?

nat   #6   10:17 am Aug 08 2012

I think the author needs to look 'just' a little deeper into US politics. For example Bush didn't start the economic crises, it been in the making since the US went off the gold standard back in 1933. But Obama did make it worse! Neither of these guys really know how to turn the USA around, the best guy was Ron Paul but the US media effectively blocked him out.

Mark   #7   10:20 am Aug 08 2012

So after Obama had a $800+ billion stimulus, running up $5 trillion dollars of new debt over 4 years and the recession offically ending in 2009 US unemployment is still at 8.3% (the same rate when Obama got his stimulus), and this only because millions of US workers have given up of finding a job in a Obama economy. If workforce partipation was the same as when Obama took office the unemployment rate would be above 10%.

According to Obama's plan unemployment would be below 5.6% by now.

Obamacare makes the US health system worst and Americans are going to lose their health care plans in the 10 of millions and mean Americans will no longer be able to see a doctor or get the healthcare that they need.

Frank-Dodd has done nothing to help the financial markets and in fact it has made uncertianity worst and make it more likely financial markets are more risky and prone to collaspe.

Obama's budgets for the last 2 years could not get a single vote in either the House or the Senate by either his own party or the opposition.

Obama is a loser and nobody but stupid lefties like you support him. He a complete and utter failure and makes Carter look good.

CJ   #8   10:26 am Aug 08 2012

He reminds me of Johnny Depp in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - well intentioned but not quite all there ... on the same not "mumbler" - learn to enunciate!! - The US is always going to have a puppet controlled by many masters. This is modern politics

franco   #9   10:27 am Aug 08 2012

Obama is mediocre, but thats the problem with being a liberal in that corrupt system, its too hard to get anything real done....

Wookie. I think hes still better than Bush jnr, who'se military adventurism, defence spending and deregulation of the american marketplace completely undid the economic progress Clinton achieved and left Obama with what can only be described as a hospital pass.

Hipster-Douchebag   #10   10:29 am Aug 08 2012

Isn't virtually any Mrkn president these days just a figurehead, and despite whatever lofty morals, ambitions and good ideas they might have, effectively hamstrung by what Congress and lobbyists vote on or push? And aren't virtually all politicians' weakened by having to water down good ideas because voters are selfish and if they institiute waht's good for the country, people will vote them out if they can't perceive a personal benefit?


Show 11-30 of 30 comments

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you , you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.


Maximum of 1750 characters (about 300 words)

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content