Obama appropriates the apocalyptic optimism of Ron Reagan
by Weldon Berger |
January 18, 2008
Ronald Reagan killed people, and he killed ideals.
He began his campaign for the presidency with a paean to states' rights in Philadelphia, Mississippi, where that cause—the right to trample the rights of others—had claimed the lives of three civil rights activists barely more than fifteen years earlier.
In Central America, he painted nun-raping, dope dealing thugs with the high gloss of Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson as they slaughtered tens of thousands of people, in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala, who only wanted to live their lives in peace.
Reagan supported the racist apartheid regime in South Africa; he killed Congressional sanctions against Iraq sparked by Saddam Hussein's use of poison gas against the Kurds; he mounted an assault on regulatory
structures that resulted in, among other disasters, a trillion-dollar implosion of the savings and loan industry.
When the AIDS epidemic took root and spread in this country, he stood by and did nothing while victims, advocates and scientists begged for research money and government assistance.
He did all that, and more, and he called it, with an easy smile, "Morning in America." Barack Obama thinks
Reagan appealed to an overwhelming urge among Americans toward clarity and optimism and "a return to
that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."
But what he really appealed to was the American urge to escape introspection, to feel good about ourselves
and our country, to feel comfortable about abandoning any sense of responsibilty for tiresome, less fortunate others. He told Americans they were enshackled by government regulations and taxes, by unions, by an unnecessary regard for civil rights. It was the reactionary version of
"If it feels good, do it."
It was an easy sale by a great salesman, and it was a disaster, one that would have been far worse absent
the ability of partisan Democrats and moderate Republicans in Congress—the latter still existed in those days—
to override some of Reagan's vetoes.
Obama wasn't endorsing the outcome of Reagan's pitch, but he seems not to recognize that the pitch and
the outcome were inseparable, that Reagan's "clarity" and "optimism" were the thin, leading wedge of a
malevolent effort to degrade government and our political culture that has reached apotheosis in the Bush administration; that Ronald Reagan and George Bush are, if we're lucky enough to get a president who can
kill the Reagan legacy, bookends.
There may be similarities between the electoral climates of 1980 and 2008, but assigning any virtue to one
of the all-time great 'bait and switch' campaigns is nauseating, and Obama's suggestion that there are echoes
of Reagan in what he offers is at least discouraging if not a bit scary.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Liberal Reaganism - NYET!
"Obama's suggestion that there are echoes of Reagan in what he offers is at least discouraging if
not a bit scary."
It certainly is, and I dread any liberal counterpart to Reaganism - even if practiced by such a
peace-loving, hopeful, innocuous gent as Obama. In the end, it is a machination to take the
national eye off the ball of severe problems, or sugarcoat them into oblivion. It also configures
from the get go a definite "handicap" for those who rail against corporate or other transgressions
- exposing us as somewhat "plague-infested" by comparison to the happy Pollyannas.
Obama is certainly a likeable guy, and he sounds the right notes. That doesn't mean he is fit to be
president - or even the Mayor of Kokomo. It merely means he has a positive-'Morning in America'
shtick like Reagan.
Reagan, as Robert Ornstein notes ('New World, New Mind'), methodically cultivated an avuncular
pose and deprecating humor in combination with an upbeat demeanor that caught people's critical
thinking centers flat-footed. (The American penchant for false optimism and bravado already predis-
posed this). So, they ended up giving him a pass on almost everything.
It is arguable that a President Obama - using the same persona and PR - could get away with tons
of stuff as well. Just keep those eyes beaming and smile wide - and 'Hey, what'd he say?' 'Doesn't
matter! No biggie! Looka the smile from them pearly whites!'
Reagan himself exploited this faux charm to get away with the most outrageous statements, such
as the time he averred (in 1983) that "submarine fired missiles could be re-called", because people's
critical brains were put on hold by his folksy, disarming charisma and charm. Bush does the same,
but with a somewhat more rube -fashioned dynamic.
Obama is different in the sense that his charisma is more sophisticated and subtle - hence able
to reach out and snare more sophisticated minds. Look at the huge college following he has!
These kids are so caught up in the freshness meme and the "new air" they lose sight of the
cautionary notes.
In the end, as much as I like Obama's cheery themes, I am still highly distrustful. Distrustful
because we have - or rather will - inside of a year - have left one of the most perfidious eras
in American history. An era - ruled by criminal whackjobs- that has done immense damage that
may take decades to repair.
Sweeping that damage under the rug will not be the Rx we need to get this nation back to where
it needs to be. I will need to see a lot more demonstration of mettle out of Obama, and attention
to serious details, before I embrace him as "the One".
Submitted by
BajanMan
January 18, 2008
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/12244Smirking Chimp.com
