Never to fulfill, always to disappoint. That’s how I can best describe Obama. Like many others, I had high hopes for what Obama seemed to promise. But, alas, the promises faded and more of the same seemed to continue.
However, what I have noticed is that I (a white, liberal guy) seem to be less disappointed than my black liberal counterpart. That’s because blacks had more at stake than I did. Obama’s failures meant that the next great black hope in national politics will have to overcome not only the usual white hostility, but also the failures of the first black president.
It’s not that Obama is a total failure. He just had to be that much better than many white presidents that came before him. Americans could forgive Bush Two for his many flaws. But Obama was expected to be better than an under-educated Texas white guy. If the final results are virtually the same, then why did we put our hopes for change in him?
Ultimately it’s all about dashed hopes. Liberals, like me, were far too invested in Obama’s anticipated success. If, like Bush Two, our expectations were low, then that would have been another story. But Obama never lived up to the narrative, except in one case: When he took over GM and forced all the worthless management out. And look how that turned out. Within two years GM did a complete financial one-eighty.
Getting tough worked! Why couldn’t Obama do the same to BP? Why is he staying the course in Afghanistan? Why can’t he get aggressive and put people to work through executive order by using infrastructure money and recycled stimulus bailout money? He appears too timid. We need Harry Truman, not a bad imitation of Jimmy Carter. Some claim that Obama is risk-averse. However, he seems to back the wrong horse at the wrong time, appearing more like a warmed-over version of Bush than Mr. Righteous Indignation over social issues. What happened to the “community organizer?”
Take his stance in the Kidd v. Ashcroft case that will be heard before the Supreme Court. John Ashcroft, the U.S. Attorney General under Bush Two knowingly took a U.S. Citizen and imprisoned him in “GITMO” without any due process. They held the guy for several years then released him. Kidd sued Ashcroft for his abuse of power and won in lower court. But, Obama is supporting Ashcroft’s defense in the Supreme Court. Why? Shouldn’t an individual office holder be held personally accountable for their personal abuse of power when they had knowledge of it at the time it happened? Isn’t that part of the reason the Revolutionary War was fought against a king who did similar acts? That’s why certain amendments about due process are in our Constitution!
And while I am at it, let me mention that tidbit about Obama telling David Brooks, off the record, there were no “shovel ready jobs” last year. That was about the same time he was talking up a proposal to stimulate the economy with shovel ready jobs. Was he trying to bolster a weak economy or just blowing hot air? Personally I believe that he was telling Brooks the truth. Why? Because my observation of Obama is that no matter how duplicitous Obama the politician can be he still has an inner desire to confess the truth … which makes him a hell of a lot better than most politicians.
Who is Obama? He’s a complex character filled with ambition and contradictions. And yet, he still doesn’t seem to be the guy I voted for. That’s why I want to take my vote back. It’s not often that I have been made a sucker of, but this time I was really had.