Daniel Henninger points out how much of a downer Obama’s speeches really are.

I think the potential vulnerability runs deeper. Strip away the new coat of paint from the Obama message and what you find is not only familiar. It’s a downer.

Up to now, the force of Sen. Obama’s physical presentation has so dazzled audiences that it has been hard to focus on precisely what he is saying. “Yes, we can! Yes, we can!” Can what?

Listen closely to that Tuesday night Wisconsin speech. Unhinge yourself from the mesmerizing voice. What one hears is a message that is largely negative, illustrated with anecdotes of unremitting bleakness. Heavy with class warfare, it is a speech that could have been delivered by a Democrat in 1968, or even 1928.

I find all this hard to understand. Why do Democrats act as if we are in the middle of a depression? Unemployment is at 5%, a level considered full employment as late as the 1980s. Economic growth has been solid ever since 2002. Folks, the economy just doesn’t get much better than this. And it can get a whole lot worse. For people who recognize that, the message of “change for the sake of change” isn’t very attractive.

Of course, Obama’s Global Poverty Act will take the whole world to a new level:

The legislation would commit the U.S. to spending 0.7 percent of gross national product on foreign aid, which amounts to a phenomenal 13-year total of $845 billion over and above what the U.S. already spends….

In addition to seeking to eradicate poverty, that declaration commits nations to banning “small arms and light weapons” and ratifying a series of treaties, including the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming treaty), the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

2 thoughts on “Obummer

  1. I guess some of us (and I think the majority) have been left out of the prosperity. I am retired, but in order to get back into the labor market I would have to look for salaried jobs at one twentieth of my former professional level pay. Nobody wants a retired professional who hasn’t worked for a few years, unless they have done something of note recently. I did play around with the stock market for a bit, but my investments only resulted in losses. So I see that philo thinks that the economy is booming, perhaps at my expense. After all, if someone wins in the market, someone else loses, right? I think that my retirement fund wins for my colleagues and me, but that I lost for my wife and me. As a result, I think that I am down many thousands. Oh well, I am glad that I could contribute to the economic gain of the masses. I for one am for change, one that will allow my grandchildren access to college and freedom to walk the streets without fear of being accosted by an abandoned lower class. High walls and guns won’t save us from people without access to a decent life.

  2. My point isn’t that everyone’s doing well; obviously, that’s not true. But how often have things been better, in general, than they are now? I see a lot of people taking prosperity for granted. But it would not be difficult to make things far worse. Jimmy Carter turned me into a Republican by doing just that in the 1970s, and, so far, all signs are that Obama or Hillary are likely to do the same starting in 2009.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s