Home / Culture and Society / Obama’s the One and Done

Obama’s the One and Done

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

It comes as no surprise to regular readers of my posts (if I have any) that I am no fan of Obama. What should be a surprise is that anyone still is.

President Barack Obama likes to pose as the adult in the room, the only one whose intellect is up to the challenges facing our nation today. Those voters who agree with his personal assessment, or delusion, if you will, are dwindling in number.  Over the last several weeks, much regret has become evident among the voters over their selection of Obama in the 2008 primary and election. “What Happened to Obama?” is a common question asked by many Obama supporters, quickly followed with the observation from some that, “We should have picked Hillary.”

I happen to disagree that Hillary should have been the 2008 nominee. If it weren’t for her chumminess with Rupert Murdoch during her Senate re-election run turning me off, it would have been her racially-tinged pitch to those who later became Tea Baggers when she knew she was losing to Obama. Or something, for there is a long list of negatives that would be used against her by the GOP.

It’s no different with Obama. Obama himself lost me with his hard right turn in policy immediately as he defeated Hillary and won the nomination. Now, it looks like he’s lost many of the most loyal voters. Gallup just released a poll showing that Obama’s approval rating tops 50% in only eleven states, and the data for this poll was gathered as far back as January, long before it became evident that Obama was willing to sacrifice Social Security and Medicare in his quixotic quest for serving his illusive Dulcinea, the  mythical bipartisanship. That fact can’t be helping this approval difficulty.

But the ones whose support Obama desperately needed most for a successful campaign may now be gone. I’m sure there is now regret for supporting Obama extending to the Wall Street investment bankers, they who received so much from Obama despite the ever-growing pleas from the jobless of Main Street.

Obama’s abject surrender to all things Tea during the recent debt reductions “talks” has led many of the investor class to question whether or not Obama has a clue of what to do to bring back those massive profits. They are taking their money out of the stock casino, for they feel that the risk has become too great. In their search for security, investors are doing something the Tea Baggers are violently against: putting their faith, trust, and money into the very government securities that drive the Tea Baggers to tax-cutting frenzy. As one investment representative put it, “global investors view US bonds as the safe-haven asset choice.”

I now doubt the bankers will enthusiastically monetize Obama’s desired billion dollar campaign fund, for he’s made them afraid. Every major economic indicator screams for attention from the Oval Office, and the only sound that seems to register a reaction from there is the sound of Obama’s own voice convincing himself (but not We, the People) that all is well, or soon will be if only the Republicans would suddenly become reasonable as he defines it.

In his own latest media event, Obama notes in his class lecture the very economic reasons he should be on the offensive against the budget reductions: The concern of investors is not that the US government is in debt, or they wouldn’t be massively increasing the amount of T-bills they hold. Their concern is more that Obama doesn’t see fit to do what the economy needs: getting the people back to work. Obama dropped these topics into the speech in such a blasé and matter-of-fact manner that I am convinced he has no clue.  He doesn’t understand the importance of what he just said. And what would that be? He had the support of most powerful group in the modern world and still he surrendered.

I fully understand why the markets collapsed after this oblivious display. They needed to send a message. There is no evidence from the words and actions of either major party that the necessary national leadership is in place to deal with a pointless economic difficulty, nor that it will soon arrive. I would have pulled my money out of the markets as well, for the investors don’t see sufficient prospects for making it grow. The necessary jobs to stimulate the economy aren’t there. They won’t be until Barack Obama is removed from the power he refuses to wield. Jobs also won’t come back if Obama is replaced by any of the current crop of announced Republican candidates.

But as I am merely a poor working-class blogger with more opinions than dollars, this can only be an intellectual exercise for me. It clearly hasn’t been such for those who are not poor.

When they speak, the world listens. We’ll know soon if it did so.

Powered by

About pessimist

  • jamminsue

    Thank you, Realist for a cold look at reality

  • Keith Wanless

    The problem, as I see it, is not that the current president is worth voting FOR, it is that many people see the collection of GOP candidates from which one nominee will eventually be drawn as worth voting AGAINST. It doesn’t matter to me which of the GOP frontrunners eventually win the nomination – I will ABSOLUTELY vote against Bachmann or Perry, on the grounds that they are right-wing whackjob loonytunes, and am highly likely to vote against Romney, on wishywashy grounds.

    If I want to vote at all, and want my vote to count (as opposed to pissing it away on whatever 3rd party also-ran may still be in the running) I’m pretty much stuck on voting for Obama.

    Once again, my vote will be AGAINST a candidate rather than FOR one.

  • Keith Wanless

    I should have written “Vote against Romney on the grounds that he is wishywashy”