Kathianne
10-20-2008, 09:50 PM
http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerkimball/2008/10/20/is-obama-a-transformational-figure-you-dont-know-the-half-of-it/
October 20th, 2008 7:31 am
Is Obama a “transformational figure”? You don’t know the half of it!
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Should we even bother to have the election November 4? If Nancy Pelosi is right, Barack Obama’s chances of winning are “100 percent.” Why don’t we skip the election and move directly to the coronation–er, I mean, the inauguration–ball? Every month, it seems, Obama smashes his record of the previous month for the amount of month his campaign has raised. Last month it was an eye-popping $150 million. (Where’s all that the dough coming from? Ask Mr. Good Will or Ms. Doodad Pro.) Acorn–the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now–will help assure that Obama gets the needed votes in battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. (In Lake County, Indiana, for example, 2,100 of 5,000 registrations that Acorn submitted right before the deadline were fraudulent. “All the signatures looked exactly the same,” said a county election board official: imagine that!) Meanwhile, the ducks keep lining up in a very neat row. Yesterday, Gen. Colin Powell, former Republican Secretary of State, waddled forth on Meet the Press to criticize his former boss and announce his support for Obama. The election of Obama, said Gen. Powell, would “electrify the world.”
I agree with Gen. Powell that Obama would be a “transformational figure.” But what sort of transformation are we talking about? The United States is the richest, freest, most powerful nation in history. What would it look like after Obama, abetted by a Pelosi-Reid Congress, got done with their transformation?
Yes, that’s right, Virginia, it would be poorer, markedly less free, and less powerful.
How exactly?
In a recent editorial, The Wall Street Journal toted up some of the ways the country would be likely to change were Obama elected with the expected left-wing filibuster-proof super-majority. Caveat emptor: this election is no ordinary choice-among-basically-similar political moderates. It is a choice between a liberal, idiosyncratic Republican and an activist left-wing crusader. As the Journal noted,
“this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven’t since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s.”
Some particulars:....
October 20th, 2008 7:31 am
Is Obama a “transformational figure”? You don’t know the half of it!
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Should we even bother to have the election November 4? If Nancy Pelosi is right, Barack Obama’s chances of winning are “100 percent.” Why don’t we skip the election and move directly to the coronation–er, I mean, the inauguration–ball? Every month, it seems, Obama smashes his record of the previous month for the amount of month his campaign has raised. Last month it was an eye-popping $150 million. (Where’s all that the dough coming from? Ask Mr. Good Will or Ms. Doodad Pro.) Acorn–the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now–will help assure that Obama gets the needed votes in battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. (In Lake County, Indiana, for example, 2,100 of 5,000 registrations that Acorn submitted right before the deadline were fraudulent. “All the signatures looked exactly the same,” said a county election board official: imagine that!) Meanwhile, the ducks keep lining up in a very neat row. Yesterday, Gen. Colin Powell, former Republican Secretary of State, waddled forth on Meet the Press to criticize his former boss and announce his support for Obama. The election of Obama, said Gen. Powell, would “electrify the world.”
I agree with Gen. Powell that Obama would be a “transformational figure.” But what sort of transformation are we talking about? The United States is the richest, freest, most powerful nation in history. What would it look like after Obama, abetted by a Pelosi-Reid Congress, got done with their transformation?
Yes, that’s right, Virginia, it would be poorer, markedly less free, and less powerful.
How exactly?
In a recent editorial, The Wall Street Journal toted up some of the ways the country would be likely to change were Obama elected with the expected left-wing filibuster-proof super-majority. Caveat emptor: this election is no ordinary choice-among-basically-similar political moderates. It is a choice between a liberal, idiosyncratic Republican and an activist left-wing crusader. As the Journal noted,
“this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven’t since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s.”
Some particulars:....