Literal Interpretation

Inside Obama's Mind

                Since it became clear he would be our 44^th president, I have carefully studied Barack Obama. And let me tell you, he is no simple specimen. A well-studied orator, President Obama is a master of his own words. His intentions are easily lost in captivating speeches and eloquent explanations. So, to find my answers, I had to look beyond his flowing rhetoric.

I diligently examined his voting record and found a mixture of evidence. On one hand, his record is almost nonexistent. Only a United States Senator since 2005, Obama has only a small sample of votes to go by. Of the roughly 1300 bills that came through the senate since his swearing in, Obama missed 314 of them. This, though, is not uncommon for a presidential candidate. But, then again, most freshmen don’t run for Student Body President, either.  On the days Obama did show up for class, he did little more than sheepishly raise a hand when his name was summoned at roll call. Not only a master of words, he is a master of neutrality.

But, through his vague words and lack of voting, it is clear that President Obama has lofty goals in mind. That became abundantly clear when he spoke to the Muslim world in Cairo last week. In a speech intended to appease world Muslims and end all holy wars, Obama slipped. He let the world too far into his mind. One simple statement offered a glimpse into that mind of the President, showing the observant public what he wants, what he believes, and what he will do. Not one time since his campaign was announced has Obama been so candid in his words.

‘Given our interdependence, any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail.’ With this one line, tucked in the middle of a broad message, Obama opened his soul to his constituency. Here, he told us that American exceptionalism is a false premise and will undoubtedly fail.

Barack Obama apparently believes that the United States is no better than the authoritarian dictatorships of Iran and North Korea. He sees capitalism, not as an advancement of human potential and individual liberty, but as an equally functional alternative to fascism or communism. While this does satisfy the elementary school notion of ‘nothing is better or worse, just different,’ it does run contrary to the mindset of most Americans.

Past presidents have promoted the idea that America is the greatest and most powerful nation on earth, and have taken steps to preserve that place. I believe that most Americans, even those who routinely degrade this country for its ‘flaws,’ fear the day we do not hold that status. Whether we choose to acknowledge it or not, at the core of most Americans is the fundamental belief that we are something special. Barack Obama simply does not share this belief. Of course, he would never say so. But, the echoes of his actions fill his hollow words.

Obama has affirmed that no country is, or deserves to be, better than another. Based on his first few months in office, he appears to be working hard to make that utopian ‘equality’ a 21^st century reality. He has spent entire weeks touring the world, apologizing for America’s actions and downplaying its power and influence. Economically, he has multiplied the U.S. debt to China with breathtaking speed. He has printed currency like never before, setting the stage for a massive meltdown of the American dollar. He has thus furthered this ‘interdependency’ he spoke of, lessening the American control over world trade and currency.

On a domestic level, Obama’s statement in Cairo is telling of his general feelings toward capitalism. Stating that the elevation of any group of people over another ‘will inevitably fail’ displays Obama’s lack of confidence in a free market system, hence his socialist leanings. His tax and spend policies echo those of socialist Europe, rather than the democratic principles of our own Constitution. He has villianized the wealthy, implying that their status is failure of capitalism, rather than a product of their ingenuity and work ethic. He believes that the poor are poor because they are victims of the system.

President Obama bases his domestic and foreign policies on simple ‘fairness.’ That would all be well and good if everyone bought in, but they don’t. The world is not fair. There are evil people who cannot be talked down. There are good people who can’t change a thing. There are people who have more than they deserve. There are people who have less than they deserve. Barack Obama, in his arrogance and naiveté, somehow believes he can change that fact of life in a 4-8 year sprint.

In his Cairo speech, Obama confirmed what I had long suspected. That he considers capitalism an enemy of utopian, ‘fair’ society, where rich get richer and poor get poorer. Despite the fact that he is ‘rich’ (after being poor) and is a product of a capitalist society, our current president believes that socialism is a more ‘fair’ societal system. Obama, in addition, has conveyed his animosity toward general American exceptionalism. He would have the United States pay reparations for its ‘transgressions’ while other nations, many with evil aspirations, flourish and thrive.

But, I never thought I would see the day that the American President would be actively campaigning against the principles that built this country. The guilt-driven policies of Barack Obama are destroying America’s place in the world and weakening its influence. His political and social ‘fairness’ is not only unachievable, but utterly absurd in today’s world. Collectivist utopias of communism and socialism are routine failures because they contradict human nature. Voluntary disarmament, diplomacy among dictators, and other efforts to equalize nations have never succeeded because we don’t think or believe the same things.

What Obama doesn’t seem to understand is that America is what it is today because we fought for what is ours. We promoted our interests, just like other nations work to promote theirs. It’s not unfair, it’s life. Capitalism works the same way. All people vying for their own self-interests create a functioning society, which has lasted longer than any collectivist system. These principles are at the core of America and are shared by most all Americans.

 From what he’s displayed in his first few months in office, Barack Obama fundamentally disagrees with much of what America stands for and thinks he can make it right. Years of university brainwashing have seemingly convinced him that all things can and will be equal. More astoundingly, he is naïve enough to believe he can make that happen. If any American wants to believe that this country is the evil of the world and its greatness must be compromised to ensure a ‘fair’ society, fine. But that individual has no business anywhere near the Oval Office.

 

Race Realizations

                Thousands of scholars and millions of citizens will tell you, with an arrogant scoff of intellectual superiority, that the 1960s were the greatest era of civil rights. That they were and forever will be the most defining years for race relations in the United States. With unabashed confidence, I profoundly disagree. The most influential years, the ones that will characterize race relations in America forever, are ahead. Race may be, albeit quietly, as much of a problem today as it ever was. But a rapidly evolving political landscape may force us to evaluate ourselves sooner, rather than later. The book on race in America might just be nearing a critical climax, at a point when most of us had put it back on the shelf.

                We live in the golden age of political correctness, where honesty is demonized for its indecency and vague neutrality is praised for its compassion. But, seeping through the holes of double-speak, that masks the raw emotion we aren’t allowed to show, are those deep-seeded feelings about race that we all knowingly possess. Among the fray of sentiment are anger, envy, retribution, and hatred. Even through the watered down rhetoric toward ‘controversial’ topics, such as race, glimpses of unrefined feelings can be found, but only by those willing to look.

                Some thought, and still think, that the racial problem in America was solved with the adoption of the 14^th Amendment or the implementation of Affirmative Action. After all, they were the great ‘equalizers’ of society. This, though, was an inherently open-ended conclusion to draw, for the definition of equality is so generally relative. Are we all equal spiritually? Emotionally? Politically? Physically? What? I can look at any one of those explanations with serious objection. For example, I am not physically equal to a pro athlete or politically equal to a U.S. Congressman. But, I am not bitter about it. People have different strengths and weaknesses. That is what makes them unique individuals.

Nonetheless, Affirmative Action and its associates have done little to improve the underlying racial sentiments in this country. In reality, they may have done more to fuel the fire than put it out. They have proliferated the cultural phenomenon known as ‘reverse racism.’ While I acknowledge the existence of the trend, I take issue with the term itself. Racism is racism is racism. Referring to white on minority discrimination as ‘racism’ and minority on white discrimination as ‘reverse racism’ is mildly racist in itself. Why, even, should there be a racial distinction? Is that not counterproductive to a goal of a colorblind society?

Barack Obama’s appointment of Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor, has put the issue of race under the microscope once again, and put a mirror up to the face of America. Without a single word spoken, the speculation of her appointment stirred up racial questions. Will he choose a Hispanic? Will he choose a Hispanic woman? Is he doing it to solidify the Hispanic vote? Will it solidify the Hispanic vote? Then, she was appointed. Now we know where she went to school, what her record looks like, everything she’s done and all she’s ever verifiably said.

Among her most controversial resume bullet points was a 2008 ruling against a group of Connecticut firefighters who were denied promotions based on race. The firefighters, who were white, were the top scorers on a promotional exam. Because no black firefighters achieved qualifying test scores, the city threw out the tests completely. Sotomayor and two colleagues backed the city’s decision. And in a 2001 speech at U.C. Berkeley, Sotomayor stated ‘I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.’

Not surprisingly, the comments and rulings conjured up strong feelings on both sides of the issue. Some conservatives called her comments ‘racist.’ Then, some liberals called conservatives ‘racists’ for calling her comments ‘racist.’

 For the sake of argument, let’s build a foundation. Racism is defined as ‘discrimination or prejudice based on race.’ Liberals and conservatives, majorities and minorities, one fish, two fish, red fish and blue fish would all reasonably agree. Now, that sounds a whole lot like the actions and words of a certain Sonia Sotomayor. First, she denies whites a promotion because no blacks qualified, even though they were all given the same standardized test. So, from my humble perspective, the only determining factor in the decision was skin color. Discrimination based on race? Just maybe? Then, she proclaims that a Latina woman can make better decisions than can a white male because all Latina women have rich life experiences that are not possibly had by white men. Prejudice based on race? Possibly? Looks that way. Or maybe she thought the dictionary was an instruction manual, not a reference book. But, then again, I’m just a white male who hasn’t had experience necessary to make that kind of distinction.

So, when white men, like Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, call her actions and words what they plainly are, they are heralded for speaking the truth. Aren’t they? Nope! Instead, they are accused of racism because they are criticizing a Latina woman. Calling her words and actions ‘racist’ is seen as sacrilege of Affirmative Action. Plus, minorities can’t be racist. Remember?

And there lies my issue. We are not a ‘post-racial’ society. We are not past the most significant racial problems America will ever see. Have we come a long way? Sure we have. Have we benefitted from contributions and sacrifices made by the likes of Martin Luther King Jr.? Absolutely. But King sought a society where men and women are judged ‘not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.’ And, obviously, we are still judged by the color of our skin. Just ask the qualified firefighters who were denied a rightful promotion because they didn’t meet the skin tone requirements for the position. Or the white men who will never get to make the sound decisions of Latina women, because they were not born with enough melanin.

I am not discrediting those who have suffered through decades of discrimination and prejudice, with the hopes that the next generation will not have to. Nor am I ignorant of the horrific atrocities that occurred in the name of race in our country. But, so many in America seem to believe that it is all in the past, that true discrimination just doesn’t happen anymore. On the contrary, it happens every day, and much of it is legal. Racism may look different than it did in the early 20^th century (and before), often with different victims and offenders, but it is the same beast.

The unfounded racial hatred responsible for the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. is the same hatred responsible for the ethnic cleansing during WWII. The discrimination that once denied blacks education in the south is the same discrimination that denied firefighters a promotion in Connecticut just last year. Whether it be minority on white, white on minority, minority on minority, or white on white, widespread discrimination exists. The day we move beyond that, in law and society, is the day we can claim the greatest victory for civil rights.