What's worse than a US President "everybody" hates?
One that "everybody" loves.
Or at least, it's just as bad. I can't make up my mind which I find more repugnant - the simple and sweeping assumption that "everyone" agrees George Bush = Bad or the equally simple and sweeping assumption that "everyone" agrees Barack Obama = Good. The only thing that either assumption proves is that today's populace needs unquestioned heroes as much as it needs unquestioned enemies.
This letter in yesterday's Age appears to be axiomatic:
Tomorrow, thank God, when the new president is sworn in, we will be finally rid o fthe Axis of Evil--Bush, Blair and Howard.Anyone watching the pomp and ceremony and hype surrounding current activity across the big pond would be forgiven for thinking they are preparing not so much for the inauguration of a president, as for the coronation of a king. In fact, given how much the journalists here in Oz are fawning over the new incumbant of the White House, why not make him King of Australia too? Now is our chance to be part of the "good empire" rather than the "evil empire".
Hey, there's a thought... Why doesn't someone suggest to PM Kevin Rudd that he officially join hands with the new "axis of goodness" and publically bind himself to cooperate with King Barack in support of all his foreign policy actions?
I must confess that I am rather looking forward to that first touch of schadenfreude when the Americans begin to experience the inevitable disappointment that comes with the realisation that they have elected a man, not a god, and that the world today continues to be very much like the world yesterday. Just as a reminder of this, yesterday, rummaging through some old newspapers for something to line the guineapig cage with, I found a page from The Age dated September 1998. The topic: How long can Bill Clinton hold onto power in the face of the Lewinski scandal...
Louise linked to this picture on her blog the other day:
Original Source
So, once more, "everyone", with Louise: "Barack Obama, can he fix it? Barack Obama, no he can't."
(BTW, Louise has changed the address of her "Purcell's Chicken Voluntary" blog to http://pcv-louise.blogspot.com/
posted by Schütz @ 6:54 pm
14 Comments
.JPG)
14 Comments:
David,
I think your posting here misses much of what my country celebrates today. I, as I hope you know, am deeply distressed over President Obama's stand on abortion. I pray that the Lord may yet chance his heart and mind on that! But the jubilation that swept much (not all) the US today was simply that an African American has assumed the highest office in the land. It's a new America where that can happen, and that's not a matter of agreeing with his policies or thinking of him in any Godlike way - shoot, you think for a second Michele gonna let him get away with that? No way, Jose!
In a sense, it was a covenant renewal to us today - a return to a vision that was bigger than our forefathers even were able to realize. I pray that the President's eyes are opened to see it's bigger than even HE realizes and that it embraces especially the little ones in the womb and the old ones who have become incapacitated in various ways.
What Fr Weedon said.
Maybe it's hard for folks from other countries to understand what this means for us. We've been struggling for pretty much our entire history to overcome and transcend the legacy of slavery and racism. In the last thirty or forty years, we've actually made a lot of progress. But there is always the niggling fear that the "progress" is only superficial, that the racial divide is really still there under the surface. The election of Barack Obama is a confirmation that the change is real, because it is something that simply was not possible a generation or two ago.
I wish President Obama were not pro-choice. It is an issue on which I am prepared to fight him tooth-and-nail. I wish, too, that our first African-American President had been a conservative and a Republican (like J. C. Watts, for example). But even though I disagree with our new President on many issues, I can still recognize that the change in our national psyche that he represents is real, and it is important. This is a great day for our country, a day on which I am proud to be an American.
Yes, I suppose that to David, myself and other Aussies it's all rather strange and very different from our own understated way of doing things, this all-but-Messianic adulation of a man I do indeed hope will serve his nation well, whose election all wish will signal great progress in combatting remaining racist attitudes, and who hopefully will perhaps not implement further pro-abortion measures after all; as an American friend of mine put it, he won't be as bad as conservatives fear nor as good as liberals think, which puts things in proper perspective after all the hoopla.
I suppose it is the difference inherent in having a unitary executive, rather than the arrangement common to Canada, NZ, Australia, the UK and so forth of a ceremonial Head of State and a separate Head of Government. The history of the USA being what it is, patriotism there has its own distinct flavour, and is bound up with the office of the President in a way not analogous to the situation in other nations. Australian Prime Ministers are accused of having become more presidential in style over the decades, but they and their office do not hold anything like the total image of the U.S. President.
Interestingly, all the main free-to-air channels here in Australia (except SBS) covered the inauguration live, which is an entirely new thing reflecting something of the way Pres. Obama has been made into an iconic figure; I had thought to get up to watch his swearing-in live, but didn't; I saw the parade though while breakfasting, etc.
I must say, I think it rather unfortunate that the new presidential limousine has been nicknamed "the Beast", since that's bound to overexcite those suffering religious mania!
That 's right Schutz we just don't get them thar yankees.The the secret ballot that would have been used for their elections ,where did it originate from?Yep here in Victoria,the first place in the world to have the secret ballot-after the short 40 minute long Eureka rebellion,in 1854. But I think the division in the powers of Government is far better than the sometimes parliamentary dictatorship we have here.
We in Australia have not had a defining moment in our history such as the War Between the States,(unless you count our 68000 dead out of a volunteer army of 323000 in World War one,blooded on Gallipoli and the Western Front)but the feeling and emotions would be the same in Canberra as they are in Washington today, if after the election of 2013 ,Noel Pearson (an indigenous Australian) became Prime Minister.
I like the Jumping Judas in January. But as to the rest:
The White House was built in part by the labour of African slaves; to-night an African-American sleeps in it as president.
It's easy to say how could a man (Jefferson) write words like "all men are created equal" and yet hold slaves; but the wonder is, that a man who held slaves could attain to the thought that all men are created equal. Our founders themselves knew that the reality around them did not match the ideal they forged, and that the contradiction could not last. Working that out has been a long and bloody path.
I think Jefferson would be absolutely delighted -- to-night a black woman sleeps in the White House as the wife of the president, rather than snuck in as a love that could not be public.
We had something like this before, when a Catholic was elected president, and an Irish-American, whose ancestors were met with "No Irish Need Apply" right under "Help Wanted" too. But they came here on their idea, to escape.
Now it visibly extends to the people brought here on someone else's idea, to be held captive.
Can PE or WW tell us how Rick Warren went in his inauguration prayer. i did not see it and the TV news reports that i viewed did not carry it.
Was it a prayer that Glorified God,or did he play the Gene Robinson??
Hi David,
Even though I'm interested in this topic, I'm hesitant to comment on it because politics often has more heat and emotion than rational content, since it is usually based on tribal loyalties. Having said that I have 3 comments:
- The hoop-la last night is of course OTT and will probably lead to tears and disappointment. Obama, from what I have seen on TV, is smart, a little arrogant, hard working, committed to community service (we can never know, even for ourselves if this is tainted by ambition), misguided on life issues and very evasive on many issues like religion (in other words, he is a successful politician). I really don't know who I would have voted for if I were a US citizen.
- we can never underestimate the wounds of the race issue, so the enthusiasm is understandable. My Mother tells the story of a white US army officer she knew in Sydney during WWII. When they boarded a tram, a black soldier saluted and got off the tram, because he was not allowed to stay on a tram with a white officer. The white officer said "they are not all like Paul Robeson, you know!!" Those petty humiliations all add up.
- finally, the political comment, and I hope I don't anger or upset anyone, but I'm glad Bush has gone, because, like Ronald Regan he seemed to make a virtue out of ignorance. I know some of his moral positions were very good and very important, but there is a big risk in depending on a flawed champion of a good cause. I also think he lied over the motives in the Iraq war. When I was taught the examination of conscience, we were told that if you weren't sure of the truth of what you were saying, and made no attempt to find out if it is true (because you want it to be true), that is the same thing as a lie.
As I say, I certainly agree that moral issues are far more important to petty politics, and I worry about what Obama will do, but in the end if we really believe in the power of prayer, we have to accept that he won the election and pray that he will be given and will accept good guidance.
The only quibble I'd have with it as a prayer is that, though Dr King was a great advocate for civil rights, he was also a rather poor observer of the 6th Commandment (Thou shalt not commit adultery), and so while I pray he's saved, well, I wouldn't necessarily assume he's ranked among the holy martyrs for Christ...
For what it is worth, here's a Yankee that shares your concern. This irrational excuberance is not sitting well. We are out of touch with reality. Pray for us and our country.
Thank you, Tony. Very well said.
Righto. I get it. The point is: I don't get it. OK? I think on that we are all agreed.
I was listening on the radio this morning to an Australian woman who lives in the States. She told me the same thing. In fact, she said we as Australians just don't get the race thing in America. She described the situation there - where the two groups just don't generally mix socially and where intermarriage is still rare. OK, if that's the case, I get it why this president is so special to you guys, but the essential point is: I still don't get why that should be something for AUSTRALIANS to go ga-ga over.
For the record: when I look at Obama, I see an American, not a black American. He is president of the United States, just as George Bush was. His interests, just like George's interests, started and stopped with the United States.
Yet now, my morning paper is saying it would be a great thing if our Kev got in good with your Mr Obama.
And this after YEARS of drivel about how bad it was for our Johnny to get into bed with your Mr Bush...
And it still somewhat mystifies me why my Australian newspaper needed to be wrapped in a 12-page "Souvenir edition" on the inauguration this morning...
What's a bet when Prince Charles finally gets crowned as King of Australia (and the other pink bits on the map) we won't get our morning edition of "The Age" wrapped in a 12-page souvenir?
THAT's my point. OK? That's all. I don't want to pour cold water on this "special time" for you Yankees. BUT HE ISN'T MY PRESIDENT, OK? I'm ALLOWED not to be bowled over by this "historic moment". I'm allowed to yawn while you guys party. That's my democratic right as an Australian! OK?
PS. This has got nothing to do with Pro-Life issues. It has more to do with my general "anti-American" and "anti-liberal" bias.
I might out grow it over time with psychiatric help, but I don't know...
Well Judas, I'm not about to explain why an Aussie paper says what it says -- take it up with them, write another letter to The Age, since it seems to be they and not we who insist you be bowled over.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home