We voted for Barack Obama in November 2008, but we got another President Clinton anyway.
I supported Barack Obama in the 2008 Democratic presidential primary primarily because I didn’t think that his primary opponent Billary Clinton could win the White House, and also because I didn’t want another Clintonesque (that is, “centrist” — that is, milquetoast) “Democratic” president.
Now, I realize that there is little difference between Obama and Billary — except that I still believe that Billary couldn’t have won the White House, and that if Obama hadn’t won the Democratic primary, we’d have another Repugnican in the White House right now.
Many have pointed out that Obama never promised to be a foaming-at-the-mouth liberal president. Well, if that is accurate, Team Obama certainly never did anything to dissuade the dollars that we liberals liberally poured into Obama’s campaign coffers. If neither Obama nor his team ever promised the starry-eyed moonbats a rose garden, well, neither Obama nor his team ever did anything to disabuse them of the notion that Obama was on their side.
President Obama recently gave his term as president thus far “a good solid ‘B+’.”
Progressive Ralph Nader, whom I almost voter for in November 2008 instead of Obama — and whom I wish I had voted for instead — gives Obama’s first year a good solid “F”.
“He’s been far too concessionary to large corporations, many of which want to block his legislation and many of which are being bailed out by his administration,” Nader said of Obama. “And when you’re concessionary, for the president, the Republicans smell weakness, they smell pliability, they smell the desperation … and when you project weakness, instead of steadfastness, then you facilitate divisions within your own party.”
Obama, I suspect, gives himself a “B+” because George W. Bush lowered the presidential bar all the way to China. Yes, if Bush II represents the new normal for the White House, then Obama would get the “B+”, but Bush was an anomaly, not the new normal.
Ralph Nader’s “F” is a bit harsh, though, as Nader represents progressive change that more than 90 percent of politicians are way too petrified to even attempt to attempt. Yes, by Nader’s lofty, idealistic standards, Obama gets an “F.”
With the extreme outliers of George W. Bush and Ralph Nader ignored, I think it’s safe to give Obama a “C.” He’s an average U.S. president: still kowtowing to the corporations and to big money, still putting the interests of the power structure over the interests of the majority of the American people. He made lots of campaign promises that he hasn’t delivered upon. He is, in short, another typical American politician.
If Obama were the only president to campaign one way and to administer in another way and to put the fat cats’ interests above the average American’s interests, then yes, I could give him an “F”, but as it’s just business as usual, I give Obama a “C”. “C” does, after all, mean average.
And “C” also is for “Clinton.” And for “centrist.”
That’s the kind of president that Obama has turned out to be: an awful lot like Bill Clinton, only Clinton was beleaguered by a Repugnican-dominated Congress while Obama has a Congress dominated by his own party, so Obama has much less of an excuse for his “centrism.”
I’d love to give Obama an “incomplete,” with the hopes that he’ll actually earn that “B+” that he claims he has earned, but my hunch is that he’ll round out his one or two terms with only a “C”.
P.S. While looking back at past weekly “This Modern World” ’toons, this one struck me as germaine to this post: