Apart from the 10% rout since Tuesday in the stock market, and whatnot, voters can relax for a day or two. They have pulled the lever, or the trigger (pick your metaphor), and whatever “Change” actually means, it is on the way. I join those who hope that Barack Obama will find the wisdom to lead this country well, though I think that would require breaking most of his campaign promises.
If he turns out to be a great president, presiding over a secure and thriving America, we can all celebrate. Those of us not yet persuaded that prosperity and peace will come of spreading Joe’s wealth and cajoling the mullahs will have reason to re-think our ideas about how the world works, and thank the man who set us straight.
In the more likely scenario that Obama’s hope-change-and-spread agenda is heading for a crack-up, it would be a great service to the country — and to themselves — for the Republicans to be ready with some new, young voices and an alternative vision. That won’t come by way of back-stabbing, infighting and trying against rising odds to devise patronage plans that out-patron the Democrats. I have this notion that if the Republicans want to redeem themselves, there just might be some traction, not so far down the road, to forgetting the branding and positioning and polling and pork, and trying a good faith leap back to that venerable American first principle of protecting individual liberty – subject of my column today at Forbes.com .
But all that will take time. At the moment, still curious about Obama’s background, I am looking –belatedly, I admit — for a copy of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, which got some attention during Obama’s campaign. It is full of lessons on community organizing, and all about “change.” The book’s opening sentence includes a phrase which Obama appropriated for some of his grander theatrics on the campaign trail (the bold is mine): “This book is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be.” … (Which has a certain resonance with the slogan plastered all over Beijing during the Olympics: “One World, One Dream” – a phrase to which a Chinese friend of mine responded with the question: “But what if I have a different dream?”)
Rules for Radicals was published in 1971, so you might think that these days it would be something less than a hot item. But as the dust settles on the 2008 presidential campaign, this book ranks way up there at #169 on Amazon. Who are all these people now reading up on how the Have-Nots can take away power from the Haves? The Republicans?
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
5 Comments
1. A lost reader:Claudia, I wanted to read your Forbes column, but the link you provided seems to have been hijacked….Have a usable one? [Ed.Note: Sorry about that -- now fixed.]
Nov 8, 2008 - 9:02 am 2. heather:It seems that Obama is no longer interested in missile bases in Poland.
In my opinion, his most dangerous impulse is to be an isolationist. And withdrawing from the world is the best way I know how for the USA to lose its power.
On the one hand, the Euros will like – really like – American tourists; but on the other hand, there are definite downsides to slipping down the power scale. (eg, British Empire, 1950 to present).
I suspect that Mark Steyn is correct: that the USA has lost its guts.
Nov 9, 2008 - 12:00 am 3. Gary Ogletree:Before one can make changes wisely one must be able “to see reality as it is” (S.N. Goenka). A good starting point for Obama and crew might be an appreciation for the genius of our Consitution, a document resulting from decades of trial and error by a number of inspired men, grown very wise in that area, if seriously flawed in other areas. To learn that a fairly sharp woman like Whoopi Goldberg is ignorant of the 13th Amendment is not encouraging.
Nov 9, 2008 - 7:47 am 4. Marko:Looking up old sources that might have informed the thinking of those who find themselves propelled into positions of power may indeed be instructive. I think in Obama’s case, however, it is quite a bit more instructive to listen to what many leaders elsewhere in the world are all saying, in a unified voice of appeal:
“The time is now for real change! Come, President Obama, and join us (because Bush wasn’t one of us, but you are), and let us remake the world! Let’s start by eliminating this economic crisis once and for all, and Restructure the world’s economy on a more ‘equitable’ basis.”
Hmmm. What was that Russian word for “restructuring?” Ah yes. Perestroika. Let’s see….. what mentioned-usually-only-on-page-F4 person can you think of who used that word a lot? That’s right. Gorbachev. He’s still in news? Yes. In fact, he just asked Obama to implement an American version of Perestroika.
The box in which we conservatives think is way smaller than the Big Stick of Reality with which we are about to be hit. The rest of the world sees our Constitution and its quaint, old theories about individual rights as an impediment to the worldwide change they want so badly that it hurts.
Now that an American president has been elected that will show little resistance to the Collective, their voices are rising in unison that “the Crisis is upon us! You must help save us all, President Obama!”
Messiah, indeed!
Nov 10, 2008 - 11:21 am 5. heather:carrying on with the ‘isolation’ theme: note that Obama did not include India in his 15 phone calls, thus, one would assume, signalling that the US will tilt towards that bastion of stability, Pakistan.
That is not good for America’s future as leader of the free world.
Also, apparently Obama-bots disapprove of Alberta’s oil sands project (ewww dirty!!), which will mean that Alberta will make deals with China.
In fact, the results of Obama’s American isolation may mean a healthier Canada, Australia and India… looking to the US for leadership is going to be a waste of time, I think. I don’t think, however, there is much hope for Europe, even with regard to Russia’s bellicosity.
Nov 10, 2008 - 1:23 pm