The Retreat
April 16, 2024, 12:51:55 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Retreat.

 
  Home Help Arcade Gallery Staff List Calendar Login Register  

The politics of seeming trumps politics of achieving

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: The politics of seeming trumps politics of achieving  (Read 87 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
MagicM
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2436



« on: November 07, 2012, 05:03:05 pm »

BARACK Obama should not have been re-elected President.  That he was tells us elections are now decided less
by heads than hearts.

Is America better off after four years already of Obama? More Americans - 7.9 per cent - are unemployed. The country is
even deeper in debt, now totalling a frightening $16 trillion. Obama’s foreign policy has left America, if anything, weaker.

Obama, who four years ago promised such a transformative presidency that “this was the moment when the
rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”, has plainly failed.


Yet he’s back in the White House, and Republican Mitt Romney, the successful businessman and governor is not.

Worse for the US, he’s back with the same deadlock in Congress - Democrats controlling the Senate, Republicans the
House - and a smaller mandate.

What the hell happened?

In a victory this narrow almost anything can be said to have made the difference: Superstorm Sandy blowing
away Romney’s momentum, the blame-Bush hangover or whatever cause you want to push.

But Obama should have been swept away so comprehensively as to make such if-buts pointless.

Bigger shifts help him, signalling the rise of a new kind of politics that could leave the US weaker, and us, too.
This election confirms the suspicion that the politics of seeming is trumping that of achieving. That what counts
most in politicians is how voters “identify” with them, rather than what they do. It also suggests that a culture of
entitlement is eating at a culture of achievement.


http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_the_politics_of_identity_and_the_dividing_of_america/
« Last Edit: November 07, 2012, 05:09:18 pm by MagicM » Report Spam   Logged

“Beauties in vain their pretty eyes may roll; charms strike the sight, but merit wins the soul.”  Alexander Pope

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Artiste
artist extraordinaire
Hero Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 9354


« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2012, 05:27:00 pm »

Merci Magic M!

Well said you did... there!

The unemployment is a much more than what you quote, double if not 3 or 4 times that!!!

And the debt in the USA in more than double of when Obama took over - that should have told something to voters but those who wanted to remain on welfare voted too much as there are many, many, many?

There are too many con artist like criminals (especially foreign ones pretending to be citizens) making and selling illegal drugs in the USA like in the other democratic countries killing them now in 2012 and it's getting worst?


Au revoir,
hugs!
Report Spam   Logged
MagicM
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2436



« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2012, 05:43:07 pm »

Brendan O’Neill writes:

Many observers, especially Obama-cheering observers here in the UK, will look upon Obama’s victory as a win for the little man over the big corporate interests that lined up behind Mitt Romney. Romney, we were frequently told, represents “the 1 per cent”, the implication being that Obama speaks for “the 99 per cent”, for Joe Average. Where the modern Republican Party has become beholden to business and religious elites, reliant on them for funding and moral backing, the Democrats under Obama are more of a mass party, we’re told, bringing not only the working classes but also the young and black people into the political sphere.

In truth, as articulated in a most interesting pre-election article by Joel Kotkin at the Daily Beast, in recent years the Democratic Party has become as much an elitist machine as GOP has.

Obama’s main source of funding was not donations from millions of Joe Averages but handouts from “the tech sector, government and the academy” – his top five funders were “the University of California, Microsoft, Google, the US government, and Harvard”. Executives at Craigslist, Facebook and Google gave maximum donations to Obama’s campaign. As Kotkin points out, these people make their fortunes “not through tangible goods but instead by manipulating and packaging information”, and so they are “generally not interested in the mundane economy of carbon-based energy, large-scale agriculture, housing, and manufacturing”.

As such, he says, unlike much of the masses who make a living getting their hands dirty in carbon-based industries, these extravagantly wealthy elitists can “afford to be green and progressive, since they rarely deal with physical infrastructure or unions or the challenges of training lower-skilled workers”.

Although this New Clerisy uses populist rhetoric, talking about the desires of the working man and the needs of youth and blacks, it is fundamentally oligarchical, says Kotkin. It believes that “power should rest not with the will of the common man or that of the plutocrats [who support Romney], but with credentialed ‘experts’”.

And so this expert class – brainier than Joe Average, more eco-enlightened due to its being cushioned from big, grubby industry, and more “aware” on issues such as gay marriage and racial equality – lords it over the ill-informed oiks who make up mass and especially Middle America. They really do see it as their role, in Coleridge’s old words, to “school the rest of society on values and standards”.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100188325/the-election-is-over-and-the-elitists-have-won/
Report Spam   Logged

“Beauties in vain their pretty eyes may roll; charms strike the sight, but merit wins the soul.”  Alexander Pope
injest
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 18510



« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2012, 06:30:14 pm »

oh it's far simpler than that, Jo. We reelected Obama because we have reached a tipping point where no one cares about anyone or anything but themselves...the gays don't care as long as they get marriage, the women libbers don't care as long as they get free birth control and abortion, the Blacks don't care as long as they get all the freebies they get.."OBAMAPHONE!" and all.

the Democrats won by appealing to the most base instincts of people...to the part of people that they USED to be ashamed to admit in public...they have encouraged greed, avarice, hatred and dependency.

and they, like the children they are, don't see what is coming for them..

As Khrushchev said:

 "Oh you Americans! You're so gullible! We'll spoon feed you socialism until you're Communists and don't even know it. We'll never have to fire a shot!"

Report Spam   Logged
Artiste
artist extraordinaire
Hero Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 9354


« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2012, 07:28:11 am »

Merci Injess!

You say well:
Quote
    the Democrats won by appealing to the most base instincts of people...to the part of people that they USED to be ashamed to admit in public...they have encouraged greed, avarice, hatred and dependency.
         


The con art Obama will never reveal his cons to them; that he is for the very rich only?

Au revoir,
hugs!
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum


Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy