Critiquing Obama’s Speech
First, let me congratulate Sen. Obama on becoming the first African-American to capture a major party’s nomination for president. It’s important that we recognize that this is an historic night. Everyone knows that I’ve got major problems with Sen. Obama on the issues but it’s a great accomplishment anytime anyone captures his party’s presidential nomination. That it was an historic accomplishment is a genuine source of pride for Sen. Obama.
Earlier tonight, Sen. McCain defined the differences between himself and Sen. Obama when he spoke in New Orleans. Now it’s time to see how Sen. Obama attempted to define himself on his own terms. Here’s what Sen. Obama said on Iraq:
Change is a foreign policy that doesn’t begin and end with a war that should’ve never been authorized and never been waged. I won’t stand here and pretend that there are many good options left in Iraq, but what’s not an option is leaving our troops in that country for the next hundred years, especially at a time when our military is overstretched, our nation is isolated, and nearly every other threat to America is being ignored.
We must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in, but start leaving we must. It’s time for Iraqis to take responsibility for their future. It’s time to rebuild our military and give our veterans the care they need and the benefits they deserve when they come home. It’s time to refocus our efforts on al Qaeda’s leadership and Afghanistan, and rally the world against the common threats of the 21st century, terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. That’s what change is.
It’s obvious that Sen. Obama will continue characterizing the current Iraq strategy as the failed strategy of three years ago. Rest assured that Sen. McCain will ofer proof that security has improved dramatically improved since the surge began. Sen. McCain will also point to the significant steps that’ve been taken on the road to political reconcilliation in Iraq.
In a very real way, Sen. Obama wants America to believe that the Iraq of today is the Iraq of 2004-2005. I don’t think that’ll work.
It’s not change when he offers four more years of Bush economic policies that have failed to create well-paying jobs, or insure our workers, or help Americans afford the skyrocketing cost of college, policies that have lowered the real incomes of the average American family, widened the gap between Wall Street and Main Street, and left our children with a mountain of debt.
Many ads will be run that will point out that the Democrats’ plan to cut the cost of a gallon of gasoline is to increase taxes while not increasing energy production. The single biggest reason why gas is as high as it is is because Bill Clinton made millions of barrels of fossil fuels off-limits in the name of ‘the Environment’. Rest assured that 527’s will point out how the Democrats’ policies are keeping oil prices rising.
I’ve suggested before that Republicans will do better than expected if they talk about increasing oil production. They must make the case that increasing production will drop prices dramatically.
As for health care, people care about the price of their premiums but they don’t believe that HillaryCare will bring costs down. They care about the availability of insurance but they don’t see how government can make it more accessible without raising taxes.
Change is realizing that meeting today’s threats requires not just our firepower, but the power of our diplomacy, tough, direct diplomacy where the President of the United States isn’t afraid to let any petty dictator know where America stands and what we stand for. We must once again have the courage and conviction to lead the free world. That is the legacy of Roosevelt, and Truman, and Kennedy. That’s what the American people want. That’s what change is.
I thought that Obama had backed away from direct talks with Ahmadinejad, Chavez and Castro unless preparations were made first. Now it’s back to showing his ignorance of history? I wish he’d make up his mind so we knew which policies to ridicule.
This is the most laughable paragraph in the speech:
John McCain has spent a lot of time talking about trips to Iraq in the last few weeks, but maybe if he spent some time taking trips to the cities and towns that have been hardest hit by this economy, cities in Michigan, and Ohio, and right here in Minnesota, he’d understand the kind of change that people are looking for.
Glenn Reynolds puts it best, as is often the case, here:
Obama says: “John McCain has spent a lot of time talking about trips to Iraq in the last few weeks, but maybe if he spent some time taking trips to the cities and towns that have been hardest hit by this economy, cities in Michigan, and
Ohio, and right here in Minnesota, he’d understand the kind of change that
people are looking for.” Er, what about the Forgotten America tour?
Glenn, perhaps he didn’t notice because he was too busy losing a depressing string of primaries? Or perhaps he spent too much time worrying about Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers and Tony Rezko?
After that, it’s time for the time-tested victimhood section of the speech:
Maybe if he went to Iowa and met the student who works the night shift after a full day of class and still can’t pay the medical bills for a sister who’s ill, he’d understand that she can’t afford four more years of a health care plan that only takes care of the healthy and wealthy. She needs us to pass health care plan that guarantees insurance to every American who wants it and brings down premiums for every family who needs it. That’s the change we need.
Sen. Obama would be wise to not talk down to us like that. Hillary tried passing government-run universal health care in 1995. That’s what put the GOP into the majority.
Maybe if he went to Pennsylvania and met the man who lost his job but can’t even afford the gas to drive around and look for a new one, he’d understand that we can’t afford four more years of our addiction to oil from dictators. That man needs us to pass an energy policy that works with automakers to raise fuel standards, and makes corporations pay for their pollution, and oil companies invest their record profits in a clean energy future, an energy policy that will create millions of new jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced. That’s the change we need.
Sen. Obama talks about “four more years of our addiction to oil from dictators” on primary nights but filibusters energy bills that would increase oil production while he’s in Washington. That’s something Democrats have done since the early years of the Clinton administration. Isn’t forcing oil companies “to invest their record profits in a clean energy future” sorta like Hugo Chavez’s nationalization of the oil companies in Venezuela?
That isn’t change we can believe in. For that matter, that isn’t change. That’s the same-old-same-old. In fact, it sounds alot like the recent rant from fring partisan Maxine Waters:
He also sounds like Hillary:
For all his bluster, Sen. Obama isn’t an agent of change. He’s just a smooth-talking Chicago machine politician.
Technorati Tags: Obama, Change, Foreign Policy, Hugo Chavez, Energy Policy, Oil Exploration, HillaryCare, Maxine Waters, John McCain, Election 2008
Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog