What Barack Obama has Reminded America
By: Guest Authors
By: Harvey Mack
When the history books look back at Barack Obama’s time in the White House, what will be his lasting legacy (besides, of course, that it was the first time in American history that the Commander in Chief wasn’t a Caucasian male) ?
Obama’s (sometimes insanely passionate) supporters will say that things like socialized health care and the killing of Osama bin Laden will be his lasting legacy. Others say that record spending numbers and unemployment numbers nearing 10% nationally are more likely what the Obama Administration will be remembered for.
Barring something unforeseen before he exits the Oval Office, I predict that the legacy of our 44th President will be as a reminder to our country.
A reminder of why we don’t elect the far left into the White House ? No, everyone already knows that. The last 2 Democrats who’ve won the Presidency hid their dedication to liberalism behind words like “bipartisan” while they were running for office and didn’t “re-commit” to the far left until they’d been elected President. So even Obama and Clinton know that candidates openly and proudly committed to the far left don’t get elected President.
In the end, the lasting legacy of the Obama Presidency will be the reminder of why voters in America are supposed to be careful when electing the leader of the free world. The reminder of why we shouldn’t elect the “heat of the moment” candidate who appears out of nowhere. Why we don’t elect the candidate who’s just come onto the political scene.
The fact that he was “new to the scene” was one of the primary reasons that Obama won the 2008 Presidential election as easily as he did (another one of course being the fact that he had a “soft opponent” in John McCain). I’m positive that Obama knew that not having any kind of significant voting record or lengthy history in the public eye would be a major advantage for him. Without any kind of record to judge him on, the voters had no choice except to take Obama at his word. Obama was also free to say whatever he wanted (or needed) at the time he was speaking and he had a much better chance of not being question about his response. Taking a politician simply at his word, why does that sound like a bad idea ?
If Obama would’ve had a voting record or history on the scene of any kind, his “supporters” would’ve had some idea of what to expect from him as their President. Everyone would have known that his continuous throwing around of the word “bi-partisan” and his claims that politicians would “work together” was nothing more than campaign talk. The voters would have known that he was a narcissistic socialist masquerading as a “Reagan Democrat.”
In regard to the sporting world, “heat of the moment” type of players usually mean nothing more than a lot of highlights on ESPN and often being the topic of discussions on sports talk shows (and occasionally some team making the mistake of giving someone a big contract and watching them wash out). Just look at what’s gone on recently with Tim Tebow and Jeremy Lin. As annoying as it can get when it comes to sports, “heat of the moment” can be outright dangerous when it comes to politics.
Getting too caught up in the “heat of the moment” with a candidate an often lead a voter to throw his/her passionate support behind a politician without taking a close enough (if any) look into who that politician actually is and what they truly believe.
Had so many people not been caught up in “Obama-mania” during the campaign , they might have taken the time to look into Obama’s past and found names like ACORN, Bill Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis, and Jeremiah Wright. They also might have taken the time to find out who those people are, what they believe, and their connections to Barack Obama. But too many people got caught up in the “heat of the moment” and gave Obama a nearly free ride to the White House.