Posted 9:28 pm Wednesday, January 23, 2013
Send to Kindle
Inaugural address held no inspiration
President Barack Obama’s second inaugural speech failed in its central purpose: to re-unite a nation divided by a bitter, partisan election. Instead of an outstretched hand, Obama presented a fist in the face of straw men, as he misrepresented his opponents’ positions and policies.
To be sure, he made ample use of the word “together,” but it seemed only to refer to his own coalition of voters. He spoke of the Founding Fathers and of our nation’s many great struggles.
“We made ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together,” Obama said in his speech on Monday. “Together we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers.
Together we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. Together we resolve that a great nation must care for the vulnerable and protect its people from life’s worst hazards and misfortune.”
Did we? Certainly, there is broad agreement that transportation is a good thing, and so are schools. There’s somewhat less agreement on how many “rules” a free market needs, but all Americans support “care for the vulnerable.”
But Obama is laying out a defense for an even stronger national government, and in particular a beefed-up executive branch (with him in charge).
And in doing so, he mischaracterizes those who disagree with his means, not his ends.
To be sure, he made ample use of the word “together,” but it seemed only to refer to his own coalition of voters. He spoke of the Founding Fathers and of our nation’s many great struggles.
“We made ourselves anew, and vowed to move forward together,” Obama said in his speech on Monday. “Together we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers.
Together we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. Together we resolve that a great nation must care for the vulnerable and protect its people from life’s worst hazards and misfortune.”
Did we? Certainly, there is broad agreement that transportation is a good thing, and so are schools. There’s somewhat less agreement on how many “rules” a free market needs, but all Americans support “care for the vulnerable.”
But Obama is laying out a defense for an even stronger national government, and in particular a beefed-up executive branch (with him in charge).
And in doing so, he mischaracterizes those who disagree with his means, not his ends.
“We reject the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future,” he said. “For we remember the lessons of our past, when twilight years were spent in poverty and parents of a child with a disability had nowhere to turn. We do not believe that in this country freedom is reserved for the lucky or happiness for the few. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us at any time may face a job loss or a sudden illness or a home swept away in a terrible storm. The commitments we make to each other through Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security, these things do not sap our initiative. They strengthen us.”
In fact, there’s no debate over whether Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are good things. The real debate is over how to preserve them. Obama’s own administration acknowledges the programs, as they exist now, are unsustainable. The question is how to make sure they’re available to our children and grandchildren.
Obama also misrepresented his opponents on the subject of climate change.
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” he said.
In fact, America is leading the way on lower emissions — and it’s due to the free market (cheap natural gas), rather than government mandates.
An inaugural address should be a speech that cites common goals and reminds us we’re all Americans.
Obama’s words fell short of that. They merely reminded us of a campaign stump speech.
In fact, there’s no debate over whether Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are good things. The real debate is over how to preserve them. Obama’s own administration acknowledges the programs, as they exist now, are unsustainable. The question is how to make sure they’re available to our children and grandchildren.
Obama also misrepresented his opponents on the subject of climate change.
“We will respond to the threat of climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and future generations,” he said.
In fact, America is leading the way on lower emissions — and it’s due to the free market (cheap natural gas), rather than government mandates.
An inaugural address should be a speech that cites common goals and reminds us we’re all Americans.
Obama’s words fell short of that. They merely reminded us of a campaign stump speech.
