Obama's Change

Part of me wants to say "Leave Obama Alone!" The more savy of you should see an image of a whiny emo fucktard shitbag, mascara running, hands to red cheeks, crying, and screaming at you from the youtube. And that's an apt picture, because that's where the sentiment comes from: the whiny emo shittard fuckbag piece of me. Don't laugh, you have one too; and the more you deny it, the more we're sure that's the majority of the corny jokes and old sight gags, and favored talking-head recitations, you try to call a personality.

"Obama's recycling Clintonians. That's not change!" some people shout. Yet, Obama never specified what change he would usher in, as he is a good politician and therefore vague/ambiguous/disingenuous/whathaveyou. Clintonians are a change from the overwhelming flood of insane business, and social, conservatives Bush has coddled to his presidential teat. They're not a change, too, for obvious reasons.

The more thoughtful piece of me, that part that those of you who know me personally hate- because it won't leave anything alone, and demands I seek out more information about it- makes me consider other possibilities. This is the piece that makes me think the guy who couldn't feel his hand probably has either upper neck and shoulder trouble or very high back problems, or both. This is the piece that makes me comment on everything, as a way of trying to "sound it out", understand it fully, "grok" it for those Heinlein fans among you.

First, I consider that President-elect Obama has had his hand forced because of the economic problems helped along by Bush's "deregulation", "no government interference in the free market", and inability to fundamentally understand key concepts about reality, like calling a group of people- or their concerns- the "reality based" initiative/movement is the exact opposite of a derogatory comment. (Note that it was meant as such, and many took it to be so). Also, take care to read my wording, I said helped, not caused. Clinton and the demo-prats helped it along too; but I would like to throw back some comments I heard early in Bush II (pt1).

When the economy tanked in the early part of this decade, it was blamed on Clinton. Clinton's mismanagement caused that mini recession, due to his appointments, etc etc; and it couldn't be Bush's fault because he'd only been president for less than a year. Many people agreed that, if a president's policies could effect the economy it would be at the end of his term into the next president's. Ahem... well... Eight years after Bush's start we see where we are on that score.

But that's tangential, really. Obama's Change is the point of this- seeing as that's the title, it's sorta neat, AMIRITE?!?!!1 Maybe it's not the economic pressures that are forcing his hand, that made him run to tried and true and keep Gates- for the moment. Maybe he was lying about real change, and just wanted his demo-pratic cronies, instead of the repulican'ts currently in Washington. That is, at least, what I suspect some people are saying/thinking.

And that's the real issue, to me. Did he "intentionally mislead"? Did he lie? I'd say we'll know in 8 years. Not that Obama is ensured a second term, he's not- especially if the economy remains in the tank. But that will put us at the end of his presidency or four years after, and we;ll have a bit more perspective. For every thing someone may point to as evidence of their side (he's lying/he's not), there's one on the other, as well.

It comes down to, as so many things seem to, interpretation. Interpretation is a very touchy kind of thing. The Austrian Economists will tell you that Alphabet Agencies caused the Great Depression to be longer. It was reported in my local newspaper some time ago as fact. What they won't tell you is that Austrian Economics are an interpretation with their own problems. Interpretation is a very subjective experience, it asks a person to take some (at its best) facts and jiggle them around inside their dinkum-thinkums until an answer plops out. That is the essence of interpretation, and the EXACT reason anything that is concluded due to interpretation should be viewed with suspicion, and taken with a grain of salt.

There are interpretations that can be trusted, rather easily, too. These would be include such scientifically accepted ideas as the Theory of Relativity. Theory, sorta, means it's an interpretation of the way the universe works; BUT as a scientific theory, it also means there has been objective testing done that confirms predictions made by the theory. Take evolution: it's a theory not because it's unprovable; but because we can't actually go back and see evolution take place. Other than that one detail, it makes predictions, all of them have been true, and the only thing that is currently disputed is the mechanisms of how it happens (not if it happens- which it does).

Obama is going to be watched 24/7 in a way that other president's have not. Clinton felt some of this, with the dawnings of the internet, Bush got more of it, as the internet (and the blogosphere) really prospered [despite some of the laws that went into effect under him]. Yet, Obama is the first black president- or will be on January 20th (depends totally on when you read this). Add the economic crisis, that's been here since December 2007, and the changing status of America in a world/superpower context, add Obama's commitment to be the most wired presidency yet; and you're starting to get the picture.

When people tell me Obama is just another huckster bullshit artist politician, I squint at them, and try to make sure I'm seeing them clearly. There's only two types of people that seem to truly believe it- and a third that loves to say it: (1) the true believer, who thinks only the Repulican'ts are capable of really truly running America "well", (2) The cynical jackass who really and truly hates when anyone else is happy/optimistic/not-a-jackass, (3) The Vacuous idiot, or chicken little douchebag, who is simply spouting the verbal diarrhea of the talking-head they jerk-off to the most.

I'm not saying "Give Obama a chance". Fuck it, if you've already made up your mind, let me know- so I can ignore you for the next four years. What I am saying is, it's too early to tell, yet. Know how you can tell THAT? Because he's not even the president- not until January 20, 2009. There's a saying that every one of you has heard, and it's apt here; it's about eggs and baskets. Obama might only be a change because of his skin color, which would be the saddest thing, in my opinion; but even if that does prove to be the case, it's still change, and that means he didn't completely lie.