Last night, Michelle Obama gave a speech at the Democratic National Convention that, this morning, is being widely praised and described as “the speech of her life” by numerous pundits. In my usual fashion, I opted to read the transcript rather than listen to applause breaks and rhetorical flourishes. What I found was a [speech] that was, in essence, 1500+ words worth of for the children! pleas and exhortations. By my count, Obama used variants of “child” 40 times in those 1500 words.
For the children! is a cheap argument. It’s intended to circumvent rational and critical thought in favor of raw emotional gamesmanship. It’s a sneaky ad hominem in that it suggests that, if you support other than what the pleader does, you’re against children. It’s, as has often been noted, a signal to “watch your wallet, because someone’s looking to dip into it.
That last bit was my first reaction. Call me a cynic, but when I hear anyone with known big-government proclivities say for the children!, I expect them to say “we” (meaning government) need to spend more money. More money, even though per-student public education spending has tripled in the last 40 years with no measurable improvement in outcome. Even though billions have been sunk into Head Start, a program that the government’s own studies have shown to make no measurable difference. Even though there are, conservatively at least 80 welfare programs already in place in the US.
That’s the past, of course, and Obama was clearly talking about the future. Consider that future, though. Consider that the nation is $19 trillion in debt, almost half of which was accrued under her husband’s watch, and that Clinton’s plans call for additional spending that will outpace the additional revenue she thinks she can pull with tax increases. Consider that Social Security is grossly underfunded, that today’s young are likely to receive only about 3/4 of their expected benefits, that her husband did nothing to address the problems that SS is facing, and that Clinton has proposed to expand the current system and pay for the expansion by raising taxes on a few rich people. Yeah, that’ll work. The same holds true to an even greater extent for Medicare. The children are looking at a future where their earnings will continue to be transferred to retirees, to fulfill promises made to them when they were young, as the Social Security and Medicare Ponzi schemes continue to grow out of control.
But, lest you think it’s only about money, consider what the continuation of our government’s expansion into all corners of our lives under Clinton will mean for the children. The children are going to grow up in a surveillance state, with weakened liberties, less economic freedom than ever, every innovation (think Uber, AirBnB) opposed and stifled by the State, and a perpetual war stance.
As to the last point, make no mistake – Clinton’s history is one of aggressive militarism. She was all-in on the Iraq war. The Libya mess rests squarely on her shoulders (she led the regime change initiative), and she’s been a big drum thumper for military action in Syria. There’s every reason to think that Clinton will continue to be Clinton once president, and send the children off to fight and die in foreign lands and foreign wars.
Yes, Mrs. Obama, lets elect Hillary Clinton for the children! If I were a child, I’d be hiding under my bed in terror at the thought.
There was one other bit in Obama’s speech that caught my eye. It was an non-specific but unveiled swipe at Trump and his “make America great again” slogan. Michelle declared:
So, look, so don’t let anyone ever tell you that this country isn’t great, that somehow we need to make it great again. Because this right now is the greatest country on earth!
Standing on its own, it’s a nice statement. It proclaims that things are good. The truth of that is beside the point – this is a rah-rah speech. Everything, however, rests on what came before. Lest we forget, this is the same woman who declared, back in 2008:
For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction.
Obama could find no pride in America prior to her husband’s success on the presidential campaign trail. She could find no pride in the nation that radically expanded rights and protections for individuals in an era where monarchy was the norm. She could find no pride in the nation that produced the greatest expansion of wealth in the world’s history, that has been the greatest nation in the history of the planet, that spawned the Greatest Generation that beat back National Socialism in Europe and imperialism in the Pacific, and that drew countless millions of immigrants as “the land of opportunity.”
What do we make of her lack of pride in 2008 and declaration of greatness in 2016? Could it simply be utter narcissism – the beatification of her husband, the delusion that Barack Obama, not Washington, or Jefferson, or Adams, or Lincoln, or either of the Roosevelts, or Reagan, or Truman, or King, or Franklin, or any of a long list of great presidents and national leaders, is what made the nation great?
Many people feel they heard a great speech. Maybe they got swept up in the moment and taken in by flourish and oratory, or maybe they simply didn’t consider the hollowness of the words. By all reports, Obama delivered her speech flawlessly. Even a flawless delivery, however, does not offset a phony message.
Loading ...
Great analysis, Peter. 100 likes to you!
she’s an insufferable, pretentious ……………!