Barack Obama in the eye of the storm
Four years ago, Barack Obama rode to the White House by creating an unstoppable freight train of mass movement buoyed by hope and the can-do spirit that galvanized the American people across the racial divide, who thought if anyone was capable of restoring the plummeting and battered image of the US abroad as well as […]
Four years ago, Barack Obama rode to the White House by creating an unstoppable freight train of mass movement buoyed by hope and the can-do spirit that galvanized the American people across the racial divide, who thought if anyone was capable of restoring the plummeting and battered image of the US abroad as well as rebuild its economy hobbled by an unnecessary war in Iraq, that person would be Barack Obama. But four years on, the economy has climbed sluggishly out of recession but it has stubbornly refused to yield the expected dividends of creating jobs and general prosperity, a situation that is now threatening to turn all the heady rhetoric of “yes, we can’’ on which he rode to power into empty verbiage.
Yet, it would be wrong to create the impression that the Barack Obama presidency so far, has been all ‘’talk and no walk’’, as even his implacable political foe, Mitt Romney has, though reluctantly recognized that President Obama has done a good job of dragging the economy out of the recession it was plunged by the preceding administration of George W. Bush. What is more, the economy is on its feet largely because of the deft handling of the banking sector crisis which necessitated huge ‘’bail-outs’’ of some of US’s mega banks. He similarly bailed out the auto-industry thereby saving the likes of General Motors from bankruptcy. Taken together, the president’s first term can be said to have been used to undo the damage done to the economy by his predecessor and the limited gains achieved would be consolidated upon in his second term to serve as foundation for prosperity and growth for the future, much like Clinton did during his tenure. But he has to win at the polls first.
Mitt Romney, his opponent has assailed him for building up a huge deficit, bigger than the level at which George W. Bush left it and this is because under Barack Obama government has grown so big it has come to dominate and infact wiped out private enterprise—the mainstay of the US economy. Mitt Romney’s attack is understandable, with his illustrious background in private business, through which he made a fortune in buying ailing companies, revitalizing and reselling them at mouth watering profit, he can be forgiven for railing against government as Father Christmas, a behemoth throwing tax payers money at every conceivable project which has resulted in the deficit. Mitt Romney therefore has promised to trim down government as a way of bringing down the deficit, succeeding in the process in painting Barack Obama as a spendthrift president who throws money at all kinds of policies.
The Republican Party candidates have a penchant for blaming their Democratic Party opponents for building huge bureaucracies—a charge that is not entirely false. But they themselves are guilty of the same charge. For instance, it is said that George W. Bush’s wars on Iraq and on terror left in their wake a vast and bewildering bureaucracy and structures which Barack Obama is battling to dismantle. Despite Mitt Romney’s bid to deny the impression created during the campaign as a warmonger who could embark on another disastrous war based on flimsy reasons like his party fellow traveler, his comment on China was generally seen as a bellicose outburst of one who could rashly take another war abroad thereby disturbing the fragile and tenuous peace existing in the world.
On balance, Barack Obama has done enough to win a second term easily, even with the sluggish economy. After all, unemployment level has continued to drop and it is now below the threshold of 8% above which it is said no incumbent president can get re-elected. His difficulty however lies in the Republican Party’s sworn determination to make him a one term president and it has done this by deploying its considerable strength in Congress to block every major policy thrusts that could impact positively on the economy, particularly the one aimed at bringing down the deficit. Then, of course, through a relentless depiction of his racial stock veiled as campaign strategy, a point buttressed by the fact that even when more and more whites are getting employed more than any other racial stock seeking white collar jobs, on the strength of Obama’s policies, only a miniscule percentage of whites in this category of workers has indicated a preference for him as president.
As Election Day approaches, a combination of factors may yet work to favour his re-election to the White House. One is the furious storm named Sandy that had buffeted most of the Caribbean leaving in its wake death and destruction. A few days ago, Sandy, like some vengeful mythical goddess, struck New York and New Jersey, dumping huge sea water on Manhattan and wreaked devastation in other places. So far some fifty lives have been lost and decimated many of New York’s infrastructure and facilities. President Barack Obama appropriately abandoned his campaign to inspect and commiserate with those so affected by Sandy. His calm disposition in the face of utter devastation of the stricken cities, where he promised federal government assistance has been shown to be timely and the appropriate response needed.
The gesture has won him endorsements from two staunch Republican Party stalwarts—Christopher Christie, governor of New Jersey and Michael Blumberg of New York for having shown astute presidential sensibility at a trying time. In other words, the endorsements by foremost opposition party personalities might just be enough to sway voters still sitting on the sideline to his side and win for him a second term.