November 2014 has been a rather political month, and not just for us here in Prince George. While we were caught up in the excitement of municipal elections, the Americans permanently hamstrung President Obama by electing a Republican majority to the Senate; thus, voters have made it clear to the President and his policy advisors that they are not impressed with his record. That might not sound very profound to many Canadians, but America's rejection of Obama serves as a valuable parable about how to govern properly.
America was in pretty rough shape when George W. Bush left office in January 2009: gas prices had soared (then crashed), Iraq was a quagmire, and the economy had tanked. Bush's successor had campaigned on "Hope and Change," giving life to the notion that every American, regardless of race or creed, could become President of the United States. At the moment of his inauguration, President Obama held the nation, the world, all of Congress and, of course, the White House in the palm of his hand. Six years later, gas is cheaper, the economy is recovering, and the troops have come home, but Mr. Obama is despised. How can this be?
Simply put, because of President Obama's constant display of contempt for legislation, processes, and political figures that stand in his way.
When President Obama was elected, congress was held by his party. He used his control of the three houses to pass a great deal of his personal agenda, including Obamacare, almost all of which went forward without any support from the opposition. When the minority Republicans, many of whom were actually moderates, voiced their concerns about how going further into debt was wrong, or how Obamacare would actually hurt not help many families, Mr. Obama not only ignored their pleas, but went so far as to ridicule them publicly. Do note that, he did this regardless of their length in office or the merit of their ideas and questions.
Mr. Obama's contempt for his adversaries has been on a heightened display ever since the Republicans took back the House of Representatives during midterm elections in 2010, the year the "Tea Party" was born. People often blame this rather extreme faction for derailing the government, but the fact of the matter is that Mr. Obama started the mudslinging much earlier. Furthermore, in 2012, while on the campaign trail, the incumbent President constantly berated his opponent, Mitt Romney, by pointing to his wealth and successful businesses as proof that he would ignore the working man, conveniently forgetting the fact that the most successful and progressive Democratic president, Franklin Roosevelt, was a monied aristocrat from New York.
Put bluntly, Mr. Obama has been on an ideological crusade since he first decided to run for President, and the American people have grown tired of it. Ideology colours his administration to the point where many people no longer believe anything that comes out of the White House press secretary's mouth, or that the President is capable of acting in the interest of the nation alone. All I can say is that Mr. Obama's predicament is certainly of his own making.
But what's the political lesson to be learned here? Ironically enough, Mr. Obama's failed presidency stands as a testament to the humanity of the voting electorate; people certainly do want results, but not at the expense of dignity and civility. In fact, it matters just as much "how" one governs as what goals a governor decides to achieve. That's actually quite encouraging.
In the end, it appears that extremism does not become a democratic leader or its people, regardless of party or ideology, at any level of government. Slow, steady change based on real evidence is the only way forward, a lesson that we'd all do well to learn faster than Mr. Obama.
