Home OP-ED Between Negativism and Pandering, Obama Became a Drop-Dead Cinch

Between Negativism and Pandering, Obama Became a Drop-Dead Cinch

136
0
SHARE

Second of two parts

Re “Romney Could Not Ever Match Obama’s Dollar Giveaways

[Editor’s Note: The activist Hovsep Fidanian of Glendale forwards the essay below with the following comment: “Take a moment to digest this most succinct, thoughtful explanation of how last month’s election demonstrates our nation is changing. The essay, by the rabbi of Congregation B’nai Yeshurun, Teaneck, NJ, appeared in the Israel National News, directed to Jewish readership. Seventy percent of American Jews voted as Democrats.”]

Dateline Teaneck, NJ –PDuring his 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to Adlai Stevenson: “Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!” Stevenson called back: “That's not enough, madam. We need a majority!” Truer words never were spoken. Obama could get away with saying that “Romney wants the rich to play by a different set of rules” without ever defining what those different rules were. Obama could get away with saying that the “rich should pay their fair share” without ever defining what a “fair share” is. Obama could get away with saying that Romney wants the poor, elderly and sick to “fend for themselves” without even acknowledging that all these government programs are going bankrupt, their current insolvency only papered over by deficit spending.

Pandering to Minorities

Similarly, Obama (or his surrogates) could hint to blacks that a Romney victory would lead them back into chains and proclaim to women that their abortions and birth control would be taken away. He could appeal to Hispanics that Romney would have them all arrested and shipped to Mexico. He could unabashedly state that he will not enforce the current immigration laws. He could espouse the furtherance of the incestuous relationship between governments and unions – in which politicians ply the unions with public money in exchange for which the unions provide the politicians with votes, in exchange for which the politicians provide more money and the unions provide more votes, etc., even though the money is gone.

The Changing of Faces

Obama also knows that the electorate has changed, that whites soon will be a minority in America (they're already a minority in California) and that the new immigrants to the U.S. are primarily from the Third World, and they do not share the traditional American values that attracted immigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries. It is a different world, a different America. Obama is part of that different America. He knows it. He knows how to tap into it. That is why he won.

Obama also proved again that negative advertising works, invective sells, and harsh personal attacks succeed. That Romney never engaged in such diatribes points to his essential goodness as a person. His “negative ads” were simple facts, never personal abuse – facts about high unemployment, lower take-home pay, a loss of American power and prestige abroad, a lack of leadership.

As a politician, though, Romney failed because he did not embrace the devil's bargain of making unsustainable promises. It turned out that it was not possible for Romney and Ryan – people of substance, depth and ideas – to compete with the shallow populism and platitudes of their opponents. Obama mastered the politics of envy – of class warfare – never reaching out to Americans as such, but to individual groups, and cobbling together a winning majority from these minority groups.

If an Obama could not be defeated – given his record and his vision of America, in which free stuff seduces voters – it is hard to envision any change in the future. The road to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and to a European-socialist economy, those very economies that are collapsing today in Europe, is paved.

What Lies Ahead for Iran

For Jews, mostly assimilated anyway and staunch Democrats, the results demonstrate again that liberalism is their Torah. Almost 70 percent voted for a President widely perceived by Israelis and most committed Jews as hostile to Israel. They voted to secure Obama's future at America's expense and at Israel's expense – in effect, preferring Obama to Netanyahu by a wide margin. A dangerous time is ahead. Under present circumstances, it is inconceivable that the U.S. will take any aggressive action against Iran and will more likely thwart any Israeli initiative. The U.S. will preach the importance of negotiations up until the production of the first Iranian nuclear weapon – and then state that the world must learn to live with this new reality. But this election should be a wake-up call to Jews. There is no permanent empire. Nor is there an enduring haven for Jews anywhere in the exile. The American empire began to decline in 2007, and the deterioration has been exacerbated in the last five years. This election only hastens that decline. Society is permeated with sloth, greed, envy and materialistic excess. It has lost its moorings and its moral foundations. The takers outnumber the givers, and that will only increase in years to come. The “Occupy” riots across this country in the last two years were mere dress rehearsals for what lies ahead, years of unrest sparked by the increasing discontent of the unsuccessful who want to seize the fruits and the bounty of the successful, and do not appreciate the slow pace of redistribution. If this election proves one thing, it is that the Old America is gone. And, sad for the world, it is not coming back.

Mr. Fidanian may be contacted at fidan1@charter.net