Obama: Make the World Safe for Hope

Abu Omar writes in the comments to point out a fascinating piece by Brendan O’Neill in the American Conservative on Obama and the euphoria that surrounds him in some quarters. He begins:

Obama-mania is getting out of hand. Full-grown and well-educated men—from swooning Andrew Sullivan to the entire staff of GQ magazine—are developing “man crushes” on Barack Obama, going weak in the knees for his immaculately pressed suits, oratorical skills, and shameless hope-mongering.

“I’ve never wanted anyone more than I want you,” warbles Obama Girl in a song called “I Got a Crush on Obama,” which has been viewed over 6 million times on YouTube. Celebs are queuing up to fall at his feet. “My heart belongs to Barack,” says Scarlett Johansson. There’s a palpable whiff of semi-religious hysteria at Obama rallies. As Joel Stein wrote in the Los Angeles Times, “Obamaphilia has gotten creepy,” and its “fanatical” adherents are starting to embarrass themselves.

Actually, it’s worse than that: they are deluding themselves. Many Democrats have become so goggle-eyed, so insanely convinced that Obama is the savior of American politics (potentially rescuing both the Democratic Party from political ruin and America herself from the decadence and violence of the Bush era), that they are beginning to suffer political hallucinations. They fantasize that he is pure and righteous, a miracle-worker who, in a pique of rage, will overturn the conventions of neocon-ruled America.

Obama, according to O’Neill, is simply a “wide-eyed, zealous interventionist”.

17 comments ↓

#1 Abu Omar on 03.06.08 at 12:59 am

Another thing that I notice the liberal media has let Obama get away with is his association with a member of the leftist terrorist group Weather Underground:

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....5758/posts

Ron Paul was attacked relentless by the liberal New Republic and other pro-Democrat outlets because some some obscure white supremacist character donated $500 to his campaign, yet Obama gets a free pass for willingly associating with radical, and in some cases violent, leftist figures.

#2 Abu Omar on 03.06.08 at 9:35 am

The murderous Columbian Marxist terrorist group FARC is routing for Obama:

http://www.freerepublic.com/fo.....0316/posts

#3 KLM on 03.06.08 at 10:24 pm

Muslim Matters have naively endorsed Obama despite his murderous Police Teh World agenda.

#4 Abu Omar on 03.10.08 at 1:57 am

Well, though a strong critic of Obama, I am following antiwar conservatives Justin Raimondo, Jeffery Hart, and Dan McCarthy in supporting Barack for president. You can count me, albeit hesitantly, among the Obamacons.

#5 Amir on 03.10.08 at 2:03 pm

The best thing about Obama is that he’s not Hilary and he’s not McCain. There’s really no choice but to support him now that Ron Paul is out of the race.

#6 Baybers on 03.10.08 at 8:08 pm

Say it ain’t so Amir, you are supporting a socialist!

#7 Eudaemonion on 03.10.08 at 10:12 pm

The last American who tried to ‘Make the World Safe for [insert issue here]‘ was Monsieur Woodrow Wilson, and look at how splendidly that turned out.

#8 Abu Omar on 03.11.08 at 1:17 am

Here is some relevant biographical information form the political career of Murray Rothbard:

The election of 1956 pitted Dwight Eisenhower against Adlai Stevenson, both of whom offered statist domestic policies (sound familiar?). But Stevenson was against conscription and less pro-war, and thus garnered Rothbard’s support, the moral priority being the prevention of another massacre of young men. Rothbard even worked the phones from the Stevenson campaign headquarters in Manhattan. His turn against the Republicans got him tossed off the Faith and Freedom masthead, led him to appeal leftward for allies, and sparked a lifelong war with William Buckley and the mainstream of the conservative movement.

Very little changed throughout his life. He was radically in favor of free markets and radically opposed to war, a wholly consistent opponent of the welfare-warfare state. But in the intellectual-political history of 1952–1989, there was no place for such a person. Official opinion required philosophical inconsistency, and the segmentation of intellectual camps followed the same course.

So Rothbard often had to make political decisions by weighing the foreign-policy question against a candidate’s domestic program. Let’s fast-forward 40 years, for example, to the presidential elections of the 1990s. Pat Buchanan challenged George Bush for the Republican nomination, saying that Bush had made two unforgivable errors: he waged an unjust war against Iraq and he raised taxes. Did Rothbard cheer Buchanan? You bet. And he worked overtime trying to get Buchanan up to speed on broader economic issues while defending him against the wrong-headed charges of the Left.

But Buchanan lost the nomination, and refused to pursue a third-party option. Rothbard then turned to Perot as the candidate worth rooting for, and on the same grounds: Perot blasted Bush’s war and his taxes. Then Perot suddenly pulled out. That left Bush and Clinton, whose foreign policy was no different from Bush’s but whose domestic policy was worse.

Rothbard then rooted for Bush against Clinton. His very controversial column appeared in the Los Angeles Times, and it garnered more hate mail than Rothbard had ever received in his life. Many libertarians (not famous for strategic acumen or catching the subtleties of such matters) were shocked by his non-interest in the Libertarian Party nominee. But by that time, Rothbard was convinced that the LP was running a presidential campaign in name only, that it was a clique devoted not to real political education but to organizational maintenance.

#9 James on 03.12.08 at 1:37 pm

Ugh!

Weather Underground? Please, pedal that rubbish somewhere else! It was a “contact” with one person, and by the way the Weather Underground died in the 1980’s. Many Black Panthers and other 60’s/70’s left radicals mellowed out and became useful community organizers and concerned citizens. Even in the hey-day of the organization most members where not in to physical violence of any sort.

Barack is just another Chicago Pol, part and parcel of the DLC (corporatist) wing of the Democratic party. In Australia he would be a part of the Conservative opposition.

#10 Abu Omar on 03.13.08 at 3:40 am

James, you misunderstood the point I was making. That Obama met with a former Weather Underground figure is of little concern to me and I’m sure the interaction was innocent. What I was trying to draw attention to was that Obama is given a free pass for this, while Ron Paul was trashed by the liberal media because of a photograph of him with white racist leader Don Black. I feel it important to note this double standard.

#11 Eudaemonion on 03.13.08 at 11:27 pm

‘Barack is just another Chicago Pol, part and parcel of the DLC (corporatist) wing of the Democratic party’. – James

Hmm, I seem to recall that a whole World War was fought over the issue of Corporatism, but was known by another, less loaded term.

What smear do we usually use when we are confronted with any White Racialist/Separatist/Supremacist? That’s right, Nazi! Now, what obscure, neutral word do we use to describe the marriage of State power and big business? Corporatism.

Interesting how this would just slide in relation to Obama, but Ron Paul would have a chorus of baying riffraff climbing over each in their eagerness to condemn.

Statists!

#12 Eudaemonion on 03.13.08 at 11:29 pm

Its also rather funny that there would be a corporatist wing of a leftist party, but then, its always been more government, by hook or by crook, eh?

#13 Suhaib Jobst on 03.16.08 at 3:40 pm

Obama is a Corporate Democrat like the rest of them, he panders to AIPAC and his policies are nothing but a “softer” version of Neoconservatism.

I am currently supporting Ralph Nader, who is the only candidate (since we know Ron Paul will not get the nomination) with anything worth listening to.

#14 Abu Omar on 03.21.08 at 4:46 am

Another of my favorite paleo-conservative historians and writers, Andrew J. Bacevich has come out in support of Barack Obama.

#15 Abu Omar on 03.21.08 at 4:49 am

Also, David Henderson has written a great article showing that the much villainized Rev. Jeremiah Wright (Obama’s pastor) was more or less right on the mark with his comments about American foreign policy.

#16 Jamal on 03.21.08 at 9:49 am

Barack Hussain Obama’s selling out of his white grandmother as a racist was a bit rough though.

#17 Abu Omar on 04.01.08 at 8:33 am

More on the rise of the Obamacons:

http://www.nysun.com/news/nati.....?page_no=1

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blo.....obama.aspx

Leave a Comment