To a man with a hammer…
…everything looks like a nail.
To the race-obsessed, everything looks like racism.
Or, even if it doesn’t, they’ll pretend it does. But that’s gotten very, very old.
I got curious about the origins of the hammer/nail phrase, and I discovered it’s attributed to psychologist (and liberal) Abraham Maslow (among others). Interesting. Even more interesting is the phrase in its original form, which goes like this:
I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail.
Although cries of “racism” are not the only tools the Obama forces have at this point, they do have a rather small remaining kit. It seems to consist of racism (a tool that’s getting worn and rusty), class warfare (still fairly sharp), and ad hominem attacks on Romney’s “weird” and “retro” personality (a sort of boomerang could come back to haunt Obama, as I pointed out in this essay).
Perhaps I’m not being fair to Obama, though. There are a few things in his record that he could brag about. One, of course, is Bin Laden. Another is that some economic indicators have certainly improved over the years, albeit slowly. And I have no doubt that some people consider Obamacare to be a good thing.
The problem with this is that not only have we heard it all so very many times before, but a lot (perhaps the majority?) of voters believe that (a) the economy would have recovered faster without Obama; and (b) Obamacare is bad for the country as a whole. So, with the single exception of killing Bin Laden, they don’t think his “accomplishments” are really all that accomplished.
Obama didn’t run on the idea that he’d do certain specific things, anyway. He ran on his personality, which was supposed to be optimistic, mature, and inclusive. That notion is now thoroughly trashed among the general public, although there is still a substantial subset of loyal supporters who believe that he is exactly those things and has been thwarted every step of the way by the evil Republicans.
At least it’s a little encouraging to see how many commentators on the linked site “hammered” Christopher for his nonsense.
What I wish more people would realize is how much this administration has impeded the recovery from a recession that ended in June, 2009. How its insistence on not letting a crisis go to waste has cost Americans untold thousands of jobs, and how the relentless class warfare rhetoric and anti-business atmosphere created by Obama and his minions has stunted what should have been, and under different leadership would almost certainly have been, a more robust recovery.
As you and others have already said so well, this administration can’t run a campaign based on its track record. Relentless use of half-truths, personal attacks, stoking of envy and the good old racist card is the only ammunition they have.
I think the Obama Campaign has another tool. Obama is not campaigning as if the campaign is about what is best for the nation. Rather, he is campaigning as if the campaign is about self validation or self invalidation of each progressive voter.
Two examples:
1. Does a voter feel proud to have Obama as POTUS?
Proud to have a black man?
Proud to have a handsome and articulate representative of center left political philosophy?
2. Is a voters, via the acts of persuading others, and of voting, going to be a special and virtuous person who promotes progress?
Or, rather, is a voter going to be a typical mindless regressive troglodyte who promotes traditional American oppression and hatred? Mitt Romney wants to return to those days of oppression and hatred. Is a voter going to be a virtuous person who helps to stop Mitt Romney and all the other haters?
So, I think the Obama Campaign is appealing to progressive pride, and is appealing to the vanity of believing that being progressive equates to being virtuous and superior.*
*”being”, as opposed to tangible acts and results. i.e as opposed to taking actions, and living a life, which equates to a virtuous and superior life. Instead, under the left side meme, merely believing in progressive philosophy (and persuading and voting) automatically justifies one as virtuous and superior, regardless of one’s actual life and actions. I am suggesting that the Obama Campaign has this going for it: either vote for Obama, or be invalidated as a virtuous and superior person.
gcotharn: agreed. But Obama was always going to win the votes of people to whom their own virtue in that respect is most important. He needs to win over a lot of other people to actually win.
There’s no accounting for possible GOP bungling but absent such, a double digit Romney win is not fantasy.
Leave it to the PACs to make the case:
Specifically,
Solyndra and the other green energy failures are the very definition of scandal, crony capitalism, corruption.
The Justice Dept is more lethally a criminal enterprise than the Hutarees they prosecuted.
The Justice Dept has ceased to operate nomothetically (based on law) and now operates chromothetically (based on color).
Obama promises Russian president Dmitri Medvedev post election concessions; concessions obviously unpalatable to the general electorate, otherwise why the téªte-é -téªte sotta voce.
Generally,
Opposition to the use of our natural resources (oil) is a sign of national decline.
Opposition to use of our own human resources (Americans vis-é -vis illegals and imported workers) is a sign of national decline.
It has been made painfully obvious the world stage is outside the competence of community organizers.
—-
Leave it to Romney to make the case:
He’s competent, successful, knowledgeable.
His experience includes private and public executive administration.
The Republican Party has been lax in the fundamental matter of deficit spending and he aims to return the Party to strict adherence of fiscal responsibility.
All of which should make the coming election the next best thing to a walkover.
I understand your point, yet I think the Obama Campaign is trying to use the vanity premise in order to win the middle, i.e. either vote for Obama, or be invalidated as a virtuous and superior person.
They have nothing else. I do not judge that either Bin Laden, or a recovering economy, will work. Therefore, the Obama Campaign has to appeal to voters in the middle with
1. race
2. class warfare
3. ad hominem re Romney, and
4. the vanity premise.
It is all they’ve got.
Actually, I probably ought categorize race, class warfare, and ad hominem as component parts of an all encompassing vanity premise about being virtuous and superior. The vanity premise being the larger strategy, and race, class warfare, and ad hominem being tactics which serve the larger strategy.
My point being, the Obama Campaign strategy is not:
appeal to voters re what is best for the nation,
but, rather, is: appeal to the vanity of voters (including voters in the middle).
gcotharn: agreed, but I still think those appeals are most likely to only appeal to those already on board—i.e. liberals. I could be wrong.
Well, we are kind of on the same page, b/c I do not think the Obama Campaign strategy will work. I am saying: it is the best they’ve got, and it is their chosen strategy.
“The Justice Dept has ceased to operate nomothetically (based on law)”
That, and the complete phrase, are SO stolen. And on point. We have plenty of evidence of non-nomothetic behavior throughout this regime. What basis is there to assume that in the event that Obama’s electoral strategy [vanity-based or otherwise] is failing, that the conduct of the election will be nomothetic??
Subotai Bahadur
SubotaiB,
There is evidence that the conduct of the election will not be based upon law, but rather will be based upon whatever will work.
Evidence in Obama’s history:
— release of sealed divorce records of Obama’s opponents: not once, but twice
— flooding of Illinois residents into the 2008 Iowa Democratic Caucus
— rumored Obama shenanigans in other 2008 state caucues
— support for ACORN
— Obama DOJ’s war against voter ID
— Obama Admin consistent stonewalling constitutionally mandated Congressional oversight and investigation
— Obama’s consistent, pervasive history of lying about particulars of political and governmental issues.
There is also historic evidence, up to and including the present moment, of Democratic Party’s breaking of election law. See “True the Vote”‘s citizen investigations of Dem Party shenanigan’s in Texas, in in the recall petition for Gov. Walker of Wisconsin.
Saul Alinsky: “The means almost always justify the ends.”
My point exactly. What is the constitutional legitimacy of a regime installed by nomothetical means? Does the existence of such a regime require action by those who have sworn Oaths to the Constitution? And what, are the bounds placed on such action?
This exercise is left for discussion.
Subotai Bahadur
Re Obama Campaign’s focus, not on policies which are best for the nation, but rather on appealing to the vanity of voters:
Barbara Boxer, today:
Also, re Obama Campaign’s appeal to voter vanity, consider the implications of this free bumper sticker from Democrats.org: “Not a Republican”.
Here’s the offer, if you are interested in a bumper sticker: http://my.democrats.org/page/s/get-your-free-bumper-sticker-r
There are other appeals to vanity as well. As my brother-in-law likes to say, last time you voted for Obama to show you’re not a racist. This time vote for Romney to show you’re not an idiot.
Subotai Bahadur,
“That, and the complete phrase, are SO stolen. And on point.”
What is it you’re getting at?
“What basis is there to assume that in the event that Obama’s electoral strategy [vanity-based or otherwise] is failing, that the conduct of the election will be nomothetic??”
There is no basis to assume any such thing and for the very reasons listed by gcotharn; which is why it should be made an issue in the campaign and repeatedly hammered home.
“Does the existence of such a regime require action by those who have sworn Oaths to the Constitution? And what, are the bounds placed on such action?”
Yes. And Congressional investigations along with State and Federal Courts.
At least it’s a little encouraging to see how many commentators on the linked site “hammered” Christopher for his nonsense.
As his bosses congratulate him on driving a sh!t-tonne of traffic to their web site??? yeah, he’s crying. All the way to the bank.
“I got to say to the women out there, whether you’re a Republican, a Democrat or Independent, if you’re a self-respecting human being, please vote for President Obama. And for the men who care about women, do the same thing.”
I won’t reiterate my misgivings about the 19th Amendment, which of course this quote pings, but what about self-respecting Americans, and men who care about America?
“There are a few things in his record that he could brag about. One, of course, is Bin Laden.”
Not sure I agree with this one.
It is sort of like giving Jimmy Carter credit for normalizing relations with Mainland China. Yes, it is true that the PRC and the USA set up official embassies under Carter; but, everyone knows and history shows that the real work was done by Nixon.
So, yea, Osama was taken out when Obama was in the white house; but, I believe everyone knows and history will show that the ground work (just like Nixon with China) was laid during Bush’s administration.
If Obama tries too hard to claim credit for getting Osama it could backfire on him.
gcotharn
Also, re Obama Campaign’s appeal to voter vanity, consider the implications of this free bumper sticker from Democrats.org: “Not a Republican”.
There is also the potential for the N.A.D.A. bumpersticker.
Not
A
Democrat
You fill in the word.
Next Romney campaign headline: “Obama Shuffles Cabinet.”
“I still think those appeals are most likely to only appeal to those already on board–i.e. liberals”
IMHO most of the recent kerfuffles have not been about “reaching out” to moderates but shoring up the base. Not that any in Obama’s base would vote for Romney but to keep turnout up, just as we worry about the right base being enthusiastic enough for Mitt. I think that comprises most of BO’s strategy this year – shore up the base and try to scare the middle away from Romney. Running on his record isn’t going to work.
George Pal:
I think SB meant that he’s stealing that phrase.
Subotai:
Great to see you here. I don’t remember seeing you comment here before. Don’t be a stranger.
I don’t buy that getting Osama bin Laden was an unqualified success. One thing that goes unmentioned but deserves a lot more scrutiny is that Obama went public almost immediately. I heard the SEALs grabbed Osama’s phones and computers. The US could have hunted down and eliminated most of the major players in Al Qaeda. The war could be over. But Obama did not wait. He wanted to take credit immediately.
if i had a hammer
i hammer in the morning
id hammer in the evening
all over this land
id hammer out danger
id hammer out a warning
cant tell whether that is a fabian anthem or the theme song of Maslow…