Obama does the right thing in Kenya.
As I’ve said previously, I believe advances in gay legal equality and social inclusion will be the great legacy of the Obama administration, and I suspect Obama may realize this.
Perhaps health care exchanges will last, although the labyrinth of business mandates under Obamacare are likely to be scaled back by a future administration and Congress. Otherwise, the debt-spiraling misspent trillions in the great redistributive give-away that Democrats called “stimulus,” the ever-expanding growth-deterring over-regulation of businesses, and the hapless foreign policy will be seen for what they are.
Even so, beginning at the very end of his first term with repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell (which heretofore he seemed willing to let Harry Reid block along with the Employee Non-Discrimination Act), followed by the administration’s opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act and support, eventually, for marriage equality, up through making an issue of gay rights internationally, Obama got one big thing right.
More. Sadly, he’s gotten so much else wrong. Columnist Daniel Henninger writes in the Wall Street Journal (7/30/15):
The American anxieties Donald Trump has tapped into are real and rational. … It’s what everyone in politics, including Hillary Clinton, knows has been the No. 1 concern of the American people for years: the U.S.’s underachieving economy. …
The U.S.’s average postwar growth rate is 3.3%, and has often been higher. Across the entire 6½ years of the Obama presidency it has been about 2%, and often lower. … The labor-force participation rate, 62.6% last month, is at its lowest level in 38 years. In human terms, 432,000 people dropped out of the workforce in June, and nearly two million are called “marginally attached to the labor force” by the government. … For much of the private economy, the Obama presidency has been almost seven years of “Survivor.” …
Here is what Reagan’s tax and regulatory policies produced from 1982-89: an economy that grew by a third and a standard of living, as measured by real disposable income, that grew by 20%.
Henninger concludes, “The result [of Obama’s economic policies] is a populace that is becoming resentful, surly and anxious for a way out,” and increasingly receptive to populist demagoguery.
Also from the WSJ, The Six-Year Slough: New GDP revisions show the worst recovery in 70 years was even weaker.
And yes, Reagan on gay legal equality/social inclusion, not so good. No party has a monopoly on the truth.
10 Comments for “The Legacy”
posted by Doug on
The so called misspent trillions you reference was necessary to pull this country out of the worst recession in 70 years brought to us courtesy of George W. Bush. How much debt did George W. Bush run up? How many jobs did he create? How many deaths is he responsive for in Iraq, where all those WMD were found. Snark.
posted by tom Jefferson 3rd on
The Obama administration has often made human rights concerns a key component of its foreign policy, which includes LGBT rights.
The challenge has been that Republicans in Congress tend to oppose LGBT rights domestically, let alone as a human rights issue.
Also, certain legal, political, social and economic conditions generally need to be met, before LGBT rights actually improve in a nation.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
We’ve had to keep on him, and kick him in the ass a few times, but he’s done a great deal to move this country toward “equal means equal”.
We can’t take the progress we’ve made during the Obama years for granted, though, because (1) the Obama administration accomplished what it did largely through executive orders, and executive orders can be modified or reversed by the next administration, and (2) the 5-4 majority on the Court we’ve enjoyed is very, very fragile, with three of the five likely to be replaced by Justices nominated by the next administration.
We could be in for rough waters ahead.
posted by Tom Scharbach on
In our area of rural Wisconsin (and similar areas throughout South Central Wisconsin, “…the great redistributive give-away that Democrats called “stimulus” …” was used to install FIOS outside the cities, villages and towns, similar to the Rural Electrification program of the 1930’s, another stimulus package. Without the stimulus grants, it is unlikely that FIOS installation would have been economically viable in rural areas at any time within the next several decades.
The project employed and trained quite a number of young workers, who otherwise would have been without jobs, and with FIOS, rural areas of an important component of infrastructure necessary for economic development in place.
I recognize that providing high-speed, reliable internet infrastructure to rural areas is classified as a “giveaway” by Republican-aligned conservatives because it did not (a) directly enrich the already wealthy through tax-driven upward distribution of wealth, or (b) could not be tied directly to wealth distribution from blue states to red states through military spending. But the project met the “stimulus package” goal of helping to stimulate the private jobs market in the area and employ and train younger workers, and will, in the long run, help the economy grow.
posted by Mike in Houston on
I guess it would be pointless to point out that the actual stimulus bill was scored @ $830 billion — not trillions — and that at least half were in actuality GOP required tax cuts that they eventually didn’t even vote for?
Or are we once again conflating the stimulus package with the financial bailouts under GW Bush that were largely paid back?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009
posted by Josh on
Per CNN: Stimulus price tag: $2.8 trillion
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/20/news/economy/total_stimulus_cost/
posted by Jorge on
Channeling Wanda Sykes, are you?
Otherwise, the debt-spiraling misspent trillions in the great redistributive give-away that Democrats called “stimulus,” the ever-expanding growth-deterring over-regulation of businesses, and the hapless foreign policy will be seen for what they are.
No they won’t.
which heretofore
…
eventually
That is what I think his legacy will be. And it will not be his alone. I shall pat myself on the back for being an exceptional citizen. I deserve it more than he does.
The Obama administration has often made human rights concerns a key component of its foreign policy, which includes LGBT rights.
Fine, fine.
Well, human rights was important to President Bush, too. As were good relations with Russia and holding rogue states to clear standards. News flash: they’re important to every president. It’s just that each puts their own slant on it. Taking a couple of years to put LGBT rights are ahead of national security concerns is dangerous, but it has to be done.
Also, certain legal, political, social and economic conditions generally need to be met, before LGBT rights actually improve in a nation.
Yes, much like giving women the right to vote.
Sorry, I don’t agree. We don’t need every country in the world to adopt Western values. We do need every country in the world to stop making war against their own people, give each person the same chance to get a job, answer to the community or family, engage in public service. These homophobic cleansings going on in Africa and the Middle East serve the same purpose as ethnic cleansings, and they need to end.
posted by Tom Jefferson III on
—Well, human rights was important to President Bush, too.
Um, No. Human rights within the context of LGBT rights were not important to President Bush.
–As were good relations with Russia and holding rogue states to clear standards.
Yeah, he looked into the soul of Putin and found it to be good….
–Sorry, I don’t agree. We don’t need every country in the world to adopt Western values.
So, LGBT people in certain nations are “S.O.L.” Wow, you managed to abandon you interest in human rights within a few paragraphs.
–These homophobic cleansings going on in Africa and the Middle East serve the same purpose as ethnic cleansings, and they need to end.
Yes, and you just gave the standard response from the government that engages in such brutality (or tolerates it), don’t impose your “western values” on us.
posted by tom Jefferson 3rd on
In Kenya, the government has allowed some NGO to do some work on behalf of the LGBT community – mostly public health and some educational projects. That may not seem like much, but in terms of foreign/international LGBT rights, it is something tangible.
Public opinion in Kenya is still very hostile to LGBT rights, and the nation needs to deal (in general) with some pretty substantial economic, development and anti-corruption problems.
Which means that important public policy in terms of equal rights under the law or equal opportunity protections are probably off the proverbial political table, for now.
posted by Jorge on
That was pretty much my point.