Obamania comes to Britain

“Mania: noun: a mental illness that causes a person to be in a state of extreme physical and mental activity, often characterized by a loss of judgment”.  Cambridge Dictionary of American English.
When I was in business, we had a saying.  “You hire an articulate manager, and after six months you realise that all he can do is to articulate”.  Well Obama is top-notch at articulation.  He is a great orator.  He is perhaps even in the class of JFK or Martin Luther King.  His soaring cadences lift our spirits.  He promises hope and change, and heaven knows we could do with some of that.  But perhaps we should recall that “change”, like the left’s other favourite buzz-word “progress”, is a value-free zone until we start talking about just what change, progress to just which destination, we have in mind.  Remember that one of Tony Blair’s favourite words was “modernisation”, which someone rather cruelly  characterised as “alteration for the sake of novelty”.  Gordon Brown is just discovering what ten years of modernisation gets you — disastrous bye-election results.
Obama appears to be starting to talk about policy.  He wants to fight terrorism, and global warming.  He wants America to make friends and influence people.  He wants the troops home from Iraq.  He wants to sort out North Korea and Iran, and put a stop to nuclear proliferation.  Above all (it seems) he wants to solve the Israel/Palestine problem.  In fact he wants to do what just about every other politician wants to do.  Success depends not on having great objectives, but on having solid, realistic, credible plans and policies in place to achieve them.  And there, Obama is keeping us in the dark.  Maybe that’s because he expects to make great, detailed policy announcements in the coming months — but I suspect not.
We know what Democrats do in government.  They start from the assumption that governments, not people, solve problems.  They love big government and high taxes.  They believe that welfarism solves social problems.  Like New Labour, they are soft on crime, soft on the causes of crime.  OK, so Bush maybe has failed to do many of the things we think a Republican President ought to do, like reducing tax and spending.  But who thinks that Obama will be better?
I am frankly shocked that some Conservative politicians who should know better appear to be taken in the hype.  A significant number say they would like to see Obama in the White House.  I am afraid I can’t join them.  Conservatives for Obama?  It makes about as much sense as Conservatives for Gordon Brown.

This entry was posted in US Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Obamania comes to Britain

  1. Jim Carr says:

    Agreed Roger.
    Of course I’d not be surprised if the
    likes of Yeo, Gummer, and, yes, Cameron
    love Obama due to his knee-jerk and
    uninformed obeisance at the altar of
    man-made “climate change”.

  2. Ryan Lavelle says:

    Ok Roger so I take it your vote goes to John “WW4” McCain?

    I dont like Obama either, but McCain is a dangerous lunatic with a foul temper and a lust for war, just like the current incumbent moron.

  3. Malcolm Edward says:

    Yet again , Roger is telling things as they are.
    Obama is hype and Nu-Labour has tested hype to destruction.

  4. Roger Helmer says:

    Ryan — When will you learn that your intemperate language tells us you are mistaken, even before we engage with what you actually say?

  5. Chris Palmer says:

    Ryan, why should Roger (or anyone else for that matter) be for something or someone automatically because they are against something or someone else?

    Unlike Roger, however, I am not particularly shocked or indeed surprised that there are Conservative MPs willing to back the Democrat candidate. In my opinion, something that is shocking has to be unusual or particularly unpleasant in some way – but since many of these Democrat candidate supporting Conservative MPs have a record on not knowing better and not actually being conservatives either, then their reaction was entirely inevitable I’m afraid.

    I am glad that Roger and some other Conservative MPs still speak sense though.

  6. Ryan Lavelle says:


    I would rather have intemperate language than another world war.

    The current neoconservative policies of both US candidates are equally dangerous to world peace.

    For the most part, the tories will support anyone who sticks with their sinking ship of free trade madness that is destroying this nation and the world with greed and speculation on a scale never seen before in human history.

    Rather than admit fault with their fanatical religious beliefs in failed economic theories, they would rather sink civilization and take us all down to the pit of hell with them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s