Obama is No King

President Obama's approval rating according to the Gallup poll this week was 46% overall, with support from liberals dropping to an all-time low of 70%. These figures contrast significantly with April 2009, when his approval rating soared among Democrats to an unprecedented 92%, with an overall rating of 69%. Historically, the news media has attributed much of the source of his disapproval to, among other things, racism. One might be surprised at this, considering all of the advances of the late 20th and now the 21st century. But what they don't realize, is that not much has really changed since the 60's.

Most people my age don't know much about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, aside from his name, and perhaps that he was assassinated. Once in a while I will come across a person who has heard of, and might even be able to rehearse a line or two from one of his many public speeches. Two years ago, one could hardly watch the news without hearing something about Dr. King and how his vision had been realized, as evidenced by the historical election of President Barack Obama, the first African-American president in the history of the United States. Amid all the buzz over the event, a hype which was unprecedented in the history of elections in the country, I couldn't help thinking that had Dr. King been alive for the 2008 election, there is a good chance he would have voted for McCain. But Dr. King fought for civil rights, specifically on the part of African-Americans. Why on earth wouldn't he vote for Obama? Why wouldn't he want to contribute to a landmark advance (or some might claim, a victory) in civil rights?

Dr. King dreamed that his children would "...one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character." This statement has been replayed and quoted more times than one would sufficiently be capable of enumerating, and the spirit of it's message has permeated social movements against racism for the past forty years. When I witnessed the fervor around Obama's election, and furthermore when I examined the administration since his inauguration, I clearly understood that just the opposite of what Dr. King envisioned had taken place. Barack Obama was judged (and elected) not by the content of his character, but by the color of his skin. When I came to this realization, I knew two things: 1. Dr. King, if he was as principled as he is believed to have been, would have turned in his grave, and 2. No one who voted for Obama would readily be conscious of, or acknowledge that they had let Dr. King down.

The harsh reality is that most of the high-profile voters who supported Obama made it publicly known that their support was motivated by the desire to see a black president. This is not surprising, given the nation's history regarding African-Americans. What was disturbing to me, was that President Bush, commenting just after the election results were in, made no mention of Obama's character, or what good things he would do for the country, or even any prior achievements he had made, but rather focused on the aspect of race, and what he called, "...the American story." He said it was an "....inspiring moment that so many have waited for for so long." When the hype faded however, and it was back to business, Bush was reported in September of 2009 to have said of Obama, "This is a dangerous world, and this cat [Obama] isn't remotely qualified to handle it. This guy has no clue, I promise you." Comical to us as his choice of words are, they carry significance. Whatever one might think of George W. Bush, and his administration, and furthermore whatever his views were of the new administration's policies and values, he certainly was in a position to know whether or not President-elect Obama was qualified to sit in the oval office.

Barack Obama was Illinois senator from 1997 to 2004, when he was elected to the U.S. Senate. In Illinois, no legislative accomplishments can be attributed to him, and nothing remarkable was achieved during his short four years as a U.S. Senator. Nothing with which to make a name for himself. Then suddenly, he was projected to win the Democratic Primary. That being said, I had to consider that perhaps he was elected based on the promises he made on the campaign trail, which seemed appealing. Looking into the facts however, the dissonance continued. I began with the practice of signing statements, a presidential act which essentially allows the commander-in-chief to choose which parts of Congress legislation to follow and abide by. Obama promised to abolish this practice. He said it was unconstitutional, and affirmed that he was in a position to know. Speaking in Montana in May 2008, he said, "I taught the Constitution for ten years. I believe in the Constitution, and I will obey the Constitution of the United States. We're not going to use signing statements as a way of doing an end-run around Congress, all right?" Since his inauguration, Obama has issued twelve signing statements, with no explanation as to why he acted contrary to his campaign commitment. Another promise broken was concerning the time given to the public to read bills before they were to be voted on by Congress. Candidate Obama promised to give a full five days to review non-emergency bills before signing. To date, he has made public six out of eleven bills, and only one of those six remained available for the full five days. Unless all eleven bills were "emergency bills", this constitutes another unfulfilled commitment, a major commitment which, when made, helped him gain support. The most famous incident of this was the $787 Billion economic stimulus bill. This 1071 page document (eight inches thick) was given to representatives in the middle of the night to read for a few hours before debate resumed on it in Congress and the voting started.

I mention these specific points not to highlight the individual issues in and of themselves, but because they demonstrate an overarching theme which is dangerously present in the Obama administration. President Bush was right; President-elect Obama wasn't qualified to be President of the United States. Perhaps he was elected because the voters saw a chance to validate their own triumph over the issue of civil rights and equality, or maybe they figured that if they didn't vote for him, they would feel as if they were perpetuating racism. The fact is the people of the United States betrayed the very cause they thought they were championing by electing Barack Obama, and the scary part is that they don't even realize that they did it.

Politicians are elected by the people, and we call them public servants. When they no longer serve the public, they are unqualified to hold the position entrusted to them. In 2012, Americans will have another chance to appoint someone to the office of President. I can only hope for a fundamental shift in the public's criteria regarding their commander-in-chief. I'm a historian, and if I've learned nothing else from history, it's that if we don't learn about it, we are bound to repeat it. The citizens of the United States of America have such potential, but I agree with what Dr. King said in Memphis, during his final speech in 1968, "We've got some difficult days ahead."