Roots of Obama

We hear much rhetoric in the conservative right about President Obama's political ideology.  Marxist. Socialist.  Communist.  I read a book that I only wish I could change the title.  I'd call it "The Roots of Obama's Policy".  Of course that sounds pretty boring and probably wouldn't sell as well, but it is was a fascinating read.  This book may present a more accurate picture of who and why the President acts in the way that he does.  The premise of the book is that we are not living out the ideology of Barack Obama so much as we are living out the legacy of a failed Kenyan civil servant that Barack Obama has been trying to live up to his entire life: Barack Obama, Sr. 

The author, Dinesh D'sousa's first and most basic clue to this possibility is to look at the title of President Obama's first book, "Dreams from my Father".  The very title itself implies that he has received his dreams from his father.  D'sousa's book suggests an Obama I and Obama II.  Obama I is the inspirational Obama that was so praised and lifted up in adulation during the 2008 campaign.  The Obama that - putting it in the words of the man himself -was "...a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views..." .   I think the premise of the book is that President Obama is not a communist or a socialist or a marxist.  He is anti-colonialist and anti-Imperialist.  D'Sousa suggests that President Obama believes the US, in the 20th and 21st century, is colonial in it's foreign policy.  It suggests Mr. Obama's hope is that he can help make the US the last of the colonialist powers. 

The consequence of this is that his policies are designed for one purpose: to weaken our standing abroad, and strengthen the role, power and impact of the federal government domestically.  The book suggests that - when given the choice of policy - his choice will always further this objective.  The book offers a tremendous amount of evidence to make this case.  I won't present all of the evidence here, but agree that it does seem to serve as a predictive measure of how Obama has acted.  Think about it.  Health Care (domestic)- increases government control.  Finance Reform(domestic)- increases government control.  Buying GM(domestic) - increases government control. Poland Missile Shield Abandoned (foreign)- weakens foreign influence.  Leading from behind in Libya (foreign)- weakens foreign influence.  Flooding economy with (borrowed) printed dollars(QE I, II, III?) - increases government control and weakens foreign influence.

Perhaps the most interesting things that it explains, in my mind, is why the President finds himself with eroding support in both conservative and progressive political camps.  We have the right clamoring for his ouster, we have the left clamoring for his ouster and we have independents exceedingly dissatisfied.  His policies have seemingly pleased no one and the reason, this book would argue, is because he isn't playing to any of us.  He is acting to more fully realize the dreams of his Father.  Could this explain why a "really good one-term Presidency" would be OK with him?  If "really" good is defined by him, and not by the rest of us, then he can - in principal - be "really good" even if no one (but him) is satisfied with his results.     

I will say there were occasions in this book for what I perceived to be hyperbole.  Unfortunately, as I mentioned above, even the title of the book plays to the hard core Obama malcontent.  While hyperbole may increase sales, it likely prevents a more wide range of political ideaology in it's readership.  I think that's unfortunate.  Were it not for the title of the book I think it offers a reasonable (even one for which we might objectively empathize) explanation for how and why the President takes action. I wonder though, what an honest to goodness, clear thinking, progressive might think?