The Obama World versus the Cheney World Defined

[slingshot]

Washinton Post article.  It just about makes me puke. I love the press!  :D  I thought the Obama Forum closed.  Some might find this interesting.  It makes me feel so-o-o-oo good that we have such as optimistic president.
 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/25/AR2009052502112.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Worldviews Collide Obama or Cheney? It's Your Choice.

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, May 26, 2009



Which reality do you inhabit, Obama World or Cheney World? If it's the latter, remember that storm clouds are always gathering. Don't forget your umbrella.

In Obama World, it's always morning. The sun is shining, the birds are chirping and the pollen count is low. In Cheney World, it's perpetual twilight. Somewhere in the distance, a lone wolf howls at the rising moon.

In Obama World, human beings are flawed but essentially decent and rational. Most will behave in a way consistent with enlightened self-interest. In Cheney World, humanity's defects are indelible and irredeemable. Absent evidence to the contrary, evil should be assumed to lurk in every heart. Better to do unto others before they have a chance to do unto you.

In Obama World, choices are artifacts of reasoning and thus are only as valid as the logic underlying them. Security and freedom, for example, do not have to be seen as an either-or proposition. The nation never came to a fork in the road with one path labeled "torture" and the other labeled "disaster." In Cheney World, choices are binary and absolute. There's no wiggle room, no gray area, no time for second thoughts and no debate about how our options are framed. It's my way or the highway, citizen.

In Obama World, objective fact matters. The failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is significant. The absence of any link between Iraq and the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks is relevant. In Cheney World, facts are based more on conviction than evidence. If it's possible to imagine "nuclear-armed terrorists," as Cheney did in his speech the other day, then they "exist" at least as a concept -- and this conceptual existence justifies torture, among other abuses.

In Obama World, some "threats" can be recognized as no threat at all. Since there has never been an escape from the federal "supermax" prison in Colorado, and since it already houses plenty of terrorists, spies and other miscreants, there's no real reason to be concerned about transferring any of the Guantanamo inmates, even the worst of the lot, there.

But in Cheney World, no threat, however remote, can be definitively ruled out -- especially if there's political hay to be made. And anyway, it's fun to scare people.

Obama World buzzes with information overload: hundreds of cable channels, zillions of Web sites, constant "tweets" from Twitter. In Cheney World, it's pretty much Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, all day, every day. It's like the saying, "I like both kinds of music -- country and western."

In Obama World, Americans have a sense of community and shared purpose. Those upon whom fortune has smiled -- through accident of birth, educational opportunity, career-

enhancing connections or any other kind of "right place, right time" serendipity -- recognize that extending a hand to those who do not enjoy such advantages is not just morally right, but ultimately beneficial to all. They believe that Henry Ford was right to pay his workers the shockingly high sum of $5 a day -- so they could afford to buy the cars they were making.

In Cheney World, sharing is

for saps. Obtaining great wealth and power has nothing to do

with being "fortunate," whatever that means. It's all about preparation, focus and hard work. The idea that luck or connections could possibly have anything to do with, say, becoming the lavishly compensated chairman and chief executive of a mega-corporation such as Halliburton? Preposterous and un-American.

In Obama World, America exerts its leadership not just through force but through example. Our nation's exceptionalism lies in its ideals of freedom, justice and opportunity for all, in its decency and generosity, in its commitment to the rule of law and its zeal for self-improvement, in its willingness to examine its own flaws and work to correct them. These intangibles are backed up by the world's most powerful military, but it's the ideals that matter most. When we lose sight of them, we head down the path of inevitable decline.

In Cheney World, ideals are nice and all that, but might makes right. We do what we want. Because we can. You got a problem with that?

Obama World is an exciting place to live right now -- not perfect, to be sure, but full of energy and hope. If Dick Cheney wants to stay in his bunker, that's his business. Others might want to come up for some fresh air.

eugenerobinson@washpost.com

Eugene Robinson will be online to chat with readers at 1 p.m. Submit your questions and comments before or during the discussion.

[makattak]

I'm not surprised to find the left think they are enlightened and people are basically good.

I'm not surprised to find they think we are frightened, seeing (imagined) dangers in every corner, and depressed and gloomy.

I wonder how his "enlightened" view of the world and the left vs. the right deals with the fact that studies have found that conservative people are more likely to be happy and generous?

Oh right, a part of the left he neglected: they rarely allow reality (statistics, logic, studies) to intrude on their worldview.

[makattak]

I also like how:

They believe that Henry Ford was right to pay his workers the shockingly high sum of $5 a day -- so they could afford to buy the cars they were making.

and

Those upon whom fortune has smiled -- through accident of birth, educational opportunity, career-enhancing connections or any other kind of "right place, right time" serendipity -- recognize that extending a hand to those who do not enjoy such advantages is not just morally right, but ultimately beneficial to all.

mean: We will FORCE you to share the product of your labor and pay people higher wages because we think it's right.

Now, we don't think it's morally right enough that we will actually give our own money to charity. But we're happy to take it from those that actually produce and call ourselves morally superior while doing it.

[slingshot]

Obama World buzzes with information overload: hundreds of cable channels, zillions of Web sites, constant "tweets" from Twitter. In Cheney World, it's pretty much Fox News and Rush Limbaugh, all day, every day. It's like the saying, "I like both kinds of music -- country and western."

In Obama World, Americans have a sense of community and shared purpose. Those upon whom fortune has smiled -- through accident of birth, educational opportunity, career-enhancing connections or any other kind of "right place, right time" serendipity -- recognize that extending a hand to those who do not enjoy such advantages is not just morally right, but ultimately beneficial to all. They believe that Henry Ford was right to pay his workers the shockingly high sum of $5 a day -- so they could afford to buy the cars they were making.

In Cheney World, sharing is for saps. Obtaining great wealth and power has nothing to do with being "fortunate," whatever that means. It's all about preparation, focus and hard work. The idea that luck or connections could possibly have anything to do with, say, becoming the lavishly compensated chairman and chief executive of a mega-corporation such as Halliburton? Preposterous and un-American.

Conservatives are some of the most generous people in the US.  Liberals are some of the most selfish.  The difference is that Conservatives see the world as a place where you create your own circumstances through hard work and liberals look to someone else for handouts and leave the heavy lifting for others.

[Monkeyleg]

In Obama World, one wanders through a beautiful forest, only to become lost and die of starvation.

In Cheney World, one wanders through a beautiful forest, gets hungry and so kills some game for food, then finds his way home because of the skills he learned in the right wing hate group, the Boy Scouts of America.

[longeyes]

Or maybe, just maybe, one is an adult...and one isn't.

[MicroBalrog]

I'm not surprised to find the left think they are enlightened and people are basically good.

So I'm a leftist now?

In my experience, Progressives usually think they are enlightened and mature, and other people are uneducated scum to be led and managed by them.

[makattak]

So I'm a leftist now?

In my experience, Progressives usually think they are enlightened and mature, and other people are uneducated scum to be led and managed by them.

leftist = thinks people are basically good

thinks people are basically good /= leftist

[MicroBalrog]

It's interesting to me that you say that. Plenty of leftist "research" and political science "thought" is actually focused on the need to prove people are essentially "irrational" and need other people to decide for them.

That's why leftists invented the term "wedge issue".

According to them, people vote for Republicans because Republicans distract them from their own "best economic interests" by "side-issues" like their rights.

[Scout26]

A conservative believes that humans, for most part, are decent and just wants to work/live in peace, but also recognizes that there are some evil SOB's out there and those evil SOB's must be confronted and destroyed otherwise they will brutalize/enslave/destroy humanity.

[makattak]

It's interesting to me that you say that. Plenty of leftist "research" and political science "thought" is actually focused on the need to prove people are essentially "irrational" and need other people to decide for them.

That's why leftists invented the term "wedge issue".

According to them, people vote for Republicans because Republicans distract them from their own "best economic interests" by "side-issues" like their rights.

Ahhh.... but that has nothing to do with whether people are basically good.

They think people are basically good, but stupid so they need to save them from their own stupidity. (They being the "enlightened ones")

[Nightfall]

So I'm a leftist now?

Don't you mean again? 

In Obama World, Americans have a sense of community and shared purpose. Those upon whom fortune has smiled -- through accident of birth, educational opportunity, career-enhancing connections or any other kind of "right place, right time" serendipity -- recognize that extending a hand to those who do not enjoy such advantages is not just morally right, but ultimately beneficial to all.

So, let's say I wind up making a decent living off of the degree I'm working on (BS in computer science, w/ a minor in math and another in physics). At what point will I have "lucked out," as they seem to say? :rolleyes:

My wife and I are paying for my education with money we earned and then, by living well within our means, saved up (and continue to do so). Perhaps my wife is my "career-enhancing connection," since I'm able to depend on the commitment we've built through the years for support.

No wait. It must be the "educational opportunity" I was blessed with. I mean, it's not like just anybody can get their GED like I did, after not completing a single year of high school. Only the blessed can then work hard in community college (and before that on their own) to make up for their missed high school classes. That must be why I'm not looking at the prospect of flipping hamburgers for the rest of my life. These 4.0 GPAs are falling into my lap because of fortune, not lots of %#$@ing work.

Ah ha! I've got it! It's "accident of birth." All the money I was born into. It's not like my father worked his ass off, starting as a house painter making minimum wage, working multiple jobs and long hours to get his family a better life. It's not like, after years of effort and long grueling hours in his subsequent career, he slowly but surely took himself from the bottom to $100k a year. It's not like he did all that with a GED, a broken home, and an alcoholic father.

I'm so racked with guilt over all my gobs of “connections” and how I'm just always in “the right place at the right time.” 

[Werewolf]

ObamaWorld = Fantasy
ChenyWorld = Reality

Those who live in the fantasy world outnumber those who live in the real world.

Politicians know this.

In the short run those who live in the real world will take it in the shorts.

In the long run those who live in the fantasy world will not survive without the cooperation of those who live in the real world.

In the long run those who live in the real world will get fed up with cooperating.

Rinse and repeat as necessary...

[Standing Wolf]

Too much whisky on the Wheaties again.

[taurusowner]

We can laugh it up all we want now.  But this is the mindset that will be dictating how we all live our lives for at least 4 years, with implications stretching indefinitely beyond that. 

[MicroBalrog]

We can laugh it up all we want now.  But this is the mindset that will be dictating how we all live our lives for at least 4 years, with implications stretching indefinitely beyond that. 

Actually, it's about 1300 days. And the implications will last as long as we want them to.

[jackdanson]

recognize that extending a hand to those who do not enjoy such advantages is not just morally right, but ultimately beneficial to all. They believe that Henry Ford was right to pay his workers the shockingly high sum of $5 a day -- so they could afford to buy the cars they were making.

Extending a hand is acceptable, the government threatening to imprison you if you don't give 50% of your income to the greater good, is not acceptable.

I'd like to see how much the writer of this article gives away every year.

[MechAg94]

One group believes in being generous with their own money.  The other group believes in being generous with someone else's money.

I like charity, but I don't like govt mandated charity.  There is a big difference between the two, yet many leftists you hear talk about such things always confuse the two.

[BReilley]

We can laugh it up all we want now.

So who's laughing?  Sure, we may be joking, but it's sarcasm borne of disgust(see below), not levity.  I don't think anyone here fails to take the situation seriously.

I'd like to see how much the writer of this article gives away every year.

Silly.  Charity is for the rich.  The author is but a humble journalist, a simple servant of the State.  Leave charity to the capitalists, those selfish speculators.