No-Drama Obama

Although inauguration day was rather dramatic. Obama's mien during his speech was somber and serious, as it was during his victory speech in Chicago.

Regarding the economic crisis, he said: "Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age."

William Safire found this a tolerant note, while I suspect this is why those like John Judis didn't like the speech.

But Obama also said,

"Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched.

But this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control. The nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous."

And he notes that his election marks the coming of age of new generation that will not be hindered by false choices.

What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long, no longer apply.

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works, whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.

False choices are presented by those in power in order to limit options and it was good to see Obama note this. It is often a ploy by older, "serious" people to present false choices as the "hard reality." But Obama does recognize there are hard choices, they're just not always the ones presented.

He wisely states, "As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals," which ruffles Safire's feathers. However, Safire notes

"Obama followed that soon enough with a paragraph appealing to hardliners, promising to "responsibly leave Iraq to its people" - hawks can hope the operative word is "responsibly" - and "forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan," which is a dovish way of saying he may have to risk the doves' charge of "Obama’s war.""

Iraq and Afghanistan are the arenas for his hard choices. My favorite part of the speech was the multicultural bit:

"And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that, "Our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken. You cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you."

(APPLAUSE)

For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness.

We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.

And because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.

To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict or blame their society's ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

As the New York Times observed

"There was a lot to reflect on in President Obama’s inaugural speech today, but there were two small points that are worth noting, two things that Mr. Obama mentioned that American politicians, especially presidents, never mention: Vietnam and atheism."
...
"To hear most American leaders tell it, the Constitutional freedom of religion allows you to be a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Christian Scientist, a Sikh — well you get the idea. Basically, a member of any religion. But they never talk about people who do not participate in an organized religion, or are even — gasp! — atheists."
...
"At another point in his address, the new president was paying homage to our ancestors, “who carried us up the long rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.”

“For us,” he said, “they fought and died in places like Concord and Gettysburg, Normandy and Khe Sanh.”

Khe Sanh? The 1968 battle in Vietnam that was one of the many times the military leadership badly underestimated the power and intentions of the North Vietnamese Army, at great cost in the lives of American Marines?

Military historians still argue about what happened at Khe Sanh, which has become an iconic symbol of the tragic failures of Vietnam. (Go back and listen to Bruce Springsteen’s “Born in the USA” for an example of what we mean.)

So why did Mr. Obama mention the battle? Perhaps because it also is a symbol of the courage and self-sacrifice of the Marines, and he wanted to include their service to America in his speech? We’re not certain. But it was interesting to note that he stopped there and did not go on to mention, say, Fallujah.

As for his reference to atheists, the answer could be simple: Mr. Obama actually meant it when he said, "On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recrminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics."

Like Obama's election, the mention of the two topics symbolize a change in the zeitgeist and a new generation. The only old grumpies during the inauguration drama were the non-heteros - and they have their reasons - but they should recognize that religion is their main adversary.