Personally, I don’t think any of the topics is suitable for a college commencement address, but then I’m not President of the United States of America:
The country’s founders, [Obama] claimed, “left us the keys to a system of self-government, the tools to do big things and important things together that we could not possibly do alone — to stretch railroads and electricity and a highway system across a sprawling continent … to gradually secure our God-given rights for all of our citizens, regardless of who they are, or what they look like, or who they love.”
“Whom they love”, not “who”, Mr. President. I think college graduates can handle proper grammar.
But what’s his point? Why is he stringing seemingly unrelated things together (Eisenhower’s highways and ugly people)?
He called on the graduates to help government revamp education programs, to “build better roads and airports and faster Internet, and to advance the kinds of basic research and technology … to confront the threat of climate change before it’s too late … [and] to protect more of our kids from the horrors of gun violence.”
Even while urging greater political activism, Obama seemed to dismiss the political activism of people who disagree with him, including the senators who delivered a critical political defeat April 17 by voting down a bill restricting gun rights.
Some “voices [are] doing their best to gum up the works … [they] warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner,” he said.
I thought dissent was the highest form of patriotism. Now it just “gums up the works”? And when he says we must “confront the threat of climate change before it’s too late”, does he mean before the rest of the people figure out it’s a hoax?
“I think it’s fair to say our democracy isn’t working as well as we know it can [in Washington]. … I’m obsessed with this issue because that sense of citizenship is so sorely needed there,” he claimed.
Oh, now I get it: the permanent campaign! Gay marriage, climate change, gun control… high speed internet… they’re all the same thing. Clinging (bitterly) to the 2nd Amendment is as backward and irrational as clinging to dial-up internet.
But why is he so down on a Washington culture he has lead for four and a half years? He’s won two elections, mostly fair and square, so isn’t our malfunctioning democracy at least partly his fault?
Or, as Rush noted in his coining of his “Limbaugh Theorem”:
No matter what is said, no matter what evidence happens, no matter what’s reported, it will not be possible to connect Obama to the negativity that’s happening in the country today because he’s campaigning against it himself. That’s the reason for the perpetual, never-ending campaign. It is why, in eight years, he will never allow himself for even one day to be seen as actually governing or presiding over any of this.
Of course, Rush saw this coming three months ago. The rest of us are just figuring this out.