Our Views: Game on, for future

It’s as if, in his second inaugural speech, President Barack Obama understood deep down that he has won — not only elected in 2008 but re-elected in 2012 under the worst political circumstances facing an incumbent in decades.

He won, and as if he felt the weight of history more now, Obama stood at the Capitol and used the enduring themes of America’s history, on the day honoring Martin Luther King Jr., as starting points for an address that called for Americans to unite in pursuit of a brighter future.

Let others be terrified of foreign competition, or concerned that America’s values aren’t up to the challenges of the 21st century. “We are made for this moment,” Obama said, in large part because of the liberating movements of the past from Washington’s days and Lincoln’s days and Dr. King’s days.

Diversity was no better exemplified than by the Italian cap jauntily worn by Justice Antonin Scalia, but also marked by all the firsts that history will remark upon, from a gay Cuban-American poet delivering an inaugural poem, to Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina justice, swearing in Vice President Joe Biden.

The first invocation of gay marriages will be noted: “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law — for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well,” Obama said.

As much as anything, though, “this moment” was significantly different from the inaugural of four years ago. Then, Obama was somber in the wake of the dramatic economic collapse that was to shadow the nation for the new president’s entire first term.

This year was about getting on with things — not only with the diversity symbolism and social liberalism, but with the growth and dynamism that America’s future needs and deserves.

“We understand that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time,” Obama said. “So we must harness new ideas and technology to remake our government, revamp our tax code, reform our schools, and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, reach higher. But while the means will change, our purpose endures: a nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American.”

“That is what this moment requires,” he said. “That is what will give real meaning to our creed.”

But if Obama’s rhetoric soared, he also spoke to the gridlocked members of Congress all around him: Political victories are “only partial,” and they cannot be stymied by those who “mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate.”

If the president’s remarks meant anything, it was that while Obama understood at least the completeness of his November victory, he also understood that he would have to seek, and soon, some partial victories in a Capitol where compromise is in historically short supply.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (19)


1) Comment by InPVille - 24/01/2013

@prbeav: "to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth." President Clinton attempted to gain international support to do something to end a genocidal war in Africa with little or no success as I recall. He did have a bit better luck with the Serbian situation in Europe. Slavery still exists to this day in certain parts of Africa. You rarely hear anyone bring the subject up. There are a few seeking to do anything about it. I don't recall anyone in American Politics talking about in recent years. So it would seem to be that saying "our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth" amounts to little more than empty words. . . pablum for the masses.

2) Comment by prbeav - 24/01/2013

So much of President Obama's speech seemed like his claims for the future and feelings about his political prowess--recent victory.>>>>>For example, "'We are made for this moment,' Obama said, in large part because of the liberating movements of the past from Washington’s days and Lincoln’s days and Dr. King’s days." Perhaps Obama suggested a future assessment: liberating movements from Washington's days and Lincoln's days and Dr. King's days and Obama's days.>>>>Also I get a regal tone or hint of monarchy on hearing "to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth." I find this pun inappropriate and beneath both the office of the President and Dr. King's "I Have a Dream" speech.

3) Comment by agagent - 24/01/2013

Where was the mention of mountain of debt Obama has created, the decrease in average household income, policies which are shrinking the middle class, the shrinking percentage in the labor force, the millions added to food stamps, the taxpayer money wasted on corrupt payments to Obama’s bundlers and supports, the lies and incompetence displayed in Benghazi terrorist attack, the loss of religious freedom and freedom to choose health insurance, and power grab of the President’s unaccountable Czars and using executive orders instead of passing legislation? The adoring media have lost their objectivity, and they are digging their own graves as their credibility sinks like the sun set. They are trusted less than used car sales (I beg the pardons of all the honest car salesmen).

4) Comment by prbeav - 24/01/2013

@lovemykids: And I am the one who made a point about pedophiles. Perhaps you missed my apology the followed: " . . . did you notice the other day that pedophilia is in the genes? So, does that mean society should appreciate pedophiles as they are? (All true partners please forgive my imagination.)" Society should not deny adult partners the opportunity to be partners or otherwise attempt to discourage appreciation.

5) Comment by InPVille - 24/01/2013

@lovemykids: Are we having trouble understanding the meaning of words today or perhaps feeling like tilting at windmills? I am the only person who has mentioned serial killers and may be the only person who mentioned sociopaths and psychopaths. I didn't take the time to do a word search for those last two. The last time I looked a pedophile was someone interested in relations with a minor. Nowhere in my post did I mention relations between two adults whether or not they are law abiding or not. I submit that you are the person being ridiculous or are inferring something that was neither implied nor intended.

6) Comment by lovemykids - 24/01/2013

It is ridiculous to compare two adult law abiding people who love each other to pedophiles, sociopaths, psychopaths, and/or serial killers. If you idiots really feel so strongly about the "sanctity" of marriage you would make divorce illegal and no one could get married if they were not or could not have children.

7) Comment by InPVille - 23/01/2013

@prbeav: "Being_Stupid, did you notice the other day that pedophilia is in the genes? So, does that mean society should appreciate pedophiles as they are?" -[**]- What are we going to do if they decide sociopaths, psychopaths, and/or serial killers have a genetic component?

8) Comment by jdk944 - 23/01/2013

Well the views here from The Advocate where not quite as sugar coated and falling all over themselves as many of the Mainstream Media were in their so called "reporting" of this event!! The sanctity of Life and of marriage are two foundations where there is NO debate or concessions to be offered. That this president condones and promotes these two immoral examples, while placing his hand on a Bible and then takes an oath, is frankly disgusting and sacrilegious. Along with the oath he took AGAIN, about protecting the constitution. WHAT A HYPOCRITE AS WELL!!

9) Comment by prbeav - 23/01/2013

rgeralwallace: What bothers me is "Overall, federal workers [cost us] $108,476 in 2008 for occupations that exist both in government and the private sector, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. The [cost to us] for the same mix of jobs in the private sector was $69,928 in 2008. " See http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm . That's a 55% premium for federal workers!!!! And the top brass do stupid things like give war guns to Mexican drug lords with impunity.>>>>ALSO, RGW, you are so correct to be concerned about the Constitution and moreover, its preamble, which sets the purpose for the Articles.>>>>Whatnow, try this quote from the speech: "Together we determined that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers." Find me a more heartless, uncaring statement in our history. I have no desire for schools to be used to "train our workers." Let every child be informed by schools and encouraged to start a path of discovering how best to utilized their brief time to fulfill their unique promises to humankind. President Obama and I are not together and judging from leopards spots I doubt he can reform.>>>>Being_Stupid, did you notice the other day that pedophilia is in the genes? So, does that mean society should appreciate pedophiles as they are? (All true partners please forgive my imagination.)>>>>skip>>>>DMJ, if you were playing football, you'd deserve a 15 yard penalty for taunting. Which brings me to the editors. "Game on" seems a petty metaphor for future governance, yet in keeping with the spirit of our president. I admire your effort to present a hopeful viewpoint, but it seems to me we have a quarterback with an agenDUMB. I hope my opinion is founded mostly in fear and will prove to be so wrong I'll be ashamed to have formed it.>>>>President Obama increased my concern about his divisive representations of issues that deserve inclusiveness. For example, Social Security and Medicare are part of the nation's plan for retirement security, and the working men and women contribute to it fully expecting to receive their benefits at retirement, just as I did. So it is not a question of them versus me. If Obama wants to make it competitive, it's my working life--service life-- versus my retirement that Obama is attacking.>>>>And President Obama misspeaks when he states "while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on earth." Every idea in that sentence is an invention of men, including freedom. My most urgent concern is this: can the person who self-judges that he is of "His people" have freedom, or is he enslaved to his own intellectual construct?>>>>I've touched a tip of my iceberg of concerns.

10) Comment by billynurse - 23/01/2013

Most anyone who actually pays attention , including us "good conservatives" , can tell a down slope when we see it.

11) Comment by 8point6 - 23/01/2013

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/31/black-pastors-group- launches-anti-obama-campaign-around-gay-marriage/

12) Comment by DMJ - 23/01/2013

Good deal, nimby. Hopefully, those who have already made up their minds will follow suit.

13) Comment by nimby? - 23/01/2013

"Woe to the good conservatives. who seem to think the U.S. will look like something out of Mad Max in four years" . I'll make my observance in four years .

14) Comment by DMJ - 23/01/2013

Woe to the good conservatives. who seem to think the U.S. will look like something out of Mad Max in four years. A little advice...temper your criticism a bit. It's hard to take you seriously when you make over the top statements, hyperboles, broad generalizations, mischaracterizations, etc. Sure, we all do it... but you guys have turned it into an art form, a pasttime, if you will. Get a grip, amigos. We'll be fine. We might even be...hold on to your hat...better off!! Man, what a crisis of self-identity that would cause, eh? Either that, or retreating further into the bubble. Your choice....

15) Comment by phil - 23/01/2013

Honestly I did not listen to the speech, but the summary here sounds like it was a lesson of how to destroy the morals of a nation and bankrupt it all at the same time.

16) Comment by Being_Stupid - 23/01/2013

Government should no longer recognize the concept of marriage and only recognize the concept of civil unions between consenting adults of legal age instead. Marriage is a function of Religion, not Government. People have a right to be mentally insane and have intercourse with the same sex if they are crazy. If we make marriage a non-issue, then the Democrat Communist Socialist Party cannot force their insanity on America.

17) Comment by rgeraldwallace@cox.net - 23/01/2013

Whatnow has a point; the president spends most of his time finding ways to circumvent the only thing that anchors our form of government which is unique in the world and world history, i.e. the US Constitution.

18) Comment by Whatnow - 23/01/2013

"Remake our government?" That statement tell you everything that is wrong with this Marxist.

19) Comment by rgeraldwallace@cox.net - 23/01/2013

Four more years of such disgusting morally corrupt politicians running amok is nothing to cheer; loading the nation with freeloaders who think they're smarter than working stiffs won't work for long.