I get the tiniest bit of schadenfreund from the growing public discontent with Obama. The joy is small through, cause I'd much rather have been wrong. I applaud him for removing the obscene hurdles to science that the restrictions on stem cell research imposed, but that's no more than I would expect any even slightly rational president to do. So hurray for that, but lets now face the fact that every other expectation that's been set up for Obama is a pipe dream.
Bah! Better yet, lets face the fact that Presidents don't have the power to fix everything! Obama himself said that early in his campaign, but it doesn't seem to have stopped his followers from beleiving that he can, or he himself acting like he can.
The one way in which President Obama, or any president, can be useful, is to veto the atrocities coming out of congress. As a populace, we need to stop acting like the president has more authority than that. The president can suggest laws and budgets, provide leadership, and go to war, but thats it! Laws are written by congress, and if we focused more attention there than on the figure head, we might be able to affect the course of the dialog.
Ok, I recognize the irony; I'm commiting exactly the error I'm condemning and focusing on the president rather than my elected representatives. Ok, Lets remedy that. First I'll figure out who they are.
Jean Schmidt seems to be my congressional representitive, and Brown, Sherrod and Voinovich, George V. are my senetors.
Now lets send them some email.
Should I actually research their records and take them to task for their misdeeds , while fairly praising them for thier virtues? Or should I just swear at them for being a part of such an evidently corrupt institution? The former option certainly seems to be the more respectable one, but given the innefectuality of either I'm tempted to do the latter.
Maybe I'll take the congressional route and compromise, incorporating the worst of both ideas! I'll research their records, then obscenely berate them!