BEFORE THE STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS

A year into the presidency of Barack Obama, I am quite disappointed. Let it be said from the outset that I supported Obama's candidacy the most in the caucus and primary season and promoted him to others after the Democratic National Convention. Also, let me hasten to add that I did not like Obama's inattention to the plight of the poor, his brutality with regards to Afghanistan, i.e., finding and killing Osama bin Laden, and his emphasis on personal response to the near exclusion of speaking out against racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination and xenophobia that still systemically plague the structures, processes, and policies of our society. I lauded his assertiveness with respect to the brokenness of the health care system, and I truly anticipated with some optimism his tackling this goal, which has been a genuine conundrum heretofore among presidents since the first have of the twentieth century.

To be fair, President Obama inherited a lot of difficult problems produced and spurned by the George W. Bush Administration: deep recession, war in Iraq, international scorn of the United States, growing unemployment, clandestine activities, etc. Any person ascending to the White House would have a tough row to hoe. Generally speaking, Obama has held up pretty well considering those scarcely surmountable challenges, but there are some issues regarding tack and substance I am compelled to criticize.

In my opinion, withdrawing from Iraq in a timely manner was something he emphasized during his campaign but never really pursued since taking office. Retaining defense personnel was clue enough that he would relinquish swift accomplishment of that goal and never consider remove U.S. presence entirely from that country. Furthermore, I did not give my endorsement to the belief that withdrawing forces from Iraq automatically meant we should focus on a war against the Taliban and al Quaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I was not an advocate of going into Afghanistan immediately after 9/11. I believe in exhausting all avenues of diplomacy and dialogue, and I adamantly oppose revenge killing of any kind. Besides, now, over eight years after the tragedy of 9/11, the purpose of avenging it no longer seems clear or understandable. What is needed is better security by the police and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to ensure such devastating loss of life does not happen in the United States at the hands of terrorists again. Collaboration with allies and the international community as a whole should work to sabotage any attempt to harm Americans in foreign lands.

The United States and the world could eliminate poverty, hunger, and curable diseases with consistent, concentrated, and continuous effort. The ability is indisputable; the will is curiously questionable. These three interrelated crises are used in dastardly political ways that fly in the face of any propaganda about the goals of peace and goodwill to humanity. It seems we do not want to have a thriving international community where countries are self-sufficient for the most part and no country is belittled, humiliated, or isolated. I am not discussing an unrealistic panacea or utopia, but, rather, a realistic and ethical global society. I do not hear much difference in the language of Obama that defies the traditional folderol about ostensibly protecting national security interests.

A proponent of a universal, government-run, virtually free health care system, I was encouraged by Obama's campaign promise radically to transform the current debacle and provide health insurance and equitable access to quality health care for everyone. Once in office, Obama has kowtowed to the wishes of moderates, independents, and conservatives to the point where he has betrayed his own 2003 endorsement of a type of public option, the single-payer plan. Reform of the health care system as we know it today must include affordable access to quality care for the indigent--without question. Any reform worthy of its name has to overhaul the system so that the 48 million people without access to the best medical care available obtains inexpensive, or even free, ingress into preventive and ongoing care. It appears that if any bill comes out of Congress and placed in the Oval Office, it will be unrecognizable in comparison to Obama's rhetoric since 2003. The mandate given to him to transform the outrageous, intransigent health care industry in this country will not at all be met.

Whereas the Republican victory regarding the Senate seat vacated by the deceased Edward Kennedy was not altogether unexpected and does not foretell the outcomes of the midterm elections this fall, the dissatisfaction over the work of President Obama and his administration cannot help but to play a role in the political arena today. Record-high unemployment, job losses, a Vietnam-like parallel in Afghanistan, and an ineffective Congress must drastically be addressed in order to fulfill the promises the excited populace cheered for in 2008.

Pres. Obama has the opportunity on January 27 to begin to make those necessary changes. He needs to return to the promises he pronounced during his campaign and surrender his efforts to soft-pedal distinctions between the two major political parties. He should, at the very least, stick with his priorities expressed during the lead-up to taking office and claim his place at the vanguard of the movement for fundamental changes in the way we have been doing business. I await his message with hope, and with fear and trepidation.