January 3rd 2009
What Will Make Me Happy In 2009
T
his morning, I heard a bunch of BBC’s radio worldwide service anchors telling the world what’s ahead in 2009 that will make them happy. What a bunch of blithering idiots.
One guy said that the economic downturn, while it will hurt some people, will allow him to be happier in 2009 than 2008 because the smokestacks of crippled, economically ravaged industry won’t be spewing out as much carbon. If there was ever a guy I’d like to see laid off because of the downturn, it’s him.
If you need more evidence that many supporters of anthropogenic global warming cling to their beliefs because they are anti-industrial, just play back the tape on this guy. He’s a new Pol Pot, wanting to primitivize the world. If he has his way, killing fields will follow, but he’ll never feel a whit of guilt, just as the left feels no guilt about Cambodia, because the dead will have died not of rising oceans and global temperatures, but from bad water, malaria, floods and landslides that could have easily been solved if money had been spent more intelligently than on dubious efforts to “stop global warming.”
Another anchor also cued off the economic downturn, saying he’ll be happy because there will be less hubris in 2009. He focused on Burj Dubai, 
the soon-to-be world’s tallest building, now nearing completion in Dubai, predicting that no one will move into it since hubris will be gone, and it will become nothing more than a roost for desert birds of prey.
We’ll see about that, shan’t we? (Note the BCC inflection?) BBC itself said of the Burj:
When finished, the skyscraper will have more than 160 floors, 56 elevators, apartments, shops, swimming pools, spas, corporate suites, Italian fashion designer Giorgio Armani’s first hotel, and an observation platform on the 124th floor.
That’s a lot to be unoccupied – a whole lot of hubris leaving the planet. He might have focused on the Burj, but I think his real thoughts were on America, because our hard-earned greatness and the self confidence that results is viewed by many less fortunates as hubris. He probably particularly saw Pres. Bush’s’ foreign policy as an example of too much hubris. I disagree, but I can understand why he’d feel that way; I certainly see the multiple military fiascoes Britain suffered at the end of its empire period as the result of too much hubris.
He might also be down on hubris because he holds the liberal view that advancement and achievement are wrong. After all, the other thing that made him feel that he’ll be happier in 2009 is that more people will be growing their own vegetables and fruits. But they’re returning to the old ways not to reject hubris, but because the economy sucks. Those factories that won’t be spewing as much carbon won’t be supporting as many workers, so the return to gardening is just another jolly return to pre-industrialization. Oh, happy liberal!
A third also teed off Bush, saying 2009 will make him happier because it will signal a return to intellectualism, where (paraphrasing) “‘the emphasis will be on many good books, not a Good Book.” He was too cowardly to say “the Good Book.” Again, here’s Bush the cowboy Christian yahoo and Obama the intellectual whose Christianity fools no one.
It’s true Obama likes intellectualism; like FDR, Obama is comfortable surrounding himself with academics and Ivy Leaguers, causing one wag to say that if anyone attacks America during the Obama years, they should do it during the Yale-Harvard game, since the entire administration will be at the game. Of course, the Beeb anchor is blinded by bias, ignoring Bush’s voracious book consumption, his Yale education, and the brilliance of his staff. And don’t get me started on the permanent damage Roosevelt’s brain trust did to America.
So the Beeb blithered. Bloody big surprise there. But can I do any better? What will make me happier in 2009?
Incredible Wife and i were talking about this a couple nights back and in our own little world, if we can hold our own and at least keep up with 2008, we’ll be happy. But I think we’re looking at bigger pictures here, so here’s my answer: I’ll be happy in 2009 because Bush will be gone.
I don’t hold that view because I’m a Bush-hater; readers of C-SM know I’m not. Nor do I hold it because of my disappointments in Bush: His inability to communicate his vision, his failure to clamp down on spending, his creation of a troubling new pharmaceutical entitlement.
No, I’ll be happy that Bush is gone because from 2009 on, the world will have to evaluate performance without the misperceptions, misreporting, hate and bias that colored so many lenses from 2000 to 2008. We’re back to “You won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around any more,” but in a much more critical and important era. Pres. Obama’s performance will quickly become his, and he will rise and fall without the false taint that hampered Pres. Bush.
I hope he does well, that he moderates his leftist views and does good things for our country, the economy and the world. If so, we’ll be able to see it as such because he is starting his administration remarkably free of dark marks. If he does not, if he takes us down a dark road toward continued economic downturn and increasing acceptance of socialist democratic principles, we will be able to see it as such.
So we have in 2009, at long last, clear lenses. I won’t miss Bush-bashing one iota, and I look forward to the world having to grapple with Obama the man instead of Obama the image.
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a Reply
[The "Comment Box" is WYSIWYG except that you have to double space between paragraphs!
Type it the way you want it to look -- Just remember to double up those line spaces.]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Comments
January 4th, 2009 at 4:46 am
In hard economic times past, at least during my lifetime, it has always seemed that the American economy succeeded DESPITE our government. It had its downs, then started up again, then Congress acted, and the economy continued, shortly thereafter, on its original upward rebound. That’s how these socialists keep getting elected. They induce a downturn, blame it on Republicans, do something to make it worse, and then claim credit when the economy recovers anyway.
That’s what I am afraid will happen again. I find myself hoping that Obamaniacs do something so terrible that the economy will sputter along “un-fixed” into the 2010 elections, just so the people will see what terrible policies he and the Democrats really have. This presumes the Republicans can do better, of course, which is not, to your point, common knowledge or expectation.