Obama is America's New Sputnik Moment

Apologies for the scarce blogging over the last week  - I have been hit by whatever bug it is that is currently circling around Manchester, and it has pretty much taken me out.  So no podcast and obviously there has been very little blogging over this week.

In my cough syrup haze I ventured to watch the State of the Union/State of Obama address in the middle of night a few days ago.  Perhaps it was the fact that it was nearly 4 in the morning British time by the time he finished, maybe it was the fact that I had mixed Scotch with my Beechams Flu Plus in order to soothe the pain of all the buzzwords and cliches, but all I could think throughout the entire thing was, "What the hell are you talking about you strange little man?"

There are so many things wrong with that speech it would take countless posts to go through them all, but I don't think I would be doing my duty if I didn't refer to the "Sputnik moment".  If you were lucky enough to ignore the SOTU address (as we kool kidz call it on Twitter...yo!) then you may be surprised to learn that Obama's plan to "Win the Future" (the blood curdling slogan for the speech) is for America to have a "Sputnik moment", which should encourage America to fire up and work to something amazing - government sponsored and controlled naturally!

Apart from the obvious fact that he chosen a Communist success story with which to encourage America, he doesn't quite seem to understand what Sputnik represented for America.  Sputnik was a moment that helped America to see how threatened it was, it showed how in danger it was of being destroyed, and how delicate the American dream ultimately was.  Sputnik itself was almost completely useless, it just circled around the globe, making noise until the novelty wore off.  Yet it awoke America out of its post-war slumber and encouraged it to rediscover itself and begin the drive into prosperity - not only with the Apollo program, but in general as well.

It is for this reason that I am going to take Obama's little metaphor and turn it on its head.  America has had its Sputnik moment already - that moment was Obama!  Obama is the useless little machine that buzzes around the globe making lots of useless noise.  Obama is the novelty that everyone is beginning to get bored of.  Sputnik was supposed to be a epoch defining moment, and really it just made noise - just like Obama.  Sputnik was also a product of socialist initiative, as is Obama!

Yet, the more serious lesson of Sputnik is also the lesson of Obama's election and presidency.  Obama's presidency, like the launch of Sputnik, has awoken America to the malaise that it finds itself in.  Obama's failed presidency shows just how far away from the American dream that nation has drifted, how threatened the American dream is once again, and it is through movements like the Tea Party where the response to the Sputnik program - one might call it a  modern Apollo program - is being conducted.

Obama is wrong to suggest that "winning the future" will come from more government "investment" and initiatives.  Instead it will come from Americans reasserting their rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and expressing America's greatness through efficiency and private sector prosperity.

The Apollo success was a response to the defeat of America that was represented by the Sputnik moment.  It is for this reason that the modern Apollo movement is well under way in the conservative movement, and it is responding to the defeat represented by the election of Obama - America's modern Sputnik moment.

Can We Stop START?? (And Other Tiresome Puns)

If American political commentators were various forms of weapons, Charles Krauthammer would be a drone missile - for every single one of his articles seem to get right to the heart of the matter and obliterates opposing arguments in a single swoop.

His latest article is on the ridiculous START treaty, which seeks to limit the number of nuclear weapons that both the US and Russia possess - the idea being that this will make the world safer as not only does it mean there are less nukes, but that it might also encourage Iran and North Korea to stop playing with nuclear weapons too.  These two arguments are nonsensical, and it one wouldn't be surprised if Mr Obama came out and say "You can't hug your children with nuclear arms!"

As Krauthammer points out, it isn't necessarily the symbolism of START which is problematic, but instead more worrying is Obama's ultimate aim that there are no nuclear weapons in existence.  This is completely idiotic for two reasons.

The first is that even if this dream were able to be achieved, this would leave us at an enormous disadvantage against Russia.  The reason the Soviets were so in favour of nuclear disarmament in the 70's and 80's wasn't because they were all peace loving hippy types, but because nuclear weapons were the only area that the United States could beat the Soviets with.  When it came to military numbers, tanks, planes etc, the Russians were well ahead of the game, due to their industrial capabilities and their enormous population which meant they had manpower for both industry and for the army.  If the Cold War had been fought only on the ground,

the Soviets would have won every day of the week!  It was only because the US had advanced nuclear weapons that prevented to Soviets from attacking.  Now, although Soviet Russia no longer exists and modern day Russia is less and less of a threat, it would still be folly to remove that strategic advantage that America has.  Getting Russia to get rid of theirs is irrelevant, as nukes aren't their strength!

Second of all, there is no such thing as a nuclear free world, and if Russia and America abolished their nukes, it would mean that the whole world could be held hostage by the one country that did manage to sneak out a weapon.  Why Obama believes that America not having weapons would do anything but encourage rogue nations to gather nukes is beyond me!   Without America having nukes, it would only remove the deterrent that currently stops smaller nations developing nukes themselves.

START also brings the revisionist history of the Cold War that the left have tried to tell into focus.  The fact is that we won the Cold War by having greater numbers of more powerful nukes and better defences than the Soviets did.  Reagan's plan (that the left hated) worked, and yet we are told that it didn't and that somehow the CND movement that pervaded the 80's were right, when they were in fact wrong.  Until now this has not mattered a great deal, but now we have a President in the White House who buys into this nonsense, and this should worry us.

It is up to the Republicans to put a spanner in the works of this treaty in 2011, or the world will be a less safe place as a result.  To fall back on the obvious pun - it is time to put a stop to START.