Populism of the Privileged (Victor Davis Hanson)

The rhetoric of Sens. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton about the sad state of America is reminiscent of the suspect populism of John Edwards, the millionaire lawyer who recently dropped out of the Democratic presidential race.

Barack Obama may have gone to exclusive private schools. He and his wife may both be lawyers who between them have earned four expensive Ivy League degrees. They may make about a million dollars a year, live in an expensive home, and send their kids to prep school. But they are still apparently firsthand witnesses to how the American dream has gone sour. Two other Ivy League lawyers, Hillary and Bill, are multimillionaires who have found America to be a land of riches beyond most people’s imaginations. But Hillary also talks of the tragic lost dream of America.

"But they are still apparently firsthand witnesses to how the American dream has gone sour."

I think there is a wee bit of truth in that statement. Time-wise, Obama is the least removed from how typical Americans live. For McCain and Clinton, it has been decades since they lived at a level that could give them personal knowledge of typical American lives.

When I got my first job in 1967, members of Congress received annual compensation of $30,000. They were paid well, but not much more than my father was making as a meat-cutter, and about the same as a senior pressman in the paper factory I worked in. The plant supervisor made more than members of Congress. I'm not certain, but I believe this had a great emphasis on members of Congress being more in tune with their constituencies. A great many members of Congress at the time were not millionaires living in lavish confines. Most lived in upscale middle class neighborhoods.

Barack Obama has enough wealth to live at a standard of living well above the average American, but when he speaks to the masses, he is hitting upon themes he likely witnessed firsthand a bit more than a decade back. Both Clinton and McCain were born to very successful parents, and may never have experienced the struggles the average American endures.

It is true Obama is not offering specific solutions. But he is echoing sentiments many of his supporters probably say themselves in conversations with friends and family. I think that is his strength. To his supporters, he sounds like one of them.

I might be off base, but Obama is beating Clinton and McCain on the basics. Clinton's major theme is universal health care. McCain's is national defense. Obama's themes are as basic as it gets, like the rising cost of groceries and gasoline.

With their salaries and wealth, it has probably been a long time since Clinton, McCain or Obama shopped for groceries for themselves, but it's a totally different story for average Americans. They are less concerned with what is happening a half world away, and they are realistic enough to know necessities like food, housing and utilities give them lives that keep them healthy. Obama, while not living the life of an average American, is speaking as though he is. MHO

Ben, I have to agree with you on this. All three major presidential candidates are a long way removed from the day to day concerns that most Americans experience. That being said, I believe that the politician who best expresses a knowledge of these concerns and shows they have the best solutions to them, will have the best chance at coming out on top in November. It remains to be seen who that will be at this point.

something for nothing.

the equation that takes over when the federal coffers are filled with tax money, paper securities and promises to pay and political edicts magically transfer ownership of “wealth” to the politically strong; the politically strong who know they have their feet on the necks of taxpayers and who deny it vehemently when confronted.

"Otherwise, even a dem candidate would tempted to declare war on the multi-cultural/PC/quota inquisition, to give but one example.

Yeah, I'm certain most all politicians would hold positions common among the general population were they living lives that were more typical of the general population.

Nearly 25 years ago we were told raising the compensation of Congressional members would bring a higher caliper of person into politics. Salaries were doubled. It seems what that brought into Congress were politicians greatly removed from the general population.

I've given a little further thought to my earlier comments. Upon reflection, Obama expressed some admiration for former President Reagan, not specifically any programs Reagan supported, but changing much of government. It is more than coincidental to me that Obama is talking about the most basic of necessities. In a roundabout way, he is employing Reagan's "Are you better of today than you were four years ago" theme that helped Reagan win the White House. Reagan was living well above an average lifestyle, as Obama is today, but Reagan was speaking clearly of life of the average American.

While he most probably has not realized it himself, when Obama speaks of the rise in the cost of basics, he is hitting a note American households are seeing very clearly. An example is the price of wheat flour that has risen about 100-150% in just a few months. All products that rely upon wheat, directly or indirectly, including livestock grain, to bread, pizza, pasta and cake are spiking as a result. It might just be a lucky break Obama's comments touch upon this as I am certain such price increases do not affect him like the general population.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.