El blog Sobre la Línea recoge sarcásticamente algunas de las grandes "diferencias" entre el discurso Obamita y el Busheano. Cito una parte que pasé por alto en mi post anterior sobre la religiosidad de Obama (que fue lo que realmente impactó a los asistentes a la ceremonia):
En primer lugar tenemos la diferencia entre la religiosidad de Bush, que raya en el fundamentalismo cristiano, y la de Obama, quien tiene una mayor sensibilidad hacia las distintas creencias:Otra cosa que fue motivo de aplausos orejudos fue el supuesto punto final que Obama pondría a la "revolución (neo)conservadora" iniciada por Ronald Reagan. Ni Obama es tan innovador al respecto ni Reagan fue tan neo-con como muchos imaginan:That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people.
George W. BushFor we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers.
Barack H. Obama
Obama:
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control — and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart — not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.
Reagan (en el discurso inaugural de su primer mandato):
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. From time to time we've been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.
Se trata de dos aproximaciones (una en positivo y otra en negativo, si se quiere) a un mismo objetivo igualitario. ¿De que "revoluciones" estamos hablando entonces? De ninguna en especial salvo de la original revolución americana.
Y ya que hablamos de Reagan: ¿sabían que su speech inaugural tuvo mucho mayor teleaudiencia que el de Obama?
Tags: Barack Obama George Bush Reagan discurso inaugural cambio Estados Unidos
