Book Review of Kevin McCullough’s “No He Can’t: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change”

McCullough, Kevin. 2011. No He Can’t: How Barack Obama is Dismantling Hope and Change. Thomas Nelson: Nashville, TN

Kevin McCullough predicted the rise of Barack Obama before he was taken seriously as a presidential candidate. He followed Obama early on in his career as a community organizer in Chicago and predicted in 2006 that he would be a major player in the 2008 elections. McCullough lists some factors contributing to the rise of Obama: the historic longing for a Black president, the fracturing of the GOP, GOP fatigue, and the frustration of moderates with the status quo. I was somewhat surprised at McCullough’s first factor (xxii), “Evangelicals listened to emotion rather than fact.” I think this is a broad stroke and also reveals some presuppositions on the part of the author that all Evangelicals should vote Republican. There are plenty of thinking Christians who voted for Obama and would reverse McCullough’s point by suggesting that many Christians who voted for McCain were guided by emotion rather than fact (BTW, I voted for McCain pinching my nose). McCullough’s point, however, was that Obama did better than most Democrats among a voter bloc that overwhelmingly casts their votes in the GOP column. This observation is true.

McCullough laments Obama’s record as arguably the most extreme pro-abortion legislator in the Illinois senate, then as U.S. Senator, and eventually as Democratic candidate (racking up the endorsement of Planned Parenthood and NARAL over Hillary Clinton). McCullough portrays Obama as a ruthless pragmatist on the abortion issue who positioned himself even more extreme than Clinton to rack up the endorsement of the abortion lobby. McCullough’s assumption, as far as I can tell, is that this trademark issue for Evangelicals took a back seat in the 2008 elections as Christians cast their votes for more than a single issue, thus confirming his thesis that the generally predictable Christian electorate was not voting single-issue and therefore must have abandoned their core convictions for the emotional euphoria Obama was creating. McCullough may be correct in his thesis, but he may also be underestimating the complexity of convictions among the Evangelical electorate. His documentation, however, of Obama’s legislative record concerning abortion is downright appalling (even by moderate pro-choice standards). McCullough is an impassioned Evangelical who is obviously frustrated that 40% of Evangelicals would vote for a candidate more extreme on abortion than most all of his Democratic colleagues. We’ll see where those numbers are in this coming election, but I will interject that this Evangelical is not too excited about the GOP candidates and I meet more and more Evangelicals who are simply disillusioned with all of the above.

McCullough proceeds to argue a case against Obama based on 4 main categories: Economic Policy, Foreign Policy, Values, and Accountability of Government to the people.

The first category concerning economic policy highlights the bailout and stimulus package, among other actions. At times McCullough engages in ad hominem attacks or non sequitur argumentation that plays well to a certain readership – but would be subject to many objections in the court of law. When McCullough sticks to the numbers he is at his best in demonstrating the abject failure of trying to send our way to recovery.

As for Obama’s foreign policy, I don’t share all of McCullough’s convictions through which he is assessing Obama. I won’t get into details, but suffice it to say that McCullough is a hawk and I’m not as hawkish and would myself be subject to criticism by his standards. That being said, McCullough does point out some of Obama’s gaffes concerning etiquette for hospitality, exchanging of gifts, and naivety in engaging our enemies. Obama has established a reputation among some as very self-absorbed and even so among some foreign leaders. I agree with McCullough that Obama should have withdrawn himself from consideration for the Nobel Peace award. This would have allowed Obama to show some humility and establish some credibility in his foreign policy. The awarding of the Nobel actually hurt Obama’s image.

The third section, concerning social conservative issues of family, parental rights, abortion, and epistemology, was probably the most beneficial material for me personally. Obama’s appointment of Kevin Jennings as the “safe schools czar” was downright troubling and McCullough dedicates several pages of disturbing information concerning Jennings that leaves one wondering why Obama would choose such an extreme leftist unless Obama was knowingly supportive of Jennings’ past “feats”. Jennings supported the early childhood education of sexual ethics as embracing of homosexuality, even writing the foreword to the book “Queering Elementary”. In essence, Jennings supported a genderless worldview where you are what you want to be and can be with who you want to be, etc. The list on Jennings is much longer and troubling and McCullough highlights Jennings of one of many appointments by Obama that either indicates incompetence and lack of proper vetting, or actual approval of such actions.

The last section concludes on the lack of transparency and accountability of the Obama administration to the people. Obama obviously broke many of his promises about conducting the most transparent administration ever. In sum, McCullough rests his case on these main categories of economic policy, foreign policy, social policy, and corruption. McCullough hits him pretty hard and is convincing on many of his points. That being said, McCullough often ignores the complexity of various factors in many of his criticisms of the president. McCullough operates from a particular set of convictions and for those who share his convictions; you will be shouting “Amen” throughout. I happen to share many of the author’s convictions and was therefore able to appreciate his commentary to a large extent, however I was also disappointed at times in the tone and continual barrage on our president and it often felt like one long attack ad (and just for the record, I can hardly stand a 30 second attack ad, let alone hours of it). I appreciate McCullough’s passion and his core convictions in many ways, and want to believe that the firmness of his criticism is truly rooted in love for country more than hatred for Obama. I have been so jaded that it is hard for me to tell the difference anymore. Therefore I own up to my own cynicism and am willing to admit that my analysis of this book may itself be rooted in the very discontent that McCullough feels over a man he feared would one day become president.

Thanks to Book Sneeze for sending me this review copy. My review reflects my genuine thoughts.

© 2011, Rick Hogaboam. All rights reserved.