Obama-Bashing

Rob Natelson has lined up with others to take a shot at Obama supporters who are investing messianic qualities in the new president. There’s something to be said for that. Cult of leadership is not a new phenomenon. Many of us noticed that Americans also invested superhuman qualities in George W. Bush after 9/11. That was fear speaking, however. The new followers are preaching hope. They are probably just as naive.

Nonetheless, Natelson’s criticisms of Obama are off the mark.

Obama had one of the thinnest resumes of any major Presidential candidate ever, but supporters have convinced themselves that he would not only govern brilliantly, but ”transform America.”

I think Obama brings impressive credentials to the table. For one, his educational achievements are stellar – Juris Doctor (J.D.) magna cum laude from Harvard. People are pooh-poohing that now, but those Latin words on parchment separate him from 99.99% of us. Few could have achieved what he did while in school. He then went on to community organizing, staying in touch with common folk, as opposed to most Harvard grads who head for Washington or Wall Street. In addition, he taught constitutional law, served in the state legislature, and the United States Senate. That’s a good start for a relatively young man. He’s a far cry from what we’ve had in office – a bright man with huge potential – one who has shown that he can organize, lead, and inspire. I find his resumé to be quite impressive.

People who claim to be against hate-mongers have blinded themselves to a record of associations that would have induced them to indignantly repudiate anyone else.

This is beneath Mr. Natelson. Over the years Obama has met thousands of people, had conservations with them, agreed and disagreed as a man of independent thought would do. I’m glad he’s been exposed to the thoughts of people on the left, including the thoughtful bomber Bill Ayers. Most people don’t take the time. To say that he’s been sullied by association is McCarthyism. That’s a word we bandy about, but it’s a tried and true technique for smearing people. It’s propaganda. I wonder if we went through Mr. Natelson’s background, dredged up every association, if we could find one or two that could be thrown in his face. Probably – if not, I’d say he’d led a sheltered existence.

We’ve had eight years now of a man who insulates himself from every outlook but his own. Now let’s see where we can go with a man who knows that there are more than two sides to every issue.

Supporters have convinced themselves that a politician with a record of cooperating with the Chicago machine is going to clean up Washington.

A man comes home from work, opens the closet to hang his jacket and finds a naked man standing there. “What are you doing here?” he asks. The man says “Everybody has to be somewhere”.

Merely coming from Chicago, living and working there and having success, should have no more bearing on his performance in office than if he came from Wasilla. Mr. Natelson’s point is no point at all. He’s reaching.

Now the gush of ga-ga really floweth over with breathless comments about how Obama’s IQ is the highest of anyone to occupy the White House, etc. etc.

I don’t know what Obama’s IQ is – but I know this: I am tired of being governed by ordinary people with ordinary smarts. People like Bush had to rely on the brains around him for policy, and he didn’t even have the good sense to being in people who disagreed with him. Smart people are not the answer – smart people with humility can lead effectively however. So stand back, Mr. Natelson, and let us do an experiment here. We’ve done it the other way. Now we’re going to try a smart guy at the helm.

Mr. Natelson offers some words of support at the end of his post. He’s not so much down on Obama as his followers. He thinks they are cultish, and that Obama has encouraged this behavior. I’ve seen some of that too. It’ll wear off. I’m already put off by all of the Clinton people and Rahm Emmanuel – the fact that he felt the need to appoint a “progressive liaison” for his transition team, meaning progressives need not apply for other positions. My antennae are already up – I’m already suspecting a Clinton-like triangulator. But I’ll give him a few more days.

I see Obama as a pragmatic intellectual. The closest I can come in comparing him to other presidents is Woodrow Wilson. I hope he does better.

20 thoughts on “Obama-Bashing

  1. >>>>I’m glad he’s been exposed to the thoughts of people on the left, including the thoughtful bomber Bill Ayers.

    Ha ha. I hope you stand up for me when all my Klan and Nazi friends come out in the press on my run for governor.

    >>>>I find his resumé to be quite impressive.

    Methinks you stretch the word “impressive”.

    Like

  2. Ah, now Ayers is the equivalent of a Nazi. He was a misguided war protester, but I suppose that whole Vietnam slaughter thing was OK ByU?

    Hey – I’m not following things, but is this Obama has no resume thing going on everywhere in rightwingville? I just have a hunch …

    Like

  3. …”free-market” (crack) pot calling (“The Messiah”)kettle black. And Obama does appear to be performing expected miracles as the new deliverer of Zionists.

    Like

  4. OK, I’ll try this. Natleson does have a accurate grasp of a typical BHO supporter. They’re cultish, blinded to defects, sheepole.

    I know how much you trust exit polls, so here’s one confirming Rob’s accusations.

    >>>Let’s start with Zogby’s numbers. The poll surveyed over 500 self-professed Obama voters and has an MOE of 4.4%, with 55% having a college degree and over 90% having a high-school diploma. It asked 12 multiple-choice questions; only 2.4% got at least 11 correct. Only .5% got all them correct.

    57.4 could NOT correctly say which party controls congress (50/50 shot just by guessing)
    81.8 could NOT correctly say Joe Biden quit a previous campaign because of plagiarism (25% chance by guessing)
    82.6 could NOT correctly say that Obama won his first election by getting opponents kicked off the ballot (25% chance by guessing)
    88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)
    56.1 % could NOT correctly say Obama started his political career at the home of two former members of the Weather Underground (25% chance by guessing).And yet…..
    Only 13.7% failed to identify Palin as the person their party spent $150,000 in clothes on
    Only 6.2% failed to identify Palin as the one with a pregnant teenage daughter
    And 86.9 % thought that Palin said that she could see Russia from her “house,” even though that was Tina Fey who said that!!<<<

    Like

  5. Swede-

    That’s not a knowledge quiz… that’s a quiz of right wing talking points. Why should they know those things? And even if you did have proof of some general lack of knowledge, wouldn’t you have to prove that that somehow separates them from your basic McCain supporters?

    In other words, would you care to make an actual argument?

    Like

  6. OK, I’ll try this. Natleson does have a accurate grasp of a typical BHO supporter. They’re cultish, blinded to defects, sheepole.

    52% of the electorate. 66.9 million people. And Swede boils them all down to “sheepole”, whatever that’s supposed to be. Talk about elitist …

    Like

  7. Wolf, if Mark allowed my first comment, a UTube showing thousands of Obama fans chanting O…..Ba….Ma, you’d see the (flocking) resemblance.

    And if I’m an elitist for the ability to answer the above questions…so be it.

    Like

  8. And Mark, Zogby responds personally to the “push poll” accusations.

    “We stand by the results our survey work on behalf of John Ziegler, as we stand by all of our work. We reject the notion that this was a push poll because it very simply wasn’t. It was a legitimate effort to test the knowledge of voters who cast ballots for Barack Obama in the Nov. 4 election. Push polls are a malicious effort to sway public opinion one way or the other, while message and knowledge testing is quite another effort of public opinion research that is legitimate inquiry and has value in the public square. In this case, the respondents were given a full range of responses and were not pressured or influenced to respond in one way or another. This poll was not designed to hurt anyone, which is obvious as it was conducted after the election. The client is free to draw his own conclusions about the research, as are bloggers and other members of society. But Zogby International is a neutral party in this matter. We were hired to test public opinion on a particular subject and with no ax to grind, that’s exactly what we did. We don’t have to agree or disagree with the questions, we simply ask them and provide the client with a fair and accurate set of data reflecting public opinion.” – John Zogby

    Like

  9. Swede – WordPress intercepted your Youtube comment. I freed it up. I don’t monitor comments, but sometimes those with embedded links get stopped, and I don’t know by what criteria.

    And the poll is a push poll. Zogby is merely saying that they conducted it professionally and were not involved in drawing up the questions. The question

    88.4% could NOT correctly say that Obama said his policies would likely bankrupt the coal industry and make energy rates skyrocket (25% chance by guessing)

    is designed to ‘educate’ the respondent rather than objectively obtain information on his points of view.

    Are you hurting? We’ve been having fun all these years with Bush, his low IQ and all, and I’m sure that you’ve built up some resentment. But do you honestly think that a whole class of people are lacking wattage to the degree that they would blindly vote for a man not knowing his position on issues? Would they be drawn in by appeals to prejudice, like needling them with fear of homosexuals and terrorists and Muslims and socialists … oh wait – that was McCain/Palin. That’s what you guys did. My bad.

    Like

  10. fear is all these pathetic bushistas cling to anymore…oh i almost forgot, fear and hate and lies.big swede reminds me of the jerk when he is walking down the street with all his “stuff”. we want something better for america than greed and hate and lies and fear. go ahead and cling to it those if they give you comfort swede. i want something better for my children than rich guys running everything. what the hell is wrong with that? i guess a poor working bear who voted with the majority of americans who still hope for a better future for this country is supposed to sit still while hollowed out soulless aristocratic blue blood draft dodgers like Natelson who pretend to know anything about average montanans spouts off. absolutely not.
    what amazes me is that the majority of americans still have enough courage and hope left after the vampire bush years have practically sucked all the life out of this country. i am proud of my vote mr natelson and swede. choke on it!

    Like

  11. >>>>we want something better for america

    I do to, but I’m not sure it comes in the person of Obama. I don’t see the examples of what makes him so great. All revolutions start with euphoria over the coming good change. How many deliver?

    >>>>That’s not a knowledge quiz

    It appears to be a quiz reflecting what the media emphasized during the election. Notice the details of Palin’s life are known, but the knowledge of what party controls Congress is not. Lefties, your plan is working.

    >>>>Ah, now Ayers is the equivalent of a Nazi.

    No. You claim past associations just show the glorious good that comes from having a wide circle of acquaintances. I suspect your view would change when the shoe is on the other foot.

    Like

  12. I like a man who is confident in his own abilities and beliefs, but humble enough to understand that there are many other ways to truth. Obama’s past associations don’t bother me – other stuff bothers me about him. I would be much more impressed with George W. Bush had he ever demonstrated any intellectual curiosity, had he sat down and had a chat with Bill Ayers. But he is insulated – a sign of both low IQ and insecurity.

    Like

  13. >>>>a sign of both low IQ and insecurity.

    There is great visceral voltage in calling an opponent stupid.

    I visit a couple of blogs where IQ is a frequent topic, and the candidates have been analyzed in great detail. Bush, holder of two Ivy league degrees and a fighter pilot certificate, is judged to be a little above one standard deviation above normal.

    The thing about Bush is that he is COMPETITIVE, as opposed to CURIOUS or AMBITIOUS. Give Bush a task, like winning an election, or getting troops into Baghdad, and he performs well. On more general topics, not so much.

    Like

  14. Yes, Bush has ambitions that are above average. But as a defining character trait he is competitive: conquer and move on.

    Like

Leave a comment