GOP Nominee
Former Candidates
There’s something truly unnerving about Barack Obama’s act. Yes, his followers are, by and large, brainless zombies. That alone shouldn’t condemn Barack; he only has so much control over the people that support him. But, one still has the sense that Barack ought to be condemned; that, even for a politician, he’s attempting an unusually unpleasant con. And then it occurred to me, that the secret was fairly obvious. Obama has cast himself as a secular political messiah. Not explicitly, but the implicit notion undergirds all language and imagery he uses. He thinks we can:
Keep on praising together. I am confident that we can create a Kingdom right here on Earth.
He is Change We Can Believe In. Not simply an expression of change, but the living embodiment of it. At the very least, he’s casting himself as a great leader of men in the tradition of Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandella (thus his nuanced MLK allusions); men who smashed down barriers, often at their own peril; men who attempted to bring about unity, even though it cost them their freedom and in some cases their lives. Messiah’s and leaders of change are courageous.
Yet, Barack is one of the more cowardly politicians in recent memory. No theme more closely jumps to the mind of the discerning observer. We’re now discovering that radically liberal survey he filled out during his days in the Illinois senate, which he’d heretofore claimed was mistakenly marked by an “aide”, was in fact filled out by him. He scrawled hand-written notes in another version, to “amend” or clarify, or expand upon the positions expressed in the survey. It has him opposing the death penalty and supporting a ban on the sale and manufacture of handguns, positions he now denies ever holding.
Obama’s campaign insists that these handwritten notes don’t “prove” he filled out the rest of the form, or had any knowledge of these positions. Which is plausible of course. He, you know, just happened to write comments pertaining to the form in the margins. He probably picked up the form, thought it was scratch paper, and spontaneously decided to write a 2 sentence truncated treatise on parental consent laws. Uh-huh. As Ed Morrissey notes, at the time he was filling out this form to win the endorsement of the Independent Voters of Illinois, a group that basks in extreme liberalism. I don’t claim to know whether Obama actually wants to ban all handguns, but he was quite content to let a certain group of voters believe he did. Now he’s quite content to tell a decidedly different set of voters that yes, he supports a personal right to bear arms, and yes that includes handguns. And when pressed on the discrepancy, he’s quite content to lie through his teeth. He continues to lie when he’s been thoroughly caught.
Earlier, we learned about his curious series of present votes in Illinois legislature, where he avoided controversial issues. This was, of course, per the Obama camp, strategery. We all remember NaftaGate, where Austin Goulsbee privately informed the Canadian government that Barack was cool on trade, and his protectionist rhetoric was simple campaign pandering. They denied this heatedly, though the Canadian reps stuck by their story. Or the incident where Samantha Power insisted that Barack didn’t really mean it when he pledged to leave Iraq, irrespective of facts on the ground. Again, this was heatedly denied.
And of course, there’s Jeremiah Wright. Obama’s friend and mentor of 20 years. His pastor and spiritual adviser. And a visceral and unrelenting anti-American hate monger. We know that story all too well. And some wonder, even now, how could he have sat their for 20 years? How could a man who’s campaign is premised so neatly on the idea of a different kind of politics; on hope, on change, have meekly endured such hatred and vitriol for 20 years. Of course Barack has an explanation for this too; he was about to leave the church. Once he’d heard of those hate-filled remarks, he felt honor bound to do so. But, don’t you know, Wright had decided to retire and Barack decided to let a deeply misguided, but well-meaning, man go quietly into his retirement. This all rings more hollow than a drum. And we shouldn’t wonder at this point, how Barack could have endured such hatred, but rather how he convinced any of us to expect better of him.
He voted present, because it was politically expedient to do so. It allowed him to avoid a record of supporting extremist positions, without suffering immediate consequences. He filled out a form with extremist views because it was politically expedient to do so, and any later negative repercussions could be mitigated by a simple “it was a staffer’s mistake”. He promotes conflicting stories on NAFTA and the war, because he’s actively attempting to be all things to all people. And he stayed in a hateful church for two decades, because it made him a power-broker in Chicago and his own ambitions were more important then disclaiming virulent racism and anti-Americanism. Until, that is, this church threatened those ambitions.
Barack Obama is a coward. He’s never given an ounce of blood, literally or metaphorically, for a cause. He’s never suffered for a controversial belief. He’s followed the political winds without question, and without hesitation. He can unite no one; he’s never made the attempt, beyond tossing off flowery rhetoric dripping in hyperbole, condescension, and an elevated sense of his own importance. He embraces figures and positions which further his own ends, and disavows figures and positions which harm those ends; when the former become the latter, he speedily reverses course. In comparison to John McCain, who’s suffered bitterly for this country, and who’s staked his political career numerous times on fighting against the headwinds of his interests (Iraq, immigration, global warming), Barack Obama looks like a rank opportunist of the first order.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:52 am
This is drivel. So now politicians must physically suffer to qualify for office? What about ordinary citizens? Has Matthew Miller served in the military or, as I suspect, is he overweight and wears glasses and prefer to fight with words? There is a hint of jealousy and self-loathing in this, an anger at Obama for being intelligent and successful. I hope this is not what I will see from McCain because America does not owe him the presidency simply because he has worn the uniform.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:54 am
Absolutely scathing, Matthew! Only one minor typo: “This all rings more hollow then a drum.” — replace the e in “than.”
I fully agree that Obama really does embody the opportunism born of political ambition. There is nothing in his biography that shows how he would make decisions other than political expediency. The guy wants people to love him for who he is. But this is not leadership. What worries me is the potential implication for foreign policy: Will he want foreign leaders and the rest of the world to love him, too? What if what the rest of the world wants is in conflict with long-term American interests domestically and abroad?
But how do you tackle the guy who has his supporters perfectly hypnotized? How do you force him to make a tough decision, commit to a position, and sell it to the public against tough opposition? And how do you do this with a fund-raising disadvantage?
March 31st, 2008 at 9:58 am
Barack and McCain both want American global dominance–in other words, they want the United Empire of America, not the United States of America.
http://www.gopcatholics.blogspot.com
March 31st, 2008 at 10:02 am
The main problem with your complaint is that it presumes that the office of the presidency is owed, that it is an entitlement. On the contrary, the right person for the job should have a resume that suggests the ability to make tough decisions among options that may seem equally unappealing.
March 31st, 2008 at 10:41 am
i think there are better ways to show mccain is superior to obama than calling obama a coward. just sayin’
March 31st, 2008 at 10:43 am
PabloZed,
“This is drivel. So now politicians must physically suffer to qualify for office? What about ordinary citizens?”
Did you, perhaps, read the article? Notice how all of my examples note how Obama has lacked what I’d call moral courage, not physical courage. MLK fought for Civil Rights though it landed him in jail. Nelson Mandella, ditto. We shouldn’t expect this level of courage from Obama; he’s only a politician after all. But, we should expect the embodiment of hope and change, “the one we’ve been waiting for”, would have some evidence, any evidence, that he’s ever done something politically inconvenient, that he’s ever fought for a cause when doing so could possibly damage his immediate reputation. Could we get, you know, a little pastor condemning BEFORE that pastor threatens to end his career? And when we do, could we maybe get something more then a mealy-mouthed “eh, i condemn his statements, sort of, but I can’t condemn him because I’ll be condemning all blacks + my grandma”? His entire political career has been fashioned in such a way as to avoid taking an inconvenient stand against powerful headwinds.
In a normal politician, this is bad enough. In a purveyor of “new politics” it’s disgraceful. And it’s problematic, because I shared Obama’s goals, whatever they may be, I’d be incredulous about his ability to effectuate them. Because accomplishing things requires you to take stands, it requires you to condemn bigots, and stand for just causes when others don’t believe they’re just. It requires character and the test of character is, as they say, “what you do when no one’s watching”, or to amend it slightly “when you’re willing to do when something might benefit you”. We know about John McCain’s character and not just because he fought physically for this country. But, because he repeatedly and proudly fought against his own political interests.
“Has Matthew Miller served in the military.”
Not yet, but I certainly might sometime after I graduate from college.
“is he overweight and wears glasses and prefer to fight with words?”
2 out of 3 my friend, 2 out of 3. But, then, I’m not running for president.
March 31st, 2008 at 11:56 am
Like the worst cowards, Obama mixes his cowardice with extreme arrogance. When Obama attacks John McCain, he just comes off jealous and insecure in the presence of a greater man.
I just wonder how long this fairy tale can continue until Americans realize Barack Obama is just a slicker, repackaged Jimmy Carter.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Matthew,
You took the highroad against my personal attacks. Good for you. But I nevertheless still do not agree with faulting Obama for what you call cowardice. Not everyone calls a press conference to announce they are fighting for or against something, and certainly not everyone gets shot down over enemy territory.
Regarding Rev. Wright I must confess that I fail to see the controversy for Obama. I live in a diverse area and while I was born roman catholic I have attended services at neighborhood black churches. You hear all sorts of stuff from pulpits including politics, sociology and some conspiracies. But I remember in 2004 in a catholic mass my parish priest talked about abortion and gays and why we would be committing a sin by voting for Kerry. I could not believe what I was hearing! But did I say a word? Of course not. And was that reason to quit the church? Nope.
One last thing. I don’t want politicians determining what priests and pastors can preach or telling me as a christian what church I should attendd. Sometimes I like to hear a little fire and brimstone along with peace and love.
March 31st, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I agree with Matthew on the expediency point. It was opportunistic to be in the church attended by the community’s high and mighty at the time, and it would have been devastating for Obama to admit he had been an opportunist by throwing his 20-year-long associate under the bus all at once.
As for what’s wrong with that particular choice of pastor more broadly, see here: “Obama’s indoctrination”.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:01 pm
Matthew E. Miller
Why are you so enraged and bent on assassinating someone character? Why do you think Hillary(who stated that no one chooses his relatives) elected to stay in her marriage, despite her husband mediatised unfaithfulness? How do you regard Barrack stand on the Iraq War? This does not show gut, and courage and moral probity? Thank Pablo for taking on this young and foolish author, blinded by his ideology…and bigotry. There is nothing that distinguish Matthew from Wright. The rhetoric is hollow, empty and vehiculates excoriating hatred…
March 31st, 2008 at 1:03 pm
I really like the last paragraph of your post here, Matthew. It’s all good, but that point stands out above the rest. There’s a word you didn’t mention though, and that word is “leadership.” Leadership doesn’t mean going along with the crowd; it means doing what you think is best for your country and damn the consequences. McCain has showed his leadership capabilities time and time again, and often on issues that conservatives disagree with him on. But the fact that he’s still the man standing above the rest shows us that he can fight and win, and as President he’ll be fighting and winning for the United States. Obama just whimpers and shrugs when confronted with a challenge. That’s not the type of man I want to be my President.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Matthew,
Great article. You sum up the Character Case against Obama very well. Pull back the curtain and you have just another career politician who’s really good at convincing (some) people he is not, despite the mounting evidence.
I think by Nov. he will be completely exposed, and in their post mortems, the liberals will (once again) rue the fact that their candidate was “undervetted” before it was too late.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:35 pm
By Nov. the question will be does Obama have ANY core principles and beliefs, or is he simply a carefully constructed vessel of vapid platitudes, coupled with an unsettling messiah complex?
March 31st, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Andrew,
(to Matthew) “Why are you so enraged and bent on assassinating someone character? ”
Did Matthew get any of his facts wrong? You may not like the conclusions he’s drawn, but did he get his facts wrong? Can you think of a time when Obama stood and fought for something at personal cost? Or is it like his charitable donations, which are scandalously small until he decides to run for President.
You bring up the war, but with the constituency he had at the time, that was the safe play for Obama. He wasn’t a prophet (that was Pat Buchanan), he was a typical politician reflecting back his constituents’ wishes.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Andrew,
Speaking of character assassination, your accusation that Matthew is a bigot is completely unfounded, and a common example of how liberals respond when they have little else to say.
March 31st, 2008 at 1:43 pm
To clarify, my last two posts (14 and 15) were addressed to “Andrew Benevolent” who wrote number 10, not “Andrew” who wrote a very good post in #11.
March 31st, 2008 at 4:13 pm
Mark Steyn analyzes the postmodern mess that is Barack Obama’s autobiography, Dreams From My Father
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/talkradio/transcripts/Transcript.aspx?ContentGuid=23d13477-3c5a-4cb1-b5e0-e6caef00e848
March 31st, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Who’s Scrubbing the Trinity United Church of Christ Website?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/whos-scrubbing.html