After eight years of a President who, at the time he was elected, had barely held a full-time job, who not only knew little about anything but didn't care or didn't think his ignorance was a vice, who had not volunteered for anything (not to mention the war he supported), and whose greatest achievement at the time of his election was quitting drinking, Barack Obama, Democratic candidate for President of the United States and a person of myriad and well-documented achievements, cannot with a straight face be called an unknown or mysterious quantity. But alas, Charles Krauthammer will say anything:
The oddity of this convention is that its central figure is the ultimate self-made man, a dazzling mysterious Gatsby. The palpable apprehension is that the anointed is a stranger — a deeply engaging, elegant, brilliant stranger with whom the Democrats had a torrid affair. Having slowly woken up, they see the ring and wonder who exactly they married last night.
A quickie marriage after an 18-month courtship? Not exactly.
I presume that Krauthammer is making a comparative judgment: He, like almost every pundit writing on the Democrats, takes himself to know the minds of the Clintons in such deep and profound ways, he can find secret messages or submerged motives in anything they say. He’s been at it since the mid-90’s, and he’s gotten pretty good at it. Since he can’t do the same as easily with Obama, it must be Obama’s mysteriousness, his enigmatic nature. Really, Krauthammer just needs a little practice; he’ll be able to do the same trick with Obama by the end of his first 100 days in office. I have confidence in him.
jcasey, why compare Bush vs Obama? Why not McCain vs Obama?
How much was Obama on the big stage before he announced his candidacy? 2 years?
And there’s really nothing new about him. It’s the same old ideas in a new wrap.
What same old ideas, BN?
jem, what new ideas?
Maybe it’s too simplistic but here is the conclusion of a quick look at Obama:
“Barack Obama is a Hard-Core Liberal.”
Now, that does not disqualifies one from being a president. Also, looking over all the issues and his positions, I don’t see anything new. Where is the change? Where is the hope? Talking in general terms and being ambiguous is a great political tool; however, when it comes down to the concrete ideas, there is nothing new or different.
BN,
You say, “jcasey, why compare Bush vs Obama? Why not McCain vs Obama?”
Could it be because the primary point is logical and not political? Jcasey’s point is that there seems to be a logical flaw in Krauthammer’s argument. The comparison to Bush is all he needs to show the flaw. Someone may be able to critique whether the comparison demonstrates the logical flaw, but that is not what you do.
The point I am making now has been mentioned to you many times by other commentors on this site and you even claim to have read the section on bias, which leaves me with only two possibilities for your continuing on this same trajectory: 1) You completely lack the ability to understand objective logical analysis of controversial topics; or more than likely 2) you are pushing your own agenda without one care for logical analysis.
In either case, it grows tiresome.
However, feel free to continue to miss the point and accuse me of being an Obama lover.
Ho-hum. I wasn’t comparing Obama and McCain, BN. Criticizing Obama’s ideas simply in virtue of your claim that they lack “novelty” seems a little hollow–what do you mean by “new” anyway? If you mean to criticize him in virtue of his slogan, it’s “change,” not “new.”
Give it a few weeks — as he does during every presidential campaign, der krauthamer will get around to psychoanalyzing Obama and conclude that he is the greatest threat our republic has ever faced. (At least until the next election….)
Matt K, who are you? I’m sorry that I’m boring you with my comments. As a suggestion, maybe you can skip reading them next time.
I know I’m not welcomed here and therefore I’m “retiring” 🙂
I appreciate the honesty and respect of jcasey.
Have a good life everyone!
So you got criticized for missing the point of the post, BN. That hardly amounts to not being welcomed here. Retiring seems a rather extreme response.
jcasey, the “not welcomed” part was not just a result of Matt’s comment.
As for retiring part, if I don’t contribute here then I’m just trolling … and that’s bad.
So, I appreciate again your patience. I’ll keep reading, so keep up the good work.