Barack, You're Nice Enough
I write this before the New Hampshire primary results are all in, but from the early morning voting tally it appears that Barack Obama will have a victory over Hillary and Edwards, and probably go on to capture the Democratic nomination. America seems to be prepared to give him the keys to the car. I know he's got the gas, but I am still not sure that he can drive, and without that knowledge, I am unprepared to become a passenger in his vehicle. If he does win the Democratic nomination, I fear that we will all of us be panning for facts and policies, knee deep in a puddle of rhetoric. Highfalutin' words are quite nice, useful in a seduction, but they are insufficient in a marriage. Yes, yes, yes, I'll vote for him against any of the twisted sisters the Republicans are offering, but I still have my questions about this Mr. Smith going to Washington.
Did I see a bit of mean spirited sarcasm coming from Barack when during the ABC debate he remarked, "Hillary, you're nice enough," his voice dropping on the enough, just enough to suggest that he finds her a middle-aged pest, a first class nuisance for daring to run against and withstand his all powerful charms? Nice enough for what? For losing what has become a beauty contest. Barack will grant her "Miss Congeniality" if she will only drop out now, taking Edwards with her, and stop speaking about the issues that interest some savvy voters: real national health insurance, the true diplomatic engagement of this country with the rest of the world, the outsourcing of jobs overseas, and a better education for America's children.
Right now I know that Barack Obama would make the best high school class president in these United States. He has the smarts, the looks, the charm, and the popularity, likes sports, and he plays well with others. But this isn't high school, or even Harvard Yard, and I think we should ask more of our Presidents. We don't. Ergo, George W. Bush. Hush, yes, I do know he won't be another Bush. He's smarter, more decent, and I think he's truly idealistic. At least I hope he is, otherwise all this talk of change and bringing people together is so much palaver. But incompetence takes many forms, and it starts with an unwillingness to articulate practical policies. Speaking in generalities is a wonderful election strategy, you become all things to all people, but it's a helluva lousy way to run a government. Having said all this, Barack may well become a great president, should he survive the Republican attack machine which is revving up, and the doubts of a few old guys like me.
A note of warning to all interested parties: As a New Yorker I caution you, "Beware of Michael Bloomberg." He has the power to convince so many that a billionaire frog is really a genial prince by using those billions to bombard the electorate. He has been a decent enough mayor and New York looks pretty good and feels good these days -- despite some hideous architectural additions and the pricing out of the middle class through astronomical rentals -- but he is arrogant, willful, and secretive, just what we don't need more of these days. He cannot become president, but he can become the new Nader, the spoiler who brings the presidency by default to a McCain with his hundred year occupation of Iraq.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I couldn't agree more...and the illusion (and paucity of actual information regarding his intended solutions) is further exaccerbated by most of the major media outlets. Does anyone remember this isn't American Idol? The primary process is to accrue enough delegates to win the nomination of a party. Since when was little ole Iowa a big deal in this process?? But suddenly the media have created a "race" where even the obvious leader has been called into severe question..
Wow. Still haven't corrected your obvious misquote. Doesn't seem up to par somehow.
Well and perceptively said, Mr. Yellen. An drop of questioning now could prevent rivers of regret later. Witness our experience with the current regime.
I agree with you. Steinem appears to have the courage, to me anyway, to say what many in the media are not doing--that is to question the issue of race. They constantly play on Hillary and her possible use of the gender card, but they don't question Obama's implicit/veiled use of race. He may not say it explicitly, but in his speeches the allusion of "...and they say this day will never come..." suggests the issue of race is there.
Steinem also posits that if Obama was a female of the same charm, speaking qualities etc... but lacking in extensive experience and qualifications, the female Obama could never be riding as high as the male Obama.
Perhaps, there are many who still will not vote for a woman president (and even women are not willing to vote for another woman). And in Obama, people are seeing a chance for redemption of sort for the history of slavery. If this is so, it's tragic because these are difficulty times for world. We need to assess our leaders based on more than feel-good, "inspirational" speeches. Let us discuss the issues, the qualifications, the experience.
My view is that Obama, so far, really doesn't have any faults that would disqualify, or would not make him a good leader. Obama's story IS an inspirational one, but so are a lot of the other candidates (Huckabee, Edwards, Richardson, H. Clinton, etc...).
However, we need to go beyond the "inspiration headlines. Isn't it telling when the Republicans like McCain plays up their experience. And yet, the Democrats are find experience and "over-qualified resumes" detestable?
What will happen in the general election is that the question and debate over experience will be the highlight. And where will the democrats be if we find experience detestable now?
Mr. Yellen,
We all have our own biases. Although you do not explicitly state it, you sound like you support Ms. Clinton. The experience argument is the main one that Clinton uses, and the latest "all--talk
You describe Mr. Bloomberg as being "arrogant, willful, and secretive"
Ms. Clinton is not very electable in the general election. We may very well have a repeat of 2000, with an extremely narrow election.
I support Mr. Obama, but any other Dem candidate is acceptable - with the BIG exception of Ms. Clinton. I refuse to vote for her. Bush-Clint
Frankly, I prefer Mr. Huckabee over Ms. Clinton. At least Mr. Huckabee doesn't appear to be trying to sell himself off as something he isn't in order to get votes.
I now vote independently because Dems constantly refuse success... Please allow me to clarify. Bush is awful. A dramatic sea change is needed. An exciting candidate comes along, specifically, one that inspires youth, meaning you could possibly hold onto power for a long time. Aren't you excited? NOPE. Now you've gotta tear him down too. So let me get this right. You want your team to win ONLY if YOUR choice wins. That's sad. And hypocritical. It's disgusting and describes the lack of loyalty and backbone that Repubicans have used against you to win time and again.
What makes me happy about all the Democratic frontrunners is that each of them seems settled enough inside as a person to sit still and read something longer than a page before he or she has to get up and ride a bike or eat a pretzel.
Looks like the next four years we get to reap the whilrwind of debt and war generated by the Bush cabal for the last eight. Lucky for us, our eventual nominee and election victor might just have an attention span of sufficient length to study proposed solutions and then make a reasonable decision.
We're going to need somebody like that, somebody studious and smart, because like Bette Davis said, it's going to be a bumpy ride-- and that's assuming the wheels don't fall off.
"I know he's got the gas, but I am still not sure that he can drive, and without that knowledge, I am unprepared to become a passenger in his vehicle."
I'm with you wholeheartedly. Unfortunately there's a lot of Kool-Aid going around.
Somebody, quick! Break out the coffee.
Obama's mentor in the senate was Joe Leiberman, what kind of change do you really expect will happen? Feel good slogans?
Thank God someone is finally questioning this rush to Obama. Now I'm going to say something that people are going to hate. If Obama was white, based on his work experience,he'd NEVER be considered for President. He would run behind Dennis Kucinich. He gets to use his race as a symbol of change when Clinton can not use her gender. When she's tried she been ridiculed for it.
Check out Gloria Steinem in the NYTimes http://www
Good article. Caution should always be advised.
Does everyone talk about Corporatisms, Right wing attack machines, Media whores/bia
Do you really think that all the mistakes made by past generations were because they were dumb and your candidate really is the one in a million guy over the last 200 years that is truly genuine?
All evil only spills in the direction of the Republicans? Their words always have double meaning and multiple motives but not your candidate? "Never! .. he believes what he says... he told me so!"
See you in 20 years.....
OK, so this is going to be the new charge against Obama, that he is shallow. That he is all style and no substance. I've been following this campaign for a long time now. All I will say is that everybody leveling this charge better do their homework. As has been mentioned before, all of his policy proposals can be found on his website. They are as detailed as those of any candidate.
This assumption that he is not a "details guy" is really starting to annoy me. Have any of the people saying this actually listened to his speeches? I'm not just talking about the victory speech in Iowa. He takes questions from voters all of the time, and answers questions in great detail.
I really hope that people educate themselves a little more before it's time to cast a ballot. It sounds as if people are just swallowing the Clinton talking points.
Mr. Yellen,
Are you aware that your piece is based on a misquote? An admission/
As blasphemous as this is going to sound, I'd kind of like to see the Democrats make an almost total sweep of Congress - and a Republican win the White House. Besides the constant pull and tug between the two branches that inevitably produces a better governance than a rubber stamp Congress, a dichotomy like that would at long, long last let us know what we've all been wondering about since last November: are the Democrats the gutless enablers they appear to be, or is it really just about the "numbers," as they've been telling us all along. Having an absolute Democratic majority in Congress and an absolute lunatic in the White House is the only way we can ever know for sure where the Democrats really stand. If they still continue to cave in to every Republican demand, then we'll know: the two party system is truly dead. And it'll be up to the rest of us to figure out a way to get rid of the filthy bathwater without chucking the baby along with it.
Small note to writer: there's no apostrophe in highfalutin.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
