Posted by
Scatbug on Wednesday, April 30, 2008 9:39:13 PM
It's been great sport over the past few weeks watching the "Obama's Got Judgment" myth explode and form a noticeable mushroom cloud over the Illinois Senator's cranium. Or perhaps that's a question mark-shaped cloud. Regardless, it's become glaringly obvious that in choosing associates, friends, and mentors, Barack Obama's judgment falls somewhere short of presidential. (And by that I mean, high school class presidential.)
But of course Obama has huge deficiencies in other areas as well, such as -- basically enough -- political thought. We hear often, even from conservative pundits, that Obama has a super-duper keen intellect and is the most intelligent presidential candidate since governments communicated via cuneiform. I've often wondered where these notions came from. Going back to when I first began reading up on the nation's Savior in 2006, I can find nothing which supports this image of him. Conversely, when studying his speeches and writings, I have forever been overwhelmed at their lack of depth, insight, and...yep...intelligence.
The best example I have that demonstrates this point comes from a
puff piece the Chicago Sun Times ran in October 2006. The article highlighted Obama's deep thoughts on deep things as expressed in his blockbuster book,
The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream. I have reproduced highlights from the article below. I want to stress that these are Senator Obama's own words and thoughts. They are not, I repeat NOT, the scribblings of a college sophomore showing the effects of 27 bong hits. Although I won't rule out the possibility that they were written with Jimi Hendrix and Crosby Stills & Nash playing on the hi-fi. Anyway...Here is the product of our Republic's most intelligent mind:
On democracy and values:
"In a country as diverse as ours, there will always be passionate arguments about how our democracy works. But our democracy might work a bit better if we recognized that all of us possess values that are worthy of respect: if liberals at least acknowledged that the recreational hunter feels the same way about his gun as they feel about their library books, and if the conservatives recognized that most women feel as protective of their right to reproductive freedom as evangelicals do of their right to worship."
[Because we all know that hunters don't read, and libraries are an explicit part of the Bill of Rights.]
On his guiding principle:
"I find myself returning again and again to my mother's simple principle -- 'How would that make you feel?' -- as a guidepost for my politics. It's not a question we ask ourselves enough, I think; as a country, we seem to be suffering from an empathy deficit.
"We wouldn't tolerate schools that don't teach, that are chronically underfunded and understaffed and underinspired, if we thought that the children in them were like our children. . . . And it's safe to assume that those in power would think longer and harder about launching a war if they envisioned their own sons and daughters in harm's way."
[An empathy deficit. You mean we're buying that from the Chinese too?]
On political ideology:
"I reject a politics that is based solely on racial identity, gender identity, sexual orientation, or victimhood generally. I think much of what ails the inner city involves a breakdown in culture that will not be cured by money alone, and that our values and spiritual life matter at least as much as our GDP."
[Well, it seems the inner city best get moving on changing its culture. No?]
On phony politicians:
"Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith -- such as the politician who shows up at a black church around election time and claps (off rhythm) to the gospel choir or sprinkles in a few biblical citations to spice up a thoroughly dry policy speech."
[Back in '06 I had a long chuckle imagining Bill Clinton's reaction upon first reading it. But now, events of the past few days have given it a whole new meaning. Politicians showing up at a black church and clapping off rhythm to the gospel choir. Uh, Reverend Wright? Care to add something here?]
On foreign policy:
"Why invade Iraq and not North Korea or Burma? Why intervene in Bosnia and not Darfur? Are our goals in Iran regime change, the dismantling of all Iranian nuclear capability, the prevention of nuclear proliferation, or all three? . . . Perhaps someone in the White House has clear answers to these questions. But our allies -- and for that matter our enemies -- certainly don't know what those answers are. More important, neither do the American people."
[Burma?!? Jeepers. And thus the Obama Doctrine: "Always let our enemies know what we're doing. It's only polite."]
On many Americans' yearning for spiritual connection:
"They want a sense of purpose, a narrative arc to their lives, something that will relieve a chronic loneliness or lift them above the exhausting, relentless toll of daily life. They need an assurance that somebody out there cares about them, is listening to them -- that they are not just destined to travel down a long highway toward nothingness.
"If I have any insight into this movement toward a deepening of religious commitment, perhaps it's because it's a road I have traveled."
[The "exhausting, relentless toll of daily life". The "long highway to nothingness". I think Michelle may have written this one.]