Political Commentary

A Hot House Plant

7 Comments

That’s what I called Barack Obama yesterday. Here are more thoughts on that subject.

He’s not that savvy. He’s lucky — which, as they say, ain’t nothin’. But he’s like a guy who got called up for the World Series after winning the high school championship: now, suddenly, the fields are bigger, the crowds are enormous and more discerning, and the other team is accomplished, professional and comes to beat your brains in — not to provide an exhibition in good sportsmanship.

Obama must react to this drastic change, but he is not as smooth as advertised, he simply does not have a well of experience to draw on, and, importantly, the Democrat nomination campaign did not prepare him. He has always had very obvious weaknesses, but the Democrat candidates could not exploit them because their nomination cannot be won without appealing to a hard-Left base which is night-and-day different from the vast majority of the country. They play a hardcore identity politics and they would crucify anyone who so much as hinted that a young, black community organizer with movement-activist (i.e., terrorist) friends and a record of protecting a woman’s right to choose even into the 4th trimester was not an ideal candidate.

Hillary, who would otherwise have been acceptable to the base, could not exploit Obama’s biggest vulnerabilities. She couldn’t go after him on terrorism because of the Clinton record of feckless counterterrorism and the pardons of Weather Underground and FALN terrorists (FWIW, that was my point in this piece). And she couldn’t go after him on his rise from the seamy world of Chicago politics because of, well, see 1992-2000. But realize that, even with her hands tied behind her back in this way, Hillary would still have beaten him had the race gone on another month or so.

The Dems have been in denial for months about how weak their candidate is. The only thing propping him up has been the favorable environment for their party. But I think a new wind blew in from Alaska a week and a half ago.

7 thoughts on “A Hot House Plant”

  1. This just proves how conniving the Republicans are. Mere mortals like I would never have thought that faking outrage at Jack Ryan actually wanting to have sex with Seven-of-Nine would have knocked Hillary! out of the Presidential race years later, but clearly deeper thinkers are at work. What fabulously all-knowing mind could have deliberately set this course in motion? Does even Rove report to a mastermind we are unaware of?

    Such a vast conspiracy of genius seems unlikely, I know, but I have eliminated the possibility that the outrage over Jack Ryan actually wanting to have sex with Seven-of-Nine being “real” outrage using the powers of sheer common sense. I mean really now, who could object to that? You know every single person involved in that affair was thinking “Damn, I wish I could get a piece of that.” Even the chicks were thinking that.

  4. Anon, if you want to sway libertarians you’re going to need better opinion pieces than TNR. Sure, they talk about “civil liberties”, but (to paraphrase the great Inigo Montoya) while they keep using that word, I don’t think it means what they think it means.

    For instance, I think one of my primary civil liberties is to not have the Constitution amended without the consent of the governed. I’m also a fan of the 2nd Amendment. The Left has historically been very hostile to these civil liberties.

  6. I actually once voted for McCain

    Holy cats, that’s the worst thing anyone’s said about McCain this year!

  7. No, anon. That has nothing to do with libertarianism. Honest and integrity are important to everyone; it’s not a libertarian issue. Trying to suggest it is just to win us over to your candidates is an insult to our intelligence. Do you think we’re gullible?

    Obviously not, since we haven’t fallen under Obama’s spell.

    But changing the subject won’t help you. YOU were the one who brought up the TNR article and “civil liberties.” Some McCain ad on education has nothing to do with that at all. If you can’t defend a position for even one post in a blog conversation, do you really think you’re going to sway a single person here (or anywhere)? Your ability to persuade and argue is pathetic and weak. You should probably just give up for this election (you don’t have time to learn how before November), but perhaps if you buckled down with some Socrates or Aristotle you’ll be able to make some headway in 2010.

Comments are closed.