-
My Rahm Reunion
May 16, 2013 | 16 comments
-
The Left Hates Us
May 9, 2013 | 143 comments
-
Such a Dynamic Duo
May 2, 2013 | 49 comments
-
The Continuing Crisis
May 1, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Calvin Coolidge: His Times Are Our Times
April 26, 2013 | 22 comments
The Current Crisis
Suddenly Last Summers
In his economic appointees, President-elect Obama has perhaps faced up to a government-created mess.
WASHINGTON — There is a condign symmetry about this financial crisis. A government-induced crisis is getting a government-insured resolution. The excesses of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are being mopped up by huge federal spending made all the more massive by all the reckless endeavors of the politicians, the regulators, and the financiers who frivoled with the intemperance of Freddie and Fannie. Now President-elect Barack Obama has perhaps faced up to the mess. He has not shied away from bringing former Secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers onto his economic team as head of his National Economic Council.
Mr. Summers was a proper critic of Freddie and Fannie, having noted this past summer that “The illusions that the companies were doing virtuous work made it impossible to build a political case for serious regulation.” This virtuous work was extending mortgages to those who could not afford those mortgages. The toxic mortgages were then bundled in with healthy mortgages and sold around the world by Wall Street geniuses like some enormous chain letter whose day of reckoning came some months ago.
The endeavor was a fantasy that had to end badly and so it has. Yet at a certain level the constituent elements of the Democratic Party are given to fantasy and excess. Consider the most vocal critics of Mr. Summers. They are not bankers or economists. They are feminists, often feminist scientists, who forced him out of the presidency of Harvard for his recognition that women of genius are not as plentiful as men of genius in the sciences and math. Now what he cited was a fact. Mr. Summers drew no invidious conclusions and offered no program that would limit the number of lady scientists. He just noted the data in a forum supposedly open to free discourse. Kaboom — the women of the fevered brow drove him from office. Remind me not to read a book aloud in Harvard Yard.
Now, in this time of economic crisis, the women of the fevered brow attempted to keep Mr. Summers out of the Obama government despite his demonstrated economic acumen — and remember these feminists claim to be a force for justice and fairness. How long do they want to ban a man like Mr. Summers from public life?
It was rumored that Mr. Obama wanted Mr. Summers back as head of Treasury. Perhaps the angry feminists kept Mr. Summers out of his old office. The man the President-elect has announced as his secretary of treasury, Timothy Geithner, is probably a suitable replacement. The economic team Mr. Obama is assembling strikes me as pretty good, but the way it was assembled is a bit worrisome. Are all the fanatics in the Democratic Party going to be able to get a hearing with this president? He is going to have to maintain both feet on the ground in the months ahead. The delusional malcontents that a Democratic presidential candidate courts in an election can cause a Democratic administration grave problems.
Now that brings to mind the visuals that the President-elect is using when he addresses the American people. He appears enhaloed by American flags, not one or two but a whole ring of flags. Moreover, he speaks from a lectern proclaiming “Office of the President-Elect.” In point of fact, there is no Office of the President-Elect, and Mr. Obama is not even in an office. He is on a stage. Arguably, a stage has been his office during much of his public life, given the fact that he is America’s first motivational speaker to become president. Actually, I doubt that this is the point Mr. Obama is trying to make. He is engaging in theater. Yet this dramatic setting is implausible. According to statute, he will not actually be president-elect until the Electoral College meets on the Monday after the second Wednesday of December to elect him according to the votes cast on November 4.
My advice to our incoming president is to avoid the implausible stage effects. There is plenty of drama out there, for instance a real war and a real economic crisis. Now he has appointed former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to be chairman of a new presidential advisory board to oversee our emergence from this economic mess. Mr. Volcker is one of the great figures of his generation, known for slaying inflation in the early 1980s and a dozen other contributions to the commonweal. It is a sign that our first motivational speaker might actually know what he is talking about — when he is talking seriously.
About the Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. is the founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator. He is the author of The Death of Liberalism, published by Thomas Nelson Inc. His previous books include the New York Times bestseller Boy Clinton: the Political Biography; The Impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton; The Liberal Crack-Up; The Conservative Crack-Up; Public Nuisances; The Future that Doesn’t Work: Social Democracy’s Failure in Britain; Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House; The Clinton Crack-Up; and After the Hangover: The Conservatives’ Road to Recovery.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (33) | Leave a comment
More Articles by R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
More Articles From The Current Crisis
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/11/26/suddenly-last-summers
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Consternated Conferences
- Ailes: A Voice for the Silent Majority
- The Welfarians
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
feminst scientists?| 11.27.08 @ 1:07AM
You don't know what you are talking about. Larry Summers was fired by the Harvard Corporation after Larry fired Dean Bill Kirby in a fit of pique with checking with the Fellows (Trustees.) The "women in science" was only one of Larry's many missteps as President. It was an especially stupid statement considering that Lisa Randall is our finest physicist, and the math prize was won by women for three years in a row. Larry's unfunded $50 billion plan to expand in Allston didn't help either, in fact my faculty is now $200 million in the hole because of it. Check your facts before spewing conventional wisdom as fact.
Bob| 11.27.08 @ 9:30AM
First of all, both parties play politics in selecting cabinet officers and personnel. It is "politics", you know. Secondly, berating the communications ability of Obama is odd when one of the glaring weaknesses of our current President is his communications ability.
Like Colin Powell and Bill Weld, I'm one of those "Obamacons". I've believed from the beginning, after studying Obama, reading his books, looking at his actions, etc., that he would govern to the center. He's off to a good start, and I hope he continues in this direction.
Regarding Summers, he is in the right position -- he should not have been Treasury secretary. Summers is not a great manager and does not communicate well with the public. However, he is the only macro-economic theorist I know that correctly predicted the housing bubble. Treasury secretary is a management and communications position, not a position that sets policy. Having people like Summers and Volcker directly communicating with Obama is the right organization. They are being used for their strengths, not their weaknesses.
You are right that Obama is not President yet. However, George Bush has already left the office for all intents and purposes and Obama is showing the only leadership right now. Where is the conservative leadership that is developing solutions for our ailing economy along conservative principles? Who is communicating those solutions? Who is being consulted to come up with the answers?
Conservatives as a group are too involved with ideological hatred and not involved enough with leadership and solutions. They are doing exactly the wrong thing right now in berating Obama. They should be showing true leadership. And please, no excuses.
The ascension of people like Palin who lack significant knowledge, curiosity, English skills, have a dislike for the "real Americans" who live in cities, make the Republican party, and especially conservatives, less relevant. If you continue down that path, conservatives will be out of power for decades just as you're seeing in Great Britain.
Brad | 11.27.08 @ 11:22AM
As for comment number one, what Summers said about male versus female top level math and science people is just a fact..perhaps an inconvenient fact, but a fact nonetheless, no matter that a couple of women have won prizes recently. Summers probably inadvertently promoted them to winners through his telling the politically incorrect truth.
As to the second comment. Obama hasn't done anything or said anything that shows leadership or understanding or consistency on anything. HIs little office sign and fake seal of the non-president is a joke. The way he enters the press conference room is as if to say, "Don't worry, I....am here." And then he says a few things that are meaningless and the left cheers, "look at that he showed up and looked and sounded confident." You like shows? I don't care for them too much. "Ideological hatred," hatred, no, if you mean we would rather be free than bound to the government stake, you would be correct. Try a little more precision with your attacks otherwise it spatters back on you. And finally the gratuitous assault on Governor Palin shows a lack of understanding that can be traced back to a childhood immersed in the idea that we are entitled to someone elses things and if we have to take away their freedom as well, well, let's have at it. Saying that "People like Palin who lack significant knowledge" is the thief saying that the judge is stupid to sentence him for the crime. Now, who is dumb? And , by the way, who is the criminal?
Roscoe Mendago| 11.27.08 @ 12:42PM
Verbal Technician---
Obama is a technician of speech, a verbal octopus. He'll be able to wiggle out of most crisis until it's shown, as lawrence Eagleburger put it, he's a charlatan. Time is going to be his enemy, the more of it that passes the more of his inadequacy will be revealed. No need for specifics, his lack of substance will all too obvious soon enough, time is oh so revealing.
David Shoup| 11.27.08 @ 12:56PM
As a computer programmer, I have had several lady colleagues. They were either among the very best, with precise, logical, and clear thinking patterns, or they were among the worst. No judgment, just my observation.
Bob| 11.27.08 @ 1:18PM
Brad, your comments lack any substance or precision. You attack Obama on style as a child would get into a fight on a schoolyard. And yes, with words like socialist, marxist, Alinskyite, etc., it is a clear sign of "ideological hatred". To accuse Palin of a lack of knowledge is clearly appropriate given her interviews by Gibson and Couric. Perhaps you'd agree with here that there is privacy right found in the Constitution as she said in the Biden debate.
Anyone who would consider Palin knowledgeable, must lack significant knowledge as there is no evidence to the contrary. Your analogy to judges makes little sense given the evidence.
By the way, as are most libertarian leaning Republicans, I do not believe the government owes me anything. The fact that you would even raise that as an issue shows both your bias and extremism. It's a little like Joseph McCarthy saying that anyone who disagrees with him must be a communist.
As I've said in previous posts, I made my own way through this life both through education, through fighting for my country, and through business success. I've worked for large corporations and I've started my own businesses. All I want is for the Republican Party to nominate smart, successful people who have done very well in school, done very well in life, and are examples for our children. Obama, even though he has left leaning ideas, is an excellent role model for our children. McCain cheated on his wife and Palin became pregnant before marriage which was duplicated by her child. Great examples, right?
marky | 11.27.08 @ 3:13PM
you know and i know that no one knows how an obama presidency will affect
americans 4, 8 or 20 years later. i do know that a democratic administration
is definitely a change from a republican administration.
all i can do, just like i did when bush was elected then reelected, is hope
that they will make the decisions to help americans pursue their dreams in a
safe world.
i don't like bush but i never hoped or predicted he would wreck america and
endanger our freedoms (and i am not saying he did either). why is it that so
many predict or hope obama screws up? don't you want america to succeed
regardless of who the president is?
i certainly believe no president regardless of party affiliation truly wants
to hurt any american rich or poor.
marky | 11.27.08 @ 3:14PM
you know and i know that no one knows how an obama presidency will affect americans 4, 8 or 20 years later. i do know that a democratic administration is definitely a change from a republican administration.
all i can do, just like i did when bush was elected then reelected, is hope that they will make the decisions to help americans pursue their dreams in a safe world.
i don't like bush but i never hoped or predicted he would wreck america and endanger our freedoms (and i am not saying he did either). why is it that so many predict or hope obama screws up? don't you want america to succeed regardless of who the president is?
i certainly believe no president regardless of party affiliation truly wants to hurt any american rich or poor.
Steve| 11.28.08 @ 7:33AM
Re: *Obamacon*
* ...words like socialist, marxist, Alinskyite, etc., it is a clear sign of "ideological hatred".* Jeez, Bob, if someone is a follower of Saul Alinsky and is referred to as such, then by definition it is deemed ideological hatred? The old leftie trick of limiting acurate speech is still in the arsenal, eh?
As for the mental giant, Sarah Palin-- she seems to be a particular sore point with elitist types; the same types who had no problem pulling the lever for a plagiarizing, ignorant, stumbling buffoon named Biden. Love the consistency there.
*It's a little like Joseph McCarthy saying that anyone who disagrees with him must be a communist.* Of course, no lefty diatribe is complete without the obligatory reference to Joe McCarthy. Glad to see you have an original playbook, Bob. Can't we leave the noble McCarthy in peace?
*All I want is for the Republican Party to nominate smart, successful people who have done very well in school, done very well in life, and are examples for our children.*
Pretty stiff list for mere politicos, Bob. Might I suggest a lowering of standards? Perhaps not all the way down to our present/historical level of drunks, fools, senescents, crackpots, corrupt thugs, and criminals that make up the politcal class (especially in Chicago), but the idea that the best and brightest go into politics is evidence of an overweening naivete that leads to a sadly misplaced faith in "government that works". Also naive is your supposition that Obama fits your list of requirements. Might I suggest that judgement be withheld for a while on a mere community organizer and urban political hack? Perhaps in the fullness of time he will meet your criteria, but it is far to early to declare Obama successful at this juncture. Right now he reminds me of another "smart", "successful", "example for our children": the worst president of the 20th century-- the celebrated brother of Billy, the peanut farmer from Plains, the one, the only: Jimmuh Cahtuh.
Mickey | 11.28.08 @ 8:12AM
Bob,
While I agree with you on electing smart people, what is the criterion? Rush Limbaugh doesn't have a college education; is he smart?
Also, your deciding who is virtuous seems a bit of a stretch. Name a President who hasn't had something in his closet: Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, even Carter lusted in his heart and has some thing for terrorists. Where will we find this paragon of virtue? I don't think it works that way. I think you have solid principles and you stick by them. I would rather have a Palin with conservative principles than a smooth talker with a good education and skewed world view. Hey, that's just me, but what do I know I just went to a state university on a 7/11 job scholarship.
Bob| 11.28.08 @ 10:08AM
Steve -- There is no clear evidence that Obama is a direct follower of Alinsky. Have you ever read Alinsky's principles? If so, they are executed far more effectively by Rush Limbaugh than by Obama, who I see much more as a pragmatic politician than an ideologue.
Regarding Palin and Biden, I try to be careful NOT to call Palin "stupid", but un-knowledgeable. I do think that Palin does show strong signs of intelligence, but that alone does not suffice. One also must have knowledge. Intelligence is a function of both. It bothers me to no end that she has no intellectual curiosity to study things like the Constitution, the Supreme Court, international relations, etc. Biden is weak, there is no argument there. However, he does have a wealth of knowledge and understands history much better. I was initially impressed with Palin until she was asked questions rather than reading scripts or using talking points. If she is intelligent, she will take the next two years and learn something about our country. If she is not, she won't. But this time around, it was a huge mistake.
Regarding McCarty -- yesterday I watched the movie "Good Night and Good Luck". It was interesting how the rhetoric and methods used by McCarty were so close to those used by so-cons on this blog. By the way, the left extremists seem to use the same method -- I think this is used by all extremists. I'm not interested in reforming the big government Democrat party, however, so there is no reason to comment on them.
And no, I don't think Limbaugh is remotely intelligent. He is great entertainer, but his facts are so wrong that it drives me crazy -- especially when it comes to the economy. This is what comes from ideologues who have no formal education. The fact that people actually believe what he says is true only shows their lack of clarity and knowledge. As someone said here, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.
Regarding Carter, he was certainly very smart, but was not a manager in any sense of the word. Instead of putting forth principles and then delegating responsibilities, he micro-managed. We knew this from his tenure as Governor and, by the way, I did not vote for him.
Obama is both bright AND a good manager. He ran his campaign flawlessly, he did his homework, he believed in strategy, and had the common sense to run to the left in the primaries and to the center in the general. McCain has always been an individual, a maverick, and not a team player. That is not a good mix for President. That's why I supported Romney this time -- he exuded most all of the personal attributes I believe in. I'm also intrigued by Jindal and will watch him closely over the next few years.
Yes, we will have to see how Obama governs. My belief is that he is a smart guy who wants to win and has the communication and analytical skills to do so. That's why he will probably govern to the center -- which is exactly where I think a President should be. If I am wrong, we will find out. But I've done my homework on him, reading his books, looking at his speeches dating back to the early 90's, watching how he ran his elections, watching his campaign, etc.
Mickey, we have over 300 million people in the United States -- so I would think that there might be a few that could emerge to my high standards. I value intellect and reason far more than conservative principles. Any good President will govern to the center. I'd rather they governed to the center right than center left, but you must vote on what you are offered. You really don't know Palin's principles -- especially if you have looked at what we do know of her. She governed more as a libertarian in Alaska than a social conservative. We have no idea what she embraces concerning economic principles, foreign relations, judicial reasoning, etc., because she proved she had little knowledge about any of those things. About the only thing you know is that she kept Trig. That's just not enough to say she has conservative principles.
Nothing was given to me and I grew up poor, but I put myself through a first class university and then received a graduate degree at Harvard. Like you, I know what it's like to go to school during the day and work at night. I'm proof that Ivy League schools are not just for the rich. I was the first in my family to go to college so there was no legacy admission in effect.
So I will keep my high standards. We had a good choice, and his name was Romney and I gave to his campaign. When the time came for my state to vote, Romney was not on the ballot and I voted for Paul. I couldn't bring myself to vote for McCain who not only did not do well in school, he graduated near the bottom of his class.
Ludwog Sylow| 11.28.08 @ 12:22PM
"It was an especially stupid statement considering that Lisa Randall is our finest physicist, and the math prize was won by women for three years in a row." Is she really? Who are you, the Physics Department Chairman or Melissa Franklin, Harvard's first token female physics professor. In checking through the names of all the Putnam exam winners since 1938 I noticed only two female names. In fact, the showing by women in actual fair math competitions clearly bears out what Larry Summers said, along with decades of test score data from the National Merit Scholarship Corporation and ETS. And don't play us for fools. Academic organizations know better than anyone (perhaps even better than the defunct Soviet Union) how to line up their ducks in a row against anyone they dislike for ideological reasons. Summers was ridden out of Harvard on a rail. As for Lisa Randall, she works in collaboration with male graduate students and collaborators, who appear to be doing much of the hardest math for her. So don't try to play AS readers for chumps.
ruth| 11.29.08 @ 1:01AM
Watch it when liberals start to spew statistics: They are usually lies.
ruth| 11.29.08 @ 1:03AM
Bob, face it--you're a lefty. Go back to your democrats. SoCons own the republican party and there is no room for you.
Bob| 11.29.08 @ 10:22AM
Ruth, I don't expect you or other so-cons to understand analysis and reality.... Pushing moderates (i.e., fiscally conservative, socially libertarian) out of the party will cause you to lose. Even the people here at AS understand that.
ruth| 11.29.08 @ 5:09PM
Bob, I hate to have to hit you in the face with a reality pie, but we did lose the last election. Did you notice? That's what happens when RINOs like you run republican campaigns. Thanks but no thanks.
Bob| 11.30.08 @ 8:57AM
Ruth, you are again taking a view of the election that doesn't fit with the facts. This again is evidence of anti-intellectualism that you are buying into. You need to have a dispassionate analysis of the data and not a biased ideological view. The major analytical factor was the loss of people calling themselves "Republican". Democrats gained significant members and Republicans lost more voters (as a percentage of population) than any time in recent history. This is most a repudiation of ideology. Becoming more social conservative will only make this worse, not better. There is no valid argument you can make to say that the people who abandoned the Republican party to become independents would be swayed to come back by a stricter ideology. Secondly, polls showed that the primary reason people outside of the party did not vote for McCain was Palin, followed closely by Bush. Palin was surely a representative of the extreme right as you have so aptly proven. Again, this hurt the party and did not help it. There is no rational, logical argument you can make that is consistent with the statistical analysis that what the party needs to do is forget about moderates and libertarian leaning Republicans. This is a clear example of belief over reason.
Kevin| 11.30.08 @ 10:06AM
Mr. Tyrell's analysis of Obama is balanced. I was listening to Mr. Limbaugh this past week and he criticized Mr. Obama for saying he is only the visionary who will appoint others to implement his policies. That's exactly what Mr. Reagan did - he was "The Great Communicator" and also "The Great Delagator." The difference is that Mr. Reagan, for decades, thought through and wrote about all major issues: communism, democracy, economics, defense, etc. After giving his concession speech at the Republican Convention in 1976, he admitted to a colleague that he recognized he wasn't quite ready for the job, and he went about preparing himself, thinking and writing. Obama has done nothing to prepare himself and his writings are limited to two memoirs. Reagan was a serious and prepared thinker, despite what the media portrays him to have been. Obama is truly an empty suit. His appointments demonstrate this. Emanuel and Hillary? Mr. Obama is surrendering to those he defeated. I think the country benefits, not because I agree with their political tendencies, but because experienced pols are needed to clean up the current messes, contributed in large part to Republicans who punted their golden opportunities.
ruth| 11.30.08 @ 3:49PM
Bob, I'm results driven, and you can see the results of your RINO candidate and his RINO campaign. Bring on victory, bring on the Conservatives!
Alan Brooks| 11.30.08 @ 9:17PM
i dont trust ANYBODY except Reagan-- let's clone him; cloning may not be ethical but we'll do it this once :)
Women can do math & science, but not as many of them can. Was Newton female? Galileo? Einstein? Fermi?
Alan Brooks| 11.30.08 @ 9:21PM
Copernicus, Kepler,Planck, Heisenberg...
ruth| 11.30.08 @ 9:24PM
Alan, you troglodyte, you sexist pig, how could you? Here I thought you were a modern man in touch with your feminine side. Oh, the humanity.
Theresa| 12.1.08 @ 6:05AM
These blogs crack me up!!! Let the chips fall where they will. In the end we will all know what side of the aisle mr. Prez Elect falls on. He may be able to put on a snobbish attitude during the campaign but that won't work in the world or on the economic stage.
I pray that the next four years are great -- I would be a fool to pray for anything else. Do I think that is going to happen. If Prez Elect does keep his promises made on the trail - no! If he backs on his promise - yes (looks like he's doing that now) - will the libs be happy about that - I don't think so
Palin 2012
CarlH| 12.1.08 @ 2:17PM
Bob says he researched Obama's history and writings and came to the conclusion that he would govern from the center, yet everything from his history, and I mean everything, points to the fact that he is a leftist. What book did you read or senate vote did you find Bob that made you think Obama was not a leftist? What association did Obama have, from his church to his leftist friends, that pointed you to think he is a moderate? Your analysis of Obama was either very flawed or you are not telling the truth. My bet is that you are not telling the truth. You know that Obama is a leftist and that is why you voted for him, and you are no republican. Stop pretending to have voted for Obama for any other reason than why you voted for him, because your words don't match reality.
Your standards about doing well in school also fall short. Biden was at the bottom of his class and his facts were 100% wrong in the debate with Palin. He sounded good to the unintelligent, but everything he said was a lie. Of course, he is not known for his honesty (he was almost kicked out of law school for his dishonesty).
I would like to also point out that you are not a very good judge of intelligence if you think Rush is not smart. The guy is very smart (he comes from a family of very intelligent peolple with law degrees, etc.), and most of what he says is 100% correct. He knows conservative politics and is very keen at finding angles and things that nobody else seems to think of.
CarlH| 12.1.08 @ 2:22PM
One more commet. Obama was all leftist during the campaign, talking about wealth redistribution, tax the rich, lots of government spending, etc. Of course, ole Bob saw through all of that and concluded that he was really a moderate. LOL. I will buy that Bob when I buy the moon is made of cheese.
Bob| 12.1.08 @ 3:39PM
Carl, I see you've swallowed the Limbaugh KoolAid. Limbaugh does not get facts correct and, in fact, misuses many of the numbers he mentions. He is an entertainer and not an analyst. Intellect requires both intelligence and knowledge about both facts and theory.
Regarding Obama, I looked at Obama's background and determined he was a hard nosed politician and not an ideologue. He won by strict Chicago politics and not because he had strong ideological beliefs. You don't understand that because you are an ideologue and not a pragmatist. He was know in Law School as consensus builder, not an ideologue. He entered community organizing not as a true believer, but as a stepping stone to a political future. The same is true of going to the highly influential Wright church. In fact, he carries with him much of the Kansas center right values of his Grandmother who raised him.
I know this is not a "messianic" picture of him, because that is not the way I see him. He is a hard nosed politician who will do what he has to do to get elected. He's a results oriented pragmatist. That's why he moved center right in the general election. If you see him as an ideologue, you don't understand who he is.
ruth| 12.2.08 @ 2:47PM
Bob, I agree with you. The 'Change' mantra was baloney from the beginning; just rank manipulation of the koolaid drinking left. Obama is a slick Chicago thug who will do anything to get what he wants, just a typical politician. Well, he's got what he wants now--let's see what he does with it.
Rick| 12.2.08 @ 7:37PM
BOB! I was just wondering the other day...WHAT ABOUT BOB? You may remember our exchange last week about the dearth of conservatives able to exploit Teaching Moments.
Once again though you are in quicksand with your condescending dismissal of Rush Limbaugh. What he has that you don't is an ability to communicate Large Truths. By descending into jargon and referencing Palin sound bytes you end up with conclusions that are Big Lies, i.e. folks with advanced degrees have a monopoly on common sense. Did you ever meet someone with more education with whom you disagreed?
Obama is showing intelligence by appearing not to make the Clinton mistake of overreaching his mandate and shocking the electorate into replacing the Democrat congress. But my contention is that the ghost of Saul Alinsky will make his debut sometime in year three of the administration.
Don't Doubt Me.
ruth| 12.2.08 @ 8:57PM
What I like about Rush is his lack of pretense: What you see is what you get. Obama, on the other hand, uses sleight of hand (enabled by our deceitful liberal media) to appeal to people. We still don't know who he is or how he will govern. But I'm betting dollars to doughnuts that Obama has not forgotten the brute power of Alinsky's tactics--they got him elected!
Rick| 12.2.08 @ 9:28PM
Thank you Ruth.
There is no way Obama will not carry his radically chic roots into the White House. I'm expecting Ayers and Dohrn being named to Blue Ribbon Commissions as well as being on the guest list (with Farrakhan) for a state dinner honoring the likes of Hugo Chavez.
ruth| 12.2.08 @ 10:29PM
If Obama thinks he can get away with it, for sure. Bob will be there.