|Home » Learning Curve » Red Hat Diaries » Reflections on Elections
Better Luck Next Time?
A small shiny object. A figure devoid of definition.
'Barack Obama is like a small shiny object', writes Mac Johnson. 'The easily fascinated can stare deeply into his blank sheen and see their own reflections.'
In a political campaign where most candidates will attempt to promise anything but not explicate anything Barack Hussein Obama is setting new records - he's almost a candidate that according to description doesn't even exist.
Not that it matters to his increasingly fanatic (rabid) groupies who really don't care if their new leader has a platform or not - they like to listen to his speeches.
Mac Johnson explains.
'He's a moderate. He's a third way. He's demographic fusion cuisine. He's a floor wax. He's a desert topping. He's everything you'd hoped for and whatever you need. That's the beauty of being unknown.'
'He's like that girl at the other end of the bar - perfect, unknown, perfectly unknown - and improved mightily by distance and pent up desire. Mentally you're in love and three weeks into the relationship before you even make it halfway over.'
'Then you notice her eyes and think 'which one do I look at when I speak because they don't point in the same direction! And what's with that Adam's apple?' But at that point it's too late to turn around because one of those eyes has seen you already.'
'I think that's the way a lot of folks are going to feel about their Obamaphilia after a few months of campaigning have removed the gauze filter from his carefully blurred image.'
Barack Hussein Obama won't debate. More than the two tentatively scheduled debates already scheduled. He categorically refused to debate in Wisconsin. Why?
For one: last time he debated he got his butt spanked. In a word he was 'outdebated'.
For two: he doesn't really have a lot to say in debates. They mean answering questions and questions in a debate are going to be focusing on details in one's beliefs, opinions, and - plans. And Barack Hussein Obama doesn't have much of those things.
Barack Hussein Obama prefers to give speeches. Carefully crafted 'stump' speeches. Where after the crowd's whipped up to a fever pitch he can 'let go' and ad lib a bit before the resounding finale.
Replace Barack Hussein Obama with James Brown in your mind and you get the picture.
Perhaps voters can judge Barack Hussein Obama on his track record? Ah. For there you run into the same problem. Back to Mac Johnson.
'If any of the fawning were asked to name his greatest accomplishment, could they name an accomplishment? Other than being elected to the Senate just two and a half years ago and being simultaneously black and yet likeable to white folks I mean.'
'For emphasis let's examine a list of Obama's major accomplishments so far.'
- Simultaneously black and yet likeable to white folks.
- Made the initials 'BO' cool again.
- Good oral hygiene.
'That's it. He's the Wayne Brady of politics: everything white folks had been hoping for in at least one black person, the big payoff for all that tolerance and diversity babble. That may not be the politically correct thing to say but it is an honest assessment of exactly what pent up desire is fueling Obamamania among his white liberal fan base.'
Admittedly Johnson is sticking tongue in cheek but he has a point. Barack Hussein Obama is not 'coincidentally' difficult to define - it's deliberate. If they can't pin you down you can't alienate any voter groups. Heck - he's even started playing on the terrorism card!
Today Barack Hussein Obama isn't talking as other candidates of 'bringing the troops home' but of 'redeploying' them - to Afghanistan and Pakistan. And although you'd think the people in the US - not to speak of the rest of the world - were sick and tired of war by now the campaign strategists for Barack Hussein Obama would likely tell you you're wrong. Nothing happens by chance in that campaign.
Mac Johnson continues.
'Obama's resumé and record (even just a record of firm opinions on important issues) are so thin I really believed that early media talk of his running for president was an affectionate nicety.'
Literary Truth vs Literal Truth
Johnson's also found Barack Hussein Obama's been 'dolling' his own biographical data in his much publicised books and CDs.
'Lord knows he's told his story enough: in two books, uncounted speeches and interviews and occasionally in explanations of why the story in the books seems to differ from the facts.'
'Obama was telling the 'literary' truth rather than getting bogged down in the literal truth.'
Johnson's winding up now.
'The man's Jesus and John the Baptist all rolled into one - the messiah that foretells his own coming. But what really is so inspiring about his story? He is alleged to have overcome the odds - to have succeeded in the face of oppression. But to see 'black' as a synonym for 'oppressed' is just a stereotype (and the rationale behind affirmative action laws). And we all know that stereotypes are wrong. I keep waiting for some real tale of the adversity he's faced and I have yet to hear it.'
So what are the facts behind this inspiring tale of overcoming 'oppression' - seeing as you're born into a rarified university atmosphere from the get-go?
- He overcame the oppression of being born to a well off middle class white woman and a Harvard PhD father.
- He then overcame the oppression of having to attend private schools his entire life.
- Oppression got the upper hand as he jumped from Occidental College to Columbia and Harvard Law School where he was practically lynched into the position of law review president.
- Children at his private school made fun of his name.
'The only real adversity I can find in his life is that his mother couldn't seem to stay married to the same man for much time and his father couldn't seem to marry just one woman at a time', reflects Johnson.
The Audacity of Hype
According to Johnson CNN polled readers not long ago with 'does Barack Hussein Obama's life story inspire you'. And most respondents said 'NO'.
To put it mildly Mac Johnson is not impressed.
'I could go on and on (and often do) but you get the idea. Barack Hussein Obama called his political aspirations The Audacity of Hope but really they're nothing so much as The Audacity of Hype.'
'Barack Hussein Obama is just a human Rorschach blot - a figure so devoid of definition and meaning that what his devotees see in him is more an insight into them than into him.'
The frustration at trying to define a candidate who by definition will resist all attempts to pin him down coupled with the dismay of seeing fellow human beings fall for this blatant ruse had already taken its toll.
Obama maniacs, increasingly provoked by the need to defend their undefined leader but naturally having no facts to back things up with have resorted to - you guessed it - the common variety of Internet flaming and hate campaigns.
All the while some of the more 'faithful' supporters are at last showing their concern and their doubts.
'Obamaphilia has gotten creepy. The best we Obamaphiles can do is to refrain from embarrassing ourselves', writes Joel Stein of the LA Times.
'One thing I worry about a lot if Obama is the Dem nominee is there will be a backlash against Obamamania. Actually it's already starting - probably too late to have much effect on the nomination fight but in plenty of time to affect the general election', writes Paul Krugman of the New York Times.
And Republican candidate John McCain hasn't wasted any time humiliating the neophyte senator from Illinois.
'I do not seek the presidency on the presumption I am blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save my country in its hour of need', said McCain sarcastically in a recent speech.
Whose Line is It Anyway?
Of course it would be one thing if this were only the machinations of the groupies and a behaviour discouraged by campaign headquarters. But it's not. It's all been part of the plan - a foolish plan.
'We're the ones we've been waiting for', said Barack Hussein Obama in a recent speech, in effect inviting the backlash begin.
And again: the risk is this sophomoric ruse will bring down not only Barack Hussein Obama but the Democrats as well and literally hand the election and the presidency to the neocons for the third time in a row. It's a good nine months until the elections - plenty of time for people to wake up as they must and realise what utter fools they've been. At which time they'll have but one alternative.
Paul Krugman winds things up very adequately in his short blog entry 'Hype and Glory'.
'I just have a very bad feeling about the way things are going.'
In a campaign where one of the main contenders refuses to be defined but where the smaller primaries suddenly fall like dominoes there's another concern: exactly how many of those Democrats voting in those Democrat caucuses and primaries are Democrats?
And that's where the things start turning from the bizarre to the ridiculous. For exit polls conducted by CNN and MSNBC show Hillary Rodham Clinton actually enjoys a comfortable margin over Barack Hussein Obama - amongst the Democrats. But guess who else is voting?
The Republicans have namely come out in record numbers to vote not only in their own primaries but in the Democrats' as well. And they naturally pick the candidate who represents the position closest to their own. Guess which candidate that is. You get one guess.
And here's where 'bizarre' is left behind and 'ridiculous' takes over: Barack Hussein Obama is now openly encouraging Republicans to vote in the Democrat caucuses and polls. These are people who will be voting on the Republican ticket come November - and they're given a chance to choose a candidate for the other side?
Perhaps 'ridiculous' isn't adequate either. Perhaps 'hijacking an election' is the only description that puts things in focus. One thing's certain - the neocons are behaving more relaxed and confident right now than they have in a long time. The paper tiger opponent they want looms closer and even if he wins it's no big deal - he's not going to upset the apple cart and risk his career on some silly issues. And his campaign already is starting to unravel. It'll be another walkover like 2000 and 2004.
As stated so many times before: the Democrats have this fantastic propensity for screwing things up for themselves. They shouldn't have lost the last two elections but did. They always pick the wrong candidate - they're famous for it.
Paul Krugman: Hype and Glory
Obamamania's Got All Sides Screaming
Barack Obama: The Human Rorschach Blot