Reply
Thu 24 Jul, 2008 06:35 am
By Maggie Gallagher
Obama has a problem: What do you do when you're a lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard law graduate who has no substantive record of accomplishments, and you are running against a war hero whom polls show that Americans overwhelmingly view as far more fit to be commander in chief?
Pose, of course.
What else can a guy like Obama do?
So the man who would be president of the United States of America flies around the world in the middle of a political campaign, enlisting the U.S. military and the Berlin Wall as free campaign commercial backdrops, to lend him the emotional weight and substance -- the aura as a commander -- that he hasn't yet earned on his own.
NBC's Andrea Mitchell was the one journalist with the courage to name what she was actually seeing happen: Obama faking even being interviewed by the press.
"Let me say something about the message management. He didn't have reporters with him, he didn't have a press pool, he didn't do a press conference," either in Afghanistan or Iraq, noted Mitchell on the air. Instead Obama manufactured "what some would call 'fake interviews,' because they are not interviews from a journalist," Mitchell went on.
Mitchell understands very well that this contrived image management is powerfully all to Obama's political advantage. He's shameless when it comes to managing his own image. "Politically it's as smart as can be," she conceded before noting the big obvious truth nobody else in the media was bothering to expose: "We've not seen a presidential candidate do this, in my recollection, ever before."
The whole Obama campaign is something we've never seen before -- at least not executed to this level of perfection with a media willing to go along because, well, so many of them want it to succeed.
Poor John McCain. He's so last-century. Still living in a world in which deeds matter, policies matter, what you would actually do with the power entrusted to you matters.
In the op ed the New York Times refused to print (which appeared in the New York Post this week instead), McCain lays out the facts in Iraq:
"Progress has been due mainly to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Sen. Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent."
Obama, he points out, still claims no political progress is being made. "Perhaps he's unaware that the U.S. embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, 'Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress,'" McCain jabs.
He jabs at an opponent who melts away from his punch.
McCain's approach is all so, well, cognitive. McCain thinks that reality is something that really exists, that has to be dealt with, instead of recognizing that we live in a Brave New World where highly paid symbolic analysts construct reality by manipulating symbols.
The left imagines they learned this from Ronald Reagan and the rise of the right: big strong guy, genial, looks good on camera -- bingo! Maybe you can't fool all the people all the time, but you can fool 51 percent every time, with the right branding and the right kind of images.
God help us when the people who think like that actually run all three branches of our government.
President Obama, if that's our future, and his team of symbolic analysts will find out soon enough there are realities out there which none of his contrivances are going to be able to help him handle.
More important, so will we.
Re: Obama Faking It
The liar, idiot, or both; Maggie Gallagher wrote:By Maggie Gallagher
Obama has a problem: What do you do when you're a lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard law graduate who has no substantive record of accomplishments, and you are running against a war hero whom polls show that Americans overwhelmingly view as far more fit to be commander in chief?
Not one poll reflects this... not one.
Re: Obama Faking It
OCCOM BILL wrote:The liar, idiot, or both; Maggie Gallagher wrote:By Maggie Gallagher
Obama has a problem: What do you do when you're a lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard law graduate who has no substantive record of accomplishments, and you are running against a war hero whom polls show that Americans overwhelmingly view as far more fit to be commander in chief?
Not one poll reflects this... not one.
Not a single poll reflects that Americans think Obama is more fit to be commander in chief... none.
Re: Obama Faking It
OCCOM BILL wrote:The liar, idiot, or both; Maggie Gallagher wrote:By Maggie Gallagher
Obama has a problem: What do you do when you're a lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard law graduate who has no substantive record of accomplishments, and you are running against a war hero whom polls show that Americans overwhelmingly view as far more fit to be commander in chief?
Not one poll reflects this... not one.
uh,
poll showing McCain is a better choice for CiC.
So I guess you'll be readressing your post?
Re: Obama Faking It
McGentrix wrote:OCCOM BILL wrote:The liar, idiot, or both; Maggie Gallagher wrote:By Maggie Gallagher
Obama has a problem: What do you do when you're a lightly accomplished one-term senator, a former state legislator from Illinois, a Harvard law graduate who has no substantive record of accomplishments, and you are running against a war hero whom polls show that Americans overwhelmingly view as far more fit to be commander in chief?
Not one poll reflects this... not one.
uh,
poll showing McCain is a better choice for CiC.
So I guess you'll be readressing your post?
I stand corrected. Most polls reflect that, and in actuality; I concur. (I read it and responded as if she were referring to the presidential duties, instead of just a portion of the responsibility.
)
I figured that was the case and is why I didn't go all C.I. on you.
Hey guys, I'm wondering if you can help me out.
I'm trying to find a website where a handful of reactionary right-wingers post convenient yet distorted articles aimed at smearing Democratic political candidates via unfounded, unsupported "facts."
Do you know of such a place?
Gargamel wrote:Hey guys, I'm wondering if you can help me out.
I'm trying to find a website where a handful of reactionary right-wingers post convenient yet distorted articles aimed at smearing Democratic political candidates via unfounded, unsupported "facts."
Do you know of such a place?
Sorry, no such place exists - you will have to make do with all of the hyper active left wing sights smearing Republicans with unfounded, unsupported "facts".
Can't verify this... but... interesting if true...
Hello everyone,
As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to "The War Zone". I wanted to share with you what happened.
He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram.
As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service.
So really he was just here to make a showing for the American's back ! home tha t he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.
I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States. I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.
If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.
In service,
CPT
Battle Captain
TF Wasatch
American Soldier
Can't you keep your crappy chain email smears of Obama confined in the cesspool of your inbox, Cj?
Cycloptichorn
Wow, only took 3 minutes for an insult to come as a result of that post.
I was surprised too that Cyclo took time away from ordering organ enhancers online to respond.
Mr Obama's view of the world is no sunnier than George Bush's:
it is equally menaced by terrorists and weapons of mass destruction and genocide and more so by global warming.
But Mr Obama promises-in fact demands-a more co-operative approach to solving such problems.
New walls threaten to divide religions, tribes and classes.
The answer, he said, attempting to sound like Kennedy and Reagan rolled into one, is to tear them down.
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=11780828&source=features_box_main
Ramafuchs wrote:Mr Obama's view of the world is no sunnier than George Bush's:
it is equally menaced by terrorists and weapons of mass destruction and genocide and more so by global warming.
But Mr Obama promises-in fact demands-a more co-operative approach to solving such problems.
New walls threaten to divide religions, tribes and classes.
The answer, he said, attempting to sound like Kennedy and Reagan rolled into one, is to tear them down.
Yes, Obama want's to level the playing field by bankrupting this republic.
H2O_MAN wrote:
Yes, Obama want's to level the playing field by bankrupting this republic.
The national debt has risen by more then half since Bush took office; and you claim Obama is the one who will bankrupt us?
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:H2O_MAN wrote:
Yes, Obama want's to level the playing field by bankrupting this republic.
The national debt has risen by more then half since Bush took office; and you claim Obama is the one who will bankrupt us?
Facts:
Obama will raise taxes sharply and kill our economy with a quickness.
He also plans to give away 100's of Billions of dollars internationally while
expanding give away programs here at home. This is a plan for disaster in
short order. Obama is very dangerous - he is nothing to laugh at.
Opinions differ.
Parochial party affliations will witheraway.
Patriotism is banal to the core.
Obama is a candidate who had exposed the AMERICAN UNFULFILLED DREAM.