Barack Obama

"Our new president is a human being, not a messiah."

|

From yesterday's invocation by Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson at the big rawk concert at the Lincoln Memorial:

"Bless us with patience and the knowledge that none of what ails us will be fixed anytime soon, and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah."…

"Please, God, keep him (Obama) safe. We know we ask too much of our presidents, and we're asking far too much of this one. We implore you, O good and great God, to keep him safe. Hold him in the palm of your hand, that he might do the work we have called him to do, that he might find joy in this impossible calling, and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity, and peace. Amen."

More here.

It is comforting, of course, to know that even his supporters view Obama not as a god but as a man (cue Jesus Christ Superstar's "I Don't Know How to Love Him"). Robinson is openly gay and so blunts some of the anger aimed at Rick "Gay Heartbreaker" Warren's delivering of the big prayer at tomorrow's inauguration. I do wonder how long Obama's left-leaning supporters will stay comfortable with the religiosity of their man in their White House.

Advertisement

NEXT: Does Anyone Really Enjoy Pete Seeger?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. People need to realize that just like Clinton and Reagan, his approval ratings will be in the toilet in 2010-2011 even if they rise later.

  2. and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah

    The fact that he even thought this needed to be said is insanely creepy. Any Obama supporter who makes fun of evangelical Christians needs to look at some of their fellow travelers and realize who they’re standing along side.

  3. “Any Obama supporter who makes fun of evangelical Christians needs to look at some of their fellow travelers and realize who they’re standing along side.”

    Paging joe. Paging joe…

  4. The most dismaying thing about the Obama adulation is that it tacitly affirms just how much the American public has intuitively bought into the idea of a powerful central government. This is a painful week for libertarians.

    In a country where individualism and liberty were regarded above all, people wouldn’t feel compelled to celebrate the arrival of a president this way, no matter how much they liked the man himself. It just wouldn’t dawn on them to respond like that. OK, so he’s an awesome guy — great. But it wouldn’t matter that much, because the presidency wouldn’t matter much.

    I know none of this is a revelation to anyone here. But it’s still striking to me. While there’s plenty of anti-adulation commentary out there, most of it is politically based: “I don’t like Obama’s politics, so I dislike the adulation.” There’s been too little criticism from the Gene Healy-esque school of thought: i.e., the problem isn’t the adulation of Obama himself, but of the presidential office.

  5. Obama’s leftist supporters aren’t bothered by religiosity; they’re bothered by theocracy, and Obama hasn’t show any tendencies in that direction.

    (The fact that the modern conservative movement is compelled to make their opponents’ ability to inspire enthusiasm appear sinister or frightening pretty much sums up the state of American politics these days.)

  6. Can’t I be a libertarian who wishes the presidency didn’t matter quite so much, be nonetheless glad that the incoming occupant of the office (at least appears to be) a more competent, reflective, and pragmatic person than his predecessor, be somewhat uncomfortable with his religiosity, and make fun of evangelical Christians?

    Yeah, I’m pretty sure that I can.

  7. “(The fact that the modern conservative movement is compelled to make their opponents’ ability to inspire enthusiasm appear sinister or frightening pretty much sums up the state of American politics these days.)”

    Does Dear Leader Obama send a thrill up your leg?

  8. Did you wear yourself out trying to reach those grapes?

  9. The fact that the modern conservative movement is compelled to make their opponents’ ability to inspire enthusiasm appear sinister or frightening

    I don’t give a shit what the “modern conservative movement” does. Quite a few of Obama’s supporters are fucking creepy hero-worshipers. Please amuse me by denying this.

  10. What, did they buy him a blimp or something?

  11. I’m just waiting for the riots to start. /sarcasm

  12. I’m going to take that as a denial. Excellent.

  13. There’s messianic hero worship. It’s not any different from that of Bush from 9/11 to Katrina, so conservatives have little room to criticize it. But libertarians can!

  14. Quite a few of (Kenneydy, Johnson’s, Nixon’s, Ford’s [ok, not Ford], Carter’s, Reagan’s, Bush’s, Clinton’s, Bush’s, Hillary’s, Palin’s, Ron Paul’s) supporters are fucking creepy hero-worshipers.

    Every politician has a wing of his supporters who are hero-worshippers. An immensely popular politician is going to have a larger body of such people than a less popular politician. He will also have a larger body of people who are enthusiastic-but-still reasonable supporters, and a larger body at every other level of enthusiasm, as well.

    I don’t think we’d be hearing so much about this if George Bush wasn’t at vegetable-hurling levels of popularity, or if John McCain was able to fill rooms larger than a Fotomat.

  15. “if John McCain was able to fill rooms larger than a Fotomat.”

    Sarah Palin can. But we still hear about it.

    Still Obama’s inauguration is a hell of a lot larger than Reagan’s or Clinton’s and is lasting three days.

  16. But libertarians can!

    Not this year, they can’t.

    I live in Massachusetts, and saw more Ron Paul signs than Obama signs.

    What, did they buy him a blimp or something?

  17. Not all libertarians were RP supporters, joe.

  18. Let me know when we have videos of children singing songs of praise for Ron Paul.

  19. Sarah Palin can. But we still hear about it.

    Actually, we heard a lot less about it after Palin was picked. They pulled the “start is fading” stuff off the air, went for a whole different angle.

    Still Obama’s inauguration is a hell of a lot larger than Reagan’s or Clinton’s and is lasting three days.

    So did Clinton’s. I was there for the big concert, speech thingy he threw. You could tell they used stock footage of the Lincoln Memorial on TV, because you couldn’t see the monitors and speakers.

  20. Not all libertarians were RP supporters, joe.

    And not all Democrats are Barack Obama supporters.

    Nonetheless, there is a subset of each population that has gone absolutely gaa-gaa over them.

  21. Episiarch | January 19, 2009, 12:12pm | #

    I’m going to take that as a denial. Excellent.

    joe | January 19, 2009, 12:14pm | #

    Quite a few of (Kenneydy, Johnson’s, Nixon’s, Ford’s [ok, not Ford], Carter’s, Reagan’s, Bush’s, Clinton’s, Bush’s, Hillary’s, Palin’s, Ron Paul’s) supporters are fucking creepy hero-worshipers.

    Every politician has a wing of his supporters who are hero-worshippers. An immensely popular politician is going to have a larger body of such people than a less popular politician. He will also have a larger body of people who are enthusiastic-but-still reasonable supporters, and a larger body at every other level of enthusiasm, as well.

    FAIL.

  22. I live in Massachusetts, and saw more Ron Paul signs than Obama signs.

    For real? Even after the primary?

  23. No, not after the primary. While Paul was still running.

  24. FAIL.

    It’s so cute that you think that saying this makes it true.

  25. The blimp part was funny.

  26. Not a messiah? WE WUZ ROBBED!

  27. No, it’s the fact you wrote “I’ll take that as a denial” of something I was agreeing with that makes your comment so much FAIL.

  28. Didn’t Hillary win Mass though?

  29. Quite a few of Obama’s supporters are fucking creepy hero-worshipers. Please amuse me by denying this.

    snip

    Every politician has a wing of his supporters who are hero-worshippers.

  30. Didn’t Hillary win Mass though?

    Oh, no, that’s unpossible. Democrats think Obama is the messiah. So how could he lose a Democratic primary?

  31. joe,

    Just for grins, show me the artwork depicting the candidate of your choice naked riding a unicorn at the moment of his selection by the party. I’ll even spot you some points by saying find a similar artwork. I’ll take any whacked-out naked mythic poses from supporters.

    Also, I question your assertion that anybody got that excited about Carter. He just wasn’t that exciting on any level.

  32. I can stop paying my mortgage and gas bills tomorrow!

  33. T,

    Here’s a picture of George Bush made up a whole bunch of little pictures of Jesus.

    http://mattstone.blogs.com/photos/christian_art_political/bush_jesus_face.html

  34. Can’t I be a libertarian who wishes the presidency didn’t matter quite so much, be nonetheless glad that the incoming occupant of the office (at least appears to be) a more competent, reflective, and pragmatic person than his predecessor, be somewhat uncomfortable with his religiosity, and make fun of evangelical Christians?

    Well, sure, B. But if you’re a libertarian, I imagine you too are dismayed by the masses of people who have taken it well beyond “glad” and into the realm of hero worship.

    My city council district’s new rep is a really awesome guy. I’m glad he got elected, and so are a lot of other people. But nobody is going ga-ga about it, because nobody thinks a city council seat is worth going ga-ga about. That’s the way it should be with the presidency –, and WOULD be in a country that hadn’t bought into the concept of powerful government.

    The outpouring of adulation this week says a lot about how the American people now view the role of government. And it should be depressing to libertarians.

  35. I do wonder how long Obama’s left-leaning supporters will stay comfortable with the religiosity of their man in their White House.

    It won’t be hyped 24/7, so they should have no more trouble ignoring it than the movement feminists had with Bill Clinton’s womanizin’ ways.

    Obama’s leftist supporters aren’t bothered by religiosity; they’re bothered by theocracy, and Obama hasn’t show any tendencies in that direction.

    So when a Christian conservative or Mormon opposes gay marriage, that’s not a sign of theocracy? Got it.

  36. I don’t think we’d be hearing so much about this if George Bush wasn’t at vegetable-hurling levels of popularity, or if John McCain was able to fill rooms larger than a Fotomat.

    I may not agree with the “if” part of that statement, but the part after it is both true and funny.

  37. I’ll take any whacked-out naked mythic poses from supporters.

    Does Palin-themed porn count?

    Tom is right on. Fuck the imperial presidency, yo.

  38. So when a Christian conservative or Mormon opposes gay marriage, that’s not a sign of theocracy?

    If they support civil unions with all the same rights as civil marriage, no, it’s not. But, of course, they don’t.

  39. Obama enthusiasm has three components: actual Obama enthusiasm, happiness as seeing the last of George Bush, and excitement over the first black president.

    The last one, in particular, tends to make people lyrical.

  40. Obama enthusiasm has three components: actual Obama enthusiasm, happiness as seeing the last of George Bush, and excitement over the first black president.

    Yes, but driving it all is the notion that the presidency is a mammoth deal. None of your three components would matter in the first place if it weren’t for the idea that the presidency matters a lot.

    It’s sort of like me getting excited about a good steak. Sure, I could say my enthusiasm has three components: the steak is juicy, it’s cooked just right, and it’s different from the soup I just ate for the past week. But underneath it all — the part that’s such a given I don’t even think to express it — is the real engine for my excitement: eating is really important to me. If I didn’t care so much about food, I wouldn’t care about a steak.

  41. The excitement over the first African-American President – that I got.
    The enthusiasm over the end of W’s reign of error – that too.
    And it’s not so much the creepy agitprop Soviet style posters that bother me as much as it is the attitude that the Forces of Good won and that, while it will be a hard road, we are on our way to righting all wrongs. These kids think I’m just being cynical when I shake my head at them.

  42. Well, sure, B. But if you’re a libertarian, I imagine you too are dismayed by the masses of people who have taken it well beyond “glad” and into the realm of hero worship…The outpouring of adulation this week says a lot about how the American people now view the role of government. And it should be depressing to libertarians.

    True, all around. But I guess I don’t see the current honeymoon period as being qualitatively different than the creepy hero-worship of GWB, Clinton, or (especially) Reagan among their most fervent supporters. It’s not a new (or even particularly modern) phenomenon…the Lincoln Memorial is patterned after the temple of Zeus, fercryinoutloud.

    I do think if there’s anything unique about the Obama lovefest (which I agree is pretty annoying…also pretty easy to ignore if you don’t have a TV, which I don’t) it has more to do with the “perfect storm” of his historical significance and the fact that he is following an extremely unpopular predecessor.

    Anyway, I’m sure this will all wear off when everyone’s pension fund collapses, the Big One hits SoCal, or Obama bombs Pakistan.

  43. Tom,

    Do you think people were less enthusiastic about presidential politics in 1804, or 1860?

  44. If they support civil unions with all the same rights as civil marriage, no, it’s not. But, of course, they don’t.

    You know who also endorsed civil unions in lieu of gay marriage?

    No, not him. That other fascist, noted theocrat George W. Bush.

    Yet another issue on which there is no material difference between George Bush and Barack Obama. Add it to the list!

  45. But I guess I don’t see the current honeymoon period as being qualitatively different than the creepy hero-worship of GWB, Clinton, or (especially) Reagan among their most fervent supporters.

    Probably not. I don’t recall the sheer volume of hagigraphic, adulatory tongue-baths from major media outlets, though.

  46. No, not him. That other fascist, noted theocrat George W. Bush.

    During his campaign. Then he backtracked.

    Yet another issue on which there is no material difference between George Bush and Barack Obama. Add it to the list! Whatever gets you through the next eight years.

    Mr. Bluebird on my shoulder…

  47. “Whatever gets you through the next eight years.

    Christ, joe, his Presidency hasn’t even started yet and you’re calling the 2012 election?

  48. I don’t recall the sheer volume of hagigraphic, adulatory tongue-baths from major media outlets, though.

    I’m sure you don’t. I’m equally sure that you wrote exactly the same thing about the “tongue baths” being given by the EmmEssEmm about every other prominent Democrat, because I’ve watched you do it for years.

  49. BDB,

    Yup.

    We’re looking at Johnson/Goldwater in four years.

  50. “We’re looking at Johnson/Goldwater in four years.”

    Only if the Republicans nominate Palin.

  51. Besides, we’re in the Next Great Depression remember? A years long depression! It will be just like Russia in the 1990s! (a lefty site actually said the latter).

  52. Well I stopped paying my bills weeks ago. It’s sweet!

  53. During his campaign. Then he backtracked.

    I’ll need a link for the backtracking, joe.

    See, that’s how this web thing works. I provide a link for my factual assertion, and then you provide a link for your contradictory factual assertion.

    No linkee, no factee.

  54. Whatever gets you through the next eight years.

    I think its more whatever gets you through the next eight years, joe. Early indications are that a sizable dose of denial seems to be in order.

  55. What, RC Dean? I thought Obama was a secret RadicalSocialist who was going to surrender to IslamoFascism! The McCain ads told me so!

  56. Whatever, RC.

    I’m sure you’ll be along to tell us that George Bush was totally going to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, too.

  57. Do you think people were less enthusiastic about presidential politics in 1804, or 1860?
    Yes.

  58. Adulatory tongue baths? Palin? Yeah, that movie got made.

    Anyhow, I’m not going to argue there weren’t some hero-worshiping fools following other candidates. There just seem to be so many of them this cycle, and they are expressing their adulation in ways that make me uncomfortable.

    I also think it’s gonna bite him and the democrats in the ass. The more personally invested in a candidate you are, the more personally you’re going to take when he doesn’t do what you want. There’s gonna be a whole lot of unhappy campers here shortly.

  59. Only if the Republicans nominate Palin.

    Or Romney.

    I’ll need a link for the backtracking, joe. What would you like, all of the news stories about how George W. Bush didn’t do anything to push for the adoption of civil unions?

    How would one go about finding stories that don’t exist, exactly?

    Talk about your denial – if I can’t find a story titled “George Bush Totally Not Putting Forward Civil Unions Bill,” it means he holds exactly the same position as Barack Obama.

    ‘kay.

  60. …and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity, and peace.

    I preferred the “freedom, prosperity, and peace” that Ron Paul was promising, with the added bonus of actually getting the integrity too.

  61. Ah, thanks for reminding me of this MLK Day Romney video, joe.

    I can see them nominating Palin. I can’t see them nominating that guy.

  62. But if we really are in Great Depression Two (double digit unemployment and contracting GDP for the next nine years), even Romney or Palin should be able to win.

  63. I can see them nominating Palin.

    I know for a fact that there’s no way that could ever happen, and here’s why:

    I have not led a virtuous enough life for God to reward me with a Sarah Palin nomination.

    (Seriously, I’m going to send her primary campaign money if there’s even a hint she might make a run.)

  64. But if we really are in Great Depression Two (double digit unemployment and contracting GDP for the next nine years), even Romney or Palin should be able to win.

    You mean like during Great Depression One?

  65. Joe, Americans today have a much shorter attention span than they did in the 1930s.

  66. How about Palin/Romney?

  67. Only NOT if the Republicans nominate Palin.

  68. ” | January 19, 2009, 1:36pm | #
    Only NOT if the Republicans nominate Palin.”

    Keeping with the depression theme…

    “As goes Alaska, so goes Utah!”

  69. Joe, Americans today have a much shorter attention span than they did in the 1930s.

    Yeah, well, that’s just…ooh, shiny thing!

  70. How about Palin/Romney?

    Oh please oh please oh please oh please oh please.

    NOT if the Republicans nominate Palin.

    Well, I don’t know if it’s the sexism, or the panic, or being caught flat-footed, but somehow, I don’t think Sarah Qualyin is going to have any better luck than her more cerebral namesake.

  71. “Every politician has a wing of his supporters who are hero-worshippers.”

    Have any of you all been keeping tabs on the Team Sarah website? Truly disturbing. I keep getting visions of hordes of Repubs – both male and female -flogging it over pix of their heroine, or whatever the proper term is when females Flog the Bishop. Row the Canoe? Flip the Switch? Plumb the Depths?

  72. “…our new president is a human being, not a messiah.”…”

    The fact that he felt a need to make such a statement proves that even Obama’s supporters are aware of the freakish worshiping by the Obama cult.

  73. “Whatever gets you through the next eight years.

    Screw that. We should repeal the 22nd amendment so Obama can serve three terms.

    Of course, that would be twelve years…and you know who else was a charismatic leader beloved by the youth of his country, serving twelve years as head of state? Hint: 1933-1945.

  74. …and he liked dogs!

  75. What the hell does Sarah Palin have to do with any of this?

    What a desperate ploy to deflect the discussion from Obama and his ridiculous zealot followers.

  76. joe, if Sarah Palin runs in 2012, your small donation will be miniscule next to the money pouring in from comedians.

  77. Uh, and don’t Episcopalians believe the Messiah was a human being? To the extent that Episcopalians believe anything these days, that is.

  78. Man, I hope Obama is the Messiah returned. It would really piss off the evangelicals and that would be awesome.

  79. What the hell does Sarah Palin have to do with any of this?

    Hint: look at the last three words of your comment.

  80. Nick,

    You know what would be even better: he’s the Jewish Messiah, finally come.

  81. I do wonder how long Obama’s left-leaning supporters will stay comfortable with the religiosity of their man in their White House.

    I’d imagine exactly as comfortable as they were with Clinton’s. Make of that what you will.

  82. “Of course, that would be twelve years…and you know who else was a charismatic leader beloved by the youth of his country, serving twelve years as head of state? Hint: 1933-1945.”

    Are you talking about Hitler, or FDR?

  83. It strikes me that Palin is the anti-Obama.

    Hmm, nice ring to it. So many layers of meaning.

    Anyhoo, people (like joe) have been pointing out (and rightly so) that Obama hasn’t served a single day as President, yet criticism keeps pouring in.

    Sarah Palin hasn’t, and never will spend a day as Vice President– let alone President, and yet she still receives truckloads of criticism.

    I wonder if she has a small 666 tattooed on her scalp?

  84. I say we will (sadly) get an evangelical populist anti-free market Republican to run in 2012 if the economy hasn’t turned around. IOW, Mike Huckabee.

  85. He also has the best chance of winning.

  86. I say we will (sadly) get an evangelical populist anti-free market Republican to run in 2012 if the economy hasn’t turned around.

    So what you’re saying is George W. Bush will run again.

  87. People criticize Palin the candidate and Palin the governor.

    I’ve never claimed it was unfair to criticize Obama the Senator or Obama the candidate – it’s the silly criticisms of his yet-to-begin presidency that I’ve objected to.

  88. “Paul | January 19, 2009, 2:26pm | #
    I say we will (sadly) get an evangelical populist anti-free market Republican to run in 2012 if the economy hasn’t turned around.

    So what you’re saying is George W. Bush will run again.”

    Well, Mike Huckabee is kind of like Dubya, without the missile-rattling foreign policy.

  89. Huckabee would be a good candidate.

    You know who else scares me a bit? New Gingrich. Master media manipulator, ruthlessly disciplined, very intelligent.

  90. – it’s the silly criticisms of his yet-to-begin presidency that I’ve objected to.

    Those are (obviously) the crirticisms I’m talking about. Frankly, I don’t remember anyone criticizing Obama the Senator.

    And why would we care about Palin the Governor?

    Unless we’re going to get that wierd space-time-continuum fold where three years into Obama’s presidency, the loony-left start blaming the country’s woes on Palin– as she’ll no doubt be pulling the levers of power from Anchorage, via Karl Rove with the help of Haliburton.

  91. Newt will be 70 years old in 2012. Republicans don’t want another old man.

  92. and fyi: Palin’s no longer a candidate.

  93. Master media manipulator, ruthlessly disciplined, very intelligent.

    I thought that was Karl Rove.

  94. Palin will run but won’t make it past New Hampshire despite being ahead in national polls for two years. She will be the 2012 version of 9iul1an1.

  95. Palin will run but won’t make it past New Hampshire

    You guys really think she’ll run again? Or are we just being snarky?

  96. I don’t recall the sheer volume of hagigraphic, adulatory tongue-baths

    I recall them during Clinton’s first term run for the president. I wasn’t even that politically involved at that point in my life, and I remember scratching my head and thinking “Wow, I’ve never seen a candidate get this much fawning press.”

  97. Remember, Annie Leibovitz did the presidential portfolio for Clinton.

  98. I’m sure you’ll be along to tell us that George Bush was totally going to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, too.

    Nope, but I see no indication he ever changed his mind about civil unions, either.

    Just wanted to be clear that being opposing gay marriage in favor of civil unions is not evidence of latent theocracy, except when it is.

    it’s the silly criticisms of his yet-to-begin presidency that I’ve objected to.

    I do think criticizing his cabinet nominees is fair game.

    As well as any policy statements/promises/etc. he has made while waiting in the wings. Why not?

    If we can’t criticize him for what he’s done and said in the last few months, does that mean we also can’t praise him?

    Because by and large, Obama’s early and rapid run away from his more goofy previous positions and toward more centrist, even Bushian, positions, is to be applauded. At least by me. Of course, a lot of the flak he’s caught as Not-Yet-President comes from the left, for doing just that.

  99. You know who else scares me a bit? New Gingrich. Master media manipulator, ruthlessly disciplined, very intelligent.

    Tell me why I shouldn’t apply those very terms to Barack Obama, joe.

  100. Paul,

    I’m not so sure “very intelligent” describes Karl Rove.

    BDB,

    Palin will run but won’t make it past New Hampshire despite being ahead in national polls for two years. Joe Lieberman led the polling for the 2004 for over a year, so there’s something to that.

    RC,

    Just wanted to be clear that being opposing gay marriage in favor of civil unions is not evidence of latent theocracy, except when it is. I’d explain it to you again, but you’re clearly in your Happy Place.

    Tell me why I shouldn’t apply those very terms to Barack Obama, joe. You probably should; I think that would be a very fair description of Barack Obama’s political assets (although it leaves off “silver tongued,” which is a tool that doesn’t apply to Gingrich).

    Cripes, you’re so wound up in your partisan angst, you’re reading neutral, even complimentary, observations about a candidate’s strengths as some kind of stealth attack.

    Just.

    Settle.

    Down.

    Not everything’s a war.

  101. Over at Savage Love (the people that gave you Santorum — a frothy mix of lube and fecal matter) is redefining “Saddleback”.

    http://www.citypages.com/advice/view/SavageLove

  102. “Let me know when we have videos of children singing songs of praise for Ron Paul.”

    Gonna take my gun,
    gonna kill all the whities I see.
    Gonna take my gun,
    gonna kill all the whities I see.
    When I kill all the whities I see,
    Whity he wont bother me.
    Gonna take my gun,
    gonna kill all the whities I see.

  103. “and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah”

    Unlike say, Kanye West…

  104. wow, joe, so fractious today. Methinks, the in5anity will chill out in a coupla weeks. Just don’t watch main stream news outlets and stay the fuck away from DC and all will be fine.

  105. Cripes, you’re so wound up in your partisan angst, you’re reading neutral, even complimentary, observations about a candidate’s strengths as some kind of stealth attack.

    Whoa, self-reflect much, joe?

    I’ve been pretty complimentary of Obama so far, seeing as he is abandoning much of what got him elected that I didn’t like. What I’ve mostly been mocking is the increasing gap between rhetoric and reality, and the imperviousness of so many of his supporters to that gap. Stay reality-based, bro!

    Glad to see that you think Obama and Karl share a lot of character traits. Just wanted to make sure that you had no problem with the very things that are supposed to make Karl so diabolical to partisan Dems.

  106. Re: this Obama/Palin contest upthread.

    It strikes me that the number of Obama’s “ridiculous zealot followers” dwarfs the number of Palin’s “ridiculous zealot followers”.

    It’s one of the reasons he got elected.

    And I’ll have to say that in all my life I’ve never seen a President with such a cult of personality.

    But it would take a lot more time and effort than I’m willing to commit to explain why I find this CoP different tha JFK’s.

    But the fact is that far from a far-left agenda he pretty much managed to have pretty much no agenda to the point where it was a blank slate upon which anyone with a pencil could scribble what they wanted it to be.

    Like most libertarians I had no pencil. I just figured that I’ve seen worse so why complain?

    Except for Hillary at State I still feel about the same.

  107. I’ve been pretty complimentary of Obama so far, seeing as he is abandoning much of what got him elected that I didn’t like. What I’ve mostly been mocking is the increasing gap between rhetoric and reality, and the imperviousness of so many of his supporters to that gap.

    So, in other words, as soon as you came to accept the fact that he’s going to win, you started to try to convince yourself that he’s really not that bad. Having succeeded at doing so, you think that the difference is that Barack Obama has changed his positions. And in a remarkable coincidence, this belief also carries the implication that you are a great deal smarter and more perceptive than your political opponents.

    Please, tell me some more about self-reflection.

    Glad to see that you think Obama and Karl share a lot of character traits. Just wanted to make sure that you had no problem with the very things that are supposed to make Karl so diabolical to partisan Dems. Those aren’t character traits. They’re skills, talents, completely unrelated to character, and I already denied that one of the three (intelligent) applies to Karl Rove.

    But you managed to not know those two rather important facts that undermine the narrative you created – the one that just so happens to allow you to consider yourself smarter and more perceptive and more principled than your political opponents.

    Whoa, self-reflect much, RC?

  108. Having succeeded at doing so, you think that the difference between what you thought of him three months ago and what you think of him today is that Barack Obama has changed his positions.

  109. This Joe character, does he do TV as well?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.