Topic: Election 2008
The Rockstar is Wearing No Clothes Why Obama is neither ready, nor fit, to leadby R.J. Moeller
(Conservative)
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
For the President of the United States at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave, more is required, expected, and desperately needed than sophisticated semantics and crowd appeal among excitable college students.
Someone running to be the next United President needs: a breadth of knowledge and experience, a track record of sustained and persistent effort and effectiveness in lower branches of government, and a healthy enough respect for the solemn position to not seek its post unless absolutely certain he or she is ready to lead.
When I was in 5th grade, I ran for Student Council President and won. My platform consisted of grandiose promises for free ice cream, meatball subs every day for lunch, a reversal of the principal's ruling against tackle football at recess, and early release days at least once a month. Knowing full well that none of the planks in my platform would hold under the weight of reality, I nevertheless insisted I was the man for the job and slyly avoided any situation where my pie-in-the-sky promises would be questioned or even examined.
The problem, besides my wildly unrealistic assurances of things I had absolutely no control over, was that I had decided to run for the prestigious position on whim a week before ballots were to be cast. A couple of cute girls in Mrs. Walter's homeroom class mentioned that they thought I should run and would win. Not once in my previous 5 years of elementary schooling had I ever even contemplated joining the student council, nor did I have any experience whatsoever in non-sports related extracurricular activities. (This would have cut in to my playing Homerun Derby, Running Bases, and Nintendo time.)
I had other priorities, zero experience, and very little appreciation for the responsibilities I would encounter should I prevail.
This story has an unhappy ending which includes my being asked to resign by the sponsoring teacher who ran Student Council. Apparently they wanted the President to show up at every meeting. She also did not like the fact that when I did show up and found out that 3rd graders were included on the Student Council Board, I initiated the vote to ban future participation in student government by anyone younger than 4th grade while she went to the Teacher's Lounge to get a Coke. (It didn't help that the sponsoring teacher's child happened to be a 3rd grader on that same Student Council board.)
The truth is I never really wanted to be President. I liked that a few cute girls in my homeroom class suggested I run and that was about the extent of my deliberating process. But something had changed as soon as I announced I was thinking of running: people came out of the woodwork to encourage my candidacy because they blindly believed I could really keep unrealistic promises.
I was the Candy Man. I promised people what they wanted, and all it cost them is a silly little vote. My popularity grew and I liked hearing and seeing my name in the hallways. I began to buy into my own hype. Most of those prompting me to run didn't really care either way themselves, but momentum built and soon I was handed the reigns to a job I was wholly unsuited and unprepared for.
From the time Barack Obama ended his now legendary "rock-star" speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004; his ascendancy to the Democratic Nominee for President in 2008 has been in some ways inevitable. Granted, most observers and pundits predicted a Hillary Clinton victory at the start of this primary season, but that initial analysis was based on the presumption that American voters would appropriately take one look at the freshmen senator from Illinois asking for their vote and say, "No we can't!?at least not yet."
There seemed little chance that someone with such insignificant experience, non-existent national familiarity, and a voting record that makes Ted Kennedy look like Joe Lieberman's conservative cousin would be able to steal the spotlight from Madame Hillary's royal coronation.
What is more, Barack Obama had, up until a few months before officially entering the race in late 2006, stated he would not run in 2008. In interviews in 2004 and 2005, as reporters began their pre-swoon swoon of the Boy Wonder, Obama appropriately pointed to his inexperience, his commitment to the "good people of Illinois," and the crop of exciting potential candidates his Party would put forward in the Presidential primary season all as reasons why he should not, would not, run.
But what do you when you are being told that you are a rock-star before ever having played a single chord, when the adoring media and Hollywood power brokers already have their proverbial lighters waving in the air asking for an encore to a performance you've yet to give (or proven you are capable of giving)? How do you turn away from that seductive siren-call of fame, power, and prestige? It's worth nothing that Bill Clinton thought of running in 1988, but decided to wait for 1992. Similarly, Republicans wanted Reagan to run while still governor of California in 1968, but he was sure that he wasn't ready yet. There's something to be said for the man who knows his own limitations.
Before deciding to run, Obama knew he had a decidedly liberal voting record (when he bothered to show up at all) that would turn away more than 50% of American voters. He knew his associations with radical pastors, known terrorists, and felons convicted of bribing politicians in his home state of Illinois would be issues only time and increased national recognition could wash away. He knew himself that 2008 was not his year.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 9 thumbs so far
2008 R.J. Moeller, all rights reserved.
Published: Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Last modified: Thursday, June 19, 2008
The views expressed in this
article are those of R.J. Moeller only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. R.J. Moeller is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-06-19 07:02:35
So you're saying that Obama is unfit to run for President because he is a liberal with baggage who wants to (in effect) impress pretty girls and give away other peoples' money? I suppose we could say the same thing about why GW Bush ran and why McCain is running. Just swap out the word "liberal" in favor of the word "conservative", and the critique remains equally valid. After all, they both have plenty of baggage and both have long track records of spending other peoples' money. I suspect they're equally lured by pretty girls, too.
Walt-
How did I know this would be the first post I'd get in response. Obviously everyone has baggage, and yes GWB has spent other people's money (more than I personally am happy with), and hopefully John McCain is attracted to attractive s (but just doesnt "Clinton" them)....But we know nothing about Obama, and we know a lot (for better or worse) about McCain. McCain is proposing $6-7 billion dollars in increased spending (which doesnt take in to account anything he would potentially cut from the budget), but Obama, on his own website, has totaled more than $250 Billion in promises of increased spending.
Life is not perfect, and while we do not have to settle for sloppy mismanagement (i.e. anything the government seems to touch), we should be cautious when making the better the enemy of the best every time we discuss politics. McCain and Obama are the choices. You can waste a vote on a 3rd Party candidate, or help send a message to Washington that while we don't care for the overspending of too many Republicans, we certainly want nothing to do with the Socialistic over-spending and centralization of Democrats.
Is this not a fair, reasonable thing to ask? If your argument is that McCain isn't perfect, then who is? This is our system of government and has served us well. This is the way we elect Presidents and for better or worse we have a two-party system. Lets work together as Conservatives and Libertarians to get fiscally responsible representatives in to office. While some on the GOP's side might be reckless with the country's checkbook...everyone on the Democrat's side is. Let's organically change the Party you know to be closer to your values than help the one you know for certain to be anything but get in to office.
Sorry for the rant. I respect your opinion and look forward to hearing your spirited response, Walt.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2008-06-19 16:40:10
Working together as libertarians and conservatives is what has given us the biggest budget deficit and the biggest national deficit in the country's history. Libertarian support at the polls for conservative politicians gave us a war we can't ever win in Iraq which is draining what's left of our national resources, a potential new war in Iran, and all kinds of problems around the world that continue to get worse and worse. It has given us a Federal Reserve that's creating money out of thin air like it's going out of style. Conservatives in government have proven without question that they simply can't be trusted to walk the walk.
Sure, Obama is terrible, but arguing that McCain is the lesser of two evils falls flat. We're currently living the lessons of "the lesser of two evils." You're going to have to do better than that to win over libertarians this year, not to mention winning over anyone else. Most libertarians are probabably going to either write in Ron Paul or vote for Bob Barr.
Let's face it...Republican conservatives are getting exactly what they deserve, if it all turns out as many of us are expecting it to turn out. Sure, the country ends up getting screwed, but let's not forget who's been doing the screwing, and for the first six years of the new millenium, it wasn't the liberals. The conservatives used complete control of the Senate, the House, and the White House to set us all up for national bankruptcy. After all that, who cares about another $250 Billion? It'll just break the camel's back faster. At this point, maybe it's just best if the country goes officially bankrupt. At least it would create serious incentives to make serious changes.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
2008 R.J. Moeller, all rights reserved.