One thing that is really bugs me about the guy or at least the Obama phenomenon is that he and his supporters (definitely his supporters) like to make a big deal about every possible racist interpretation that can be put into what his opponents say about him. Yet it is obvious to Blind Freddy that he would not be in the limelight in the first place were it not for the whole race issue. If Obama were white would anyone really give a damned what he said? He’s milking this mixed heritage business for all it’s worth. How much of his book is about his philosophy and how much of it is about converting his personal life story into a heap of ‘we are the world’ cliches?The hype that has been placed on the guy speaks volumes for the ridiculousness of the media’s patronising attitudes on race.
Is there any evidence that he is any much smarter than the average politician? Any wiser or more intellectual? Does anyone know what he stands for besides banal platitudes and a trendy populism?
– Jason Soon of Catallaxy enunciates what I suspect a number of Samizdata readers and contributors are thinking about Barack Obama.
Banal platitudes and trendy populism just won the Democrats two houses of Congress.
Why is Rudy Giuliani getting any consideration? Because he watched crack fizzle out in New York, sat on top of a nationwide decline in crime and claimed it as his own, and got lucky with a strong economy. Ask him why the Mexican government still hasn’t paid his private firm. The answer is that because when he was called in as a consultant, he couldn’t even tame panhandlers in Mexico City. Good luck with Baghdad. But the American electorate doesn’t really do due diligence on candidates. Just a simple fact. Wish it were otherwise.
In the meantime, I’m holding out for Ron Paul or the true dark horse, Bill Richardson.
– Jason Soon of Catallaxy enunciates what I suspect a number of Samizdata readers and contributors are thinking about Barack Obama.
You’re kidding, right? James, which Samizdata contributors do you believe think black politicians are unfairly privileged by the media?
I would have thought it was none of them.
Also:
Is there any evidence that he is any much smarter than the average politician? Any wiser or more intellectual? Does anyone know what he stands for besides banal platitudes and a trendy populism?
As Adam says above, is there any evidence that voters care about smarts, wisdom or intellect? And don’t actually want banal platitudes and trendy populism?
That’s his USP. He’s also young and handsome, if you can see past the color of his skin.
A friend and I were talking about Mr. Obama last night and he said that we Americans are so self-absorbed and so selfishly engaged in pursuing our personal interests that we have stopped paying attention to the candidates and that’s how we are ending up with such pathetic and embarrassing collections of politicians. That’s a good theory, but “honest politician” has probably always been an urban legend. Although the Proud Towers are said to have fallen in the early 1900’s (and of course America had one – we are still human), the rats which fled from those monstrosities stuck to their offices and kept breeding and passing along their traditions, and in doing so have continued to remain integral parts of our political systems almost up the invention of the camcorder. We were socialized to respect and trust the political office or position, and then trained to transfer that trust and respect to the representative human without knowing what the person really was. What we now know is that none of them have ever been better than any of the rest of us in any personal sense, they just had control of what we were able to know about them, but a brand new literacy is changing that. No one talks about this (maybe it’s too obvious) but human awareness of current events and the people who engage, cause, or direct them has increased geometrically since the advent of the internet, and our problem solving abilities have increased in direct proportion to that. What we once viewed as elevated groups of higher functioning humans with mysterious powers, we now see as real humans, some with real human flaws and real human problems, and some are just flat out freaks. That realization was completely shocking and even frightening for us at first, but the prelude to this election shows we have already adapted. The stark absence of any obvious personal power, charisma, intelligence, or even marginal likability among the front running candidates shows how hesitant we are to give power to people who we realize (thanks to google) are not more sophisticated than we are, are not smarter than we are, and are certainly not more able in a critical event than we are. Furthermore, until something better comes along, rather than risk seduction by a clever charlatan, we seem intent on giving power to the ones who are the least likely or able to use it. If they have a sufficient number of obvious flaws and can be content with the empty trappings of power, they might just get the vote.
I will not be voting fir the Junior Senator from Illinois, mind you, but I think you and the commenters so far may be underestimating his appeal. His introduction to the party at the 2004 convention was a home run speech. He is uber-charismatic.
He is playing his lack of experience as a positive against establishment front runners like McCain and Clinton.
He is reeling a bit from his “wasted” gaffe but I’d say those who prefer liberty underestimate him at their peril.
I was in the US October/November last year and was Obama-ed to buggery by the news.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. He is reasonably good looking and reasonably charismatic but nothing to write home about. He wouldn’t stand out as a middle-manager in a carpet-dealership but he does stand out against the assorted luminaries of the Dem party not because he is an exceptional orator with the build of a Greek God but because the rest of them look like rejects from a freakshow and have the charisma of wallpaper paste.
Let’s look at the current cavalcade of jackanapes: We have Hillary “Whitewater” Clinton, John “Fucking Dull” Edwards, Howard “(Primal) Scream” Dean, Al “I invented the internet” Gore, John “Pass the Sauce” Kerry, Dennis “Who the Fuck?” Kucinch… Put me in a $1000 suit and give me a few soundbites and I’d sound like a pretty strong contender compared to them.
Obama is proof positive that you don’t need to be a giant to lord it over pygmies.
Not that I’m being smug over this. I look at the likely line-up for the next UK general election and I want to eat my own teeth. We’ve got a choice between two terminally dull solicitors from Fife (who both want to tax us to buggeration) and Dave “Windy Miller” Cameron who (probably) just wants to tax us to the stage of felching.
If you don’t know what “felching” is please don’t Google it. Just take my word that it’s pretty unpleasant, unless you’re into that kinda thing, obviously. But then this being Valentine’s Day, if you were into that sort of thing, you’d be doing it, not Googling it, right?
Also, under no circumstances whatsoever Google Image Search: “tubgirl.jpg”. Not ever.
There are plenty of black politicians who get short shrift from the media. Obama is interesting, not because he’s black, but because he’s young, handsome, and a riveting speaker. After 8 years of drivel from Bush, Kerry, and Gore, getting an actual public speaker near the Big Chair is a welcome relief.
Granted, his ideas all suck, but that’s politics.
– Josh
“Is there any evidence that he is any much smarter than the average politician? Any wiser or more intellectual?”
Well, he was President of the Harvard Law Review and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago. I don’t know that that makes him certifiably “wiser” than the average politician…but yes, as a matter of fact, it’s pretty good evidence that he’s smarter and more intellectual than the average politician. Moron.
Why didn’t Jason Soon know this? Could it be that he saw a personable African-American political and instantly assumed there was no substance there? If he’s going to criticize the man, he could at least learn SOMETHING about him.
Steve Sailer picks up an interesting point about Obama in his website when he points out that Barack Obama’s most important supporters are white women:
“Then, running preliminary polls, his advisers noticed something remarkable: Women responded more intensely and warmly to Obama than did men. In a seven-candidate field, you don’t need to win every vote. His advisers, assuming they would pick up a healthy chunk of black votes, honed in on a different target: Every focus group they ran was composed exclusively of women, nearly all of them white.
“There is an amazingly candid moment in Obama’s autobiography when he writes of his childhood discomfort at the way his mother would sexualize African-American men. “More than once,” he recalls, “my mother would point out: ‘Harry Belafonte is the best-looking man on the planet.’ ” What the focus groups his advisers conducted revealed was that Obama’s political career now depends, in some measure, upon a tamer version of this same feeling, on the complicated dynamics of how white women respond to a charismatic black man.””
…And, what an awful lot of whites hope, deep down, to accomplish by electing Barack Obama President is to make him the supreme king #1 role model for all African Americans, utterly eclipsing deplorable examples such as Snoop Dogg and 50 Cent.
In other words, the message white America hopes to send to black America by electing Obama is:
Stop Acting So Black!
Start Acting More Ba-rack!
Perhaps this explains why blacks haven’t been all that enthusiastic about Obama?
Sorry but most legislators are lawyers and a disproportionate number of the American predator class (i.e. professional politicians and other while collar gang members) went to Harvard or Yale… I am not overly impressed. It means he is intelligent but it does not mean he is particularly exceptional (of course it does not mean he is not, either). Teaching constitutional law requires you to have read a lot and have understood a number of concept that are really nothing any 120+ IQ person can manage without all that much difficulty. My view is is vastly easier than teaching theoretical physics (for example). Clearly the man is not stupid but what you hold up as a ‘clear’ indication he is exceptional compared to other politicos does nothing of the sort.
As I said before, it does not matter if he is wise or dumb (at least not much), black or white, Christian or Muslim.
What matters is that he voted with the hard left 100% of the time.
Does that make him smart ? Not in my eyes, but smart or not – I wish him all the worst.
Uhm, Perry, to be fair, how many political leaders have the potential smarts to be able to teach theoretical physics?
It doesn’t take exceptional brilliance to be a leader. Just guts and some common sense. Which unfortunately most leaders lack.
I get the feeling Obama isn’t really a hard left, as in the principled kind. He’s going that way simply because he sees it as his best chance at power.
Given the current political and social climate in the US, would you say that he’s wrong? The leftists have controlled the debate, they now own the field. They are going through the media, the educational institutions, the branches of the government.
Face it, it’ll be a slow and painful decline before the next resurgence in the next decade ala Reagan, if it ever happens.
No matter what, the next president of the US will probably more left leaning than anybody here would like. Sucks, but that’s the way the US voters want it.
Funny thing that the first 12 responses have not touched: Obama is the only contender who was against the war from the start.
If he is able to keep to that and also demonstrate that he believes in the citizenry more than the state, he will have my vote.
But, then again, so would anybody else.
NickM,
Even with a thousand dollar suit somebody with a Geordie accent is certainly unelectable in the US and probably (to date anyway) unelectable in the UK.
Resident Alien,
For shame!
Ant & Dec for President!
Kevin Whately as Sec Def!
Alan Shearer as Sec State!
(He can solve the World’s problems during a kick about with Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Amandinnajad)
Just no Mackems.
I heard that Governor Bill Richardson was a free market man – so I looked into it. He (for example) vetoed protection for property owners (from having their property stolen and given to developers under “Eminent Domain”) that had passed the New Mexico State legislature.
As far as I know he is the only Governor to have done that.
ex Mayor G.?
Fine in his first term – then he let spending rip in his second term.
Mitt R. – A “C” from the Cato Insitute on controlling government spending. And then he left with the State with the legal demand for compulsory health cover from all but the smallest companies (in reality just more fines for the State government – because it will be cheaper to pay the fine than to pay for health cover for all the employees). And (from this July) everyone in Mass must have health cover or face a thousand Dollar fine.
Oh gosh, that leaves John McCain – well I also hope a “Dark Horse” gets some traction (Ron Paul would be wonderful – but it is not going to happen). I even sort of like the anti mass immigration Congressman Tom Tancredo (if that is how he spells his name). At least he takes a strong line on government spending – and being anti mass immigrantion he would keep parasites like me out of the United States.
Still it will most likely be McCain versus Clinton – that is where the money is going.
As for Senator Obama. There are a couple of Democrats running who opposed the war from the state – for example there is a Democrat Congressman (and ex useless Mayor of Cleveland) from Ohio that Neil Cavuto has on from time to time (that is correct, I can not remember his name – which shows how much chance he has I suppose).
“riveting speaker”, “attractive” (and so on) – oh come on Wild Pegasus. Senator Obama is an empty suit who has never said an interesting thing is his life (granted that goes for most politicians). The only interesting thing about the man is his hard left voting record (especially at State level). “believes in the citizenry more than the State” (Michiganny) – errr no he does not (if you mean what I think you mean).
Senator Obama believes in more government programs, more regulations and more taxes – even more than most politicians do.
The truth is as stated above. It is not because he is “anti war” (as already stated he is NOT the only candidate who was “against the war from the start”) or because he “handsome” (he is thin, odd looking person) or a great speaker (it is “let us all work together” dross) – the Senator gets media attention because he is black.
As was rightly said of “Teddy” Kennedy back in 1962 “if your name was anything other than Kennedy your running for the Senate would be a joke”.
If Senator Obama was white no one would have ever heard of him.
Paul,
Thank you for highlighting Bill Richardson. I had forgotten about him.
You allude to Dennis Kucinich. You may be right that he is a candidate against the war. I stated Obama was the only contender against the war, meaning that I think he might win in ’08.
Also, small venue politics is pretty different from presidential politics. People change quite a bit in order to get the big prize. Just look at McCain. He went from “straight talk” to pandering to intolerant religious volk. If he and Cheney were both willing to court people of that ilk, in spite of their own respective daughters, for votes, I am betting there are few bills in Springfield Obama would not disavow to get moderates like me to vote for him.
And please remember that I want these politicians to demonstrate that they think we are citizens, not boys and girls who need a strong parent to keep us in line. There is far too much of that on the left and the right.
Lastly, I think Chuck Hagel would be a good president by that criteria. He is also exceptional relative to most senators because he actually talks like a human being. When a man uses words like hell and damn when discussing the important issues of the day, I tend to believe he actually still has balls in his pants, as opposed to having sent them off to a focus group to evaluate. And it also certainly helps that he has seen combat and is still even-keeled about the use of force.
Of course, Perry is now going to ask if Hagel is any good at theoretical physics!
Interesting thing about intelligence. According to a piece of info floating in the blogosphere (true or false—who knows), Kerry’s grades at Yale were two points lower than George Bush’s. I would not have thought that when listening to them back in the days of whine and roaches.