Obama — nothing but a useless symbol
The good thing about living in a liberal community is that you get to hear how ordinary people — not the pundit class and the media — think. I blogged yesterday about one elderly woman’s absolute trust in the MSM. If they say it, it must be true, all actual evidence to the contrary.
To these liberals, it’s a “who do you trust” issue. You trust the media, no matter how often they’re proven wrong, and you don’t trust anyone else, no matter the fact that, even as to the one only verifiable point, they’re proven right.
Today, I got another insight into liberal think. A friend told me that he really doesn’t like Obama, but that this single quotation about McCain made it apparent to him that he couldn’t possibly ever vote for McCain: “I make them as quickly as I can, quicker than the other fellow, if I can. Often my haste is a mistake, but I live with the consequences without complaint.” Having heard that quotation, my liberal friend instantly assumed that McCain makes decisions without data, which is nowhere implied in what McCain says.
Aside from the fact that McCain never says he ignores data, it’s a useful mental exercise to realize that Obama thought long and hard about his VP choice, and then made a terrible mistake. More to the point, while I see McCain as exaggerating somewhat for effect, I think he was really saying that he’s a modern day Truman: “The buck stops here.” He makes his decisions and doesn’t immediately turn around and blame everyone else if they fail.
My liberal friend conceded that Obama has nothing personal going for him: My friend doesn’t like Obama’s policies and is not impressed by his resume. Why, then, will he vote for him? It’s all about image. Obama is the ultimate American advertisement. Voting for him, says my friend, will increase America’s standing in the world, make people of color feel good about themselves, and prove that America is not a racist nation.
If the Presidency was merely a symbolic position, those might be valid reasons. But the Presidency is a very powerful position. To vote for the most powerful person in the world, a person you concede is ineffectual and holds views antithetical to yours, simply because he looks good and you think he’ll make America “popular” strikes me as the height of irresponsibility.
This approach also shows remarkable ignorance. Barring the rare moments when America walks in and actually rescues Europeans from the arms of death, Europe has always been anti-American. Go back to writings from the 18th Century and you’ll see the same themes: America is a boorish, uncultured, ill-informed bully that needs to be reined in by wiser European heads. The only difference between now and then is that, while the American media historically took umbrage at and challenged those anti-American viewpoints, media members now echo and enlarge on those same views.
Likewise, what will it take to be friends with Iran? Conceding that it’s okay to launch a nuclear missile at Israel, perhaps? How about being friends with North Korea? “Yes, we’d love for you to be nuclear and, while you’re at it, we’ll just withdraw and leave South Korea to you.” Likewise, with Venezuela — “Please, go ahead with imposing Marxism on Latin America. And, dude, we love the neo-anti-Semitism you’re spouting. Sounds good.”
My liberal friend has reduced the presidential election to a high school level popularity contest. He wants to elect the “coolest” kid so that we “look good.” This is the Fernando Lamos school of voting. It was bad politics in high school, and it’s worse politics on the world stage.
