The Problems with Obama [Victor Davis Hanson]

NRO ^ | 2/15/2008 | VDH

[Uncledave]

The Problems with Obama [Victor Davis Hanson]

Under pressure to produce some facts and specifics, the Obama team is beginning to release a little on the economy, taxes, and new entitlements. But the problem is that Obama himself seems not familiar with the details, and still prefers talking only about hope and change. Wonks releasing details doesn't solve the problem. And it won't, until he, the candidate, can talk in serious fashion ex tempore about the specifics he wants to achieve.

The other problem could well be racial. His coalition initially was based on the notion that he would capture 60 percent of the black vote in a tough competition against the wife of our first honorific black president, and go on from there to cobble together a coalition with other minorities and elite whites. But his success seems to have been achieved with a slightly different calculus — 80-90 percent of the African-American vote, elite yuppie whites, and students and Moveon.org progressives.

The problem with that is illustrated by Hillary's last-ditch appeal to win Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania with working-class whites and Hispanics. Since the agendas and past voting records of Obama and Clinton are nearly identical, and since he is the far more inspirational candidate, she hopes to tap into a growing resentment that his appeal is boutique for whites, and based on racial solidarity among African-Americans; the former turns off the working classes and the latter other minorities as well as poor whites. I think squaring that circle is every bit as problematic as McCain pacifying the conservative base. And the Democrats would worry about a candidate coming into the convention and beyond that lost the popular primary vote in the key November states of California, Florida, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.

With Hillary, Obama looks youthful and invigorating. But beside the scarred old veteran McCain, he will appear inexperienced and wet behind the ears. Putin's comment that Hillary didn't have a head reminds us that the problems in the world are not, pace Obama, due to misunderstanding or miscommunication, but because thugs like Ahmadinejihad, the Chinese apparatchiks, Assad, Putin, Chavez, etc. profoundly dislike the impediments the United States poses to their respective carnivorous agendas. McCain gets it, the others don't (cf. his Putin KGB quip compared to Hillary's 'duh' redundant remark that Putin didn't have a soul.)

These creepy leaders are more like beady-eyed wolves that wish to break into the global hen-house and prey on the European, African, Asian, and Latin American chickens inside — and so pace back and forth, eyeing the trigger finger of the farmer with the shotgun at the door. They know exactly what they want, and how to get it, and can't wait for the guardian to sit down, discuss their hunger, and invite inside them for discussions — and some lunch.

02/15 02:44 PM

[ronnie raygun]

We can all agree that a women president in the eyes of the Islamics is WEAKNESS! Women are virtual slaves in thier society, dogs have it better. So Hillary would be a disaster. Obama would be viewed as an inexperienced youngster, they can get him dizzy easily by spinning him around and around, convince him we are all friends and continue thier murderous campaign, just look at the help Pelosi and her fiends in congress are providing for our democratic leader already, no water-boarding, allowing wiretap surveillance to expire. These people are just as dangerous as the terrorists them selves. They are literally removing all obstacles in the terrorist way and making it easier to kill Americans in thier own country. we live in dangerous times, “change and hope” are empty words wihtout a real strong plan on issues that will decide whether we win or lose. If we allow more of this to continue we will surely pay the price.

[olivia3boys]

Jim Jones did things like this.

[DoughtyOne]

It's been my observation that Obama supporters seem to be content for him to spout empty phrases while they cheer enthusiastically at each new offering.  But what are they cheering?  There's very little substance.  And what little there is, is quite troubling, certainly nothing to cheer about.

Obama is merely this year's tired old retread on a gimmick that has brought the democrats some measure of success in the past.  In 1972, voters went to the polls to vote for a guy they knew very little about.  That brought us the malaise years, the incredibly destructive Carter administration.

Once again in 1992, we were offered up another governor this time from Arkansas that voters knew very little about.  That year they voted in the slickmeister, perhaps the closest thing to a (dixie) mafia stooge we'll ever get.  Where do you begin to describe those years, watching the democrats defend a guy for having sex with a woman thirty years his junior in the Oral Office, while not having more than five minutes conversation with her during the first year of their deeply fulfilling relationship.  The guy even made phone calls from the Oral Office talking to politicians about deploying U.S. toops, while getting serviced.  And that was by no means the worst of it.

Here we are again with an unknown.  The guy offers up some great speeches, it's just that they're calorie free.  It's as if his supporters see him as some modernistic version of Yoda.  When he speaks they close their eyes and rely on the Force.  The question is, which side is that Force on?  Is it the Alican Skywalker Force, or the Darth Vador Force?

Folks need to read about Obama.  If ever there was a guy that folks should get to know before voting, this is the one.  The vacant see him as a benevolent sage, but I'm thinking it will turn out to be a more like Derth Maul.  The vacant hammer of this year's left.

The graphic cycles approximately every thirty seconds.

[DSP in CW]

A co-worker whose insight into politcs I tend to trust, believes the only way McCain can pull off a win in the general election is if he picks the right VP candidate - and he thinks that it has to be be Lieberman. I agree that this choice would bring in a lot of Dems and Inds, I am hoping for JC Watts as VP.

[scannell]

correct........

And when you can’t afford a new car, do you look for at least the best used car you can afford or do you walk?

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

Not quite the same. If you actually have an influence in determining the next President (see comment 18), then by not voting for McCain, you are in essence voting for one of the other two (the Democrat nominee).

Basically, if you had to choose one of them to be President, which would you pick? McCain or Clinton/Obama? Hopefully, you'd pick the top candidate (based on your views) of a trashy lot.

[scannell]

That is exactly the point I am trying to make. If you can’t get what you want you need to move down the heirarchy to the next best option.

[mtntop3]

“Hope and change” - ??...to defend this nation, our families, ourselves against an fanatic enemy intent on killing us all no matter how long it takes?????

Obama needs a video of the Twin Towers behind him when Obama mews this, with never-to-be-forgotten men and women dropping from dizzying hights in horrible sequence after sequence to concrete below....

“Hope and change:” A CHARGE AGAINST OUR OWN SOCIETY AS THE ENEMY SEEKS TO DESTROY IT....

Go to hell, Obama. Go to hell, Clinton. With you - either of you - we only LOSE hope.

[Tolik]

http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/victordavishanson/2008/02/16/the_tragic_self.php

Obamiana

Barrack Obama’s team should begin to worry that in the popular culture and even the mainstream media, people are beginning automatically to associate his set speech with vapidity, “hope” and “change” with saying nothing. If not curtailed, that Pavlovian identification will take on a life of its own.

Historians will wonder at what point the post-racialist Obama, who, it was alleged, “was not black enough”, transmogrified into “The Black Candidate” and began winning 85-95% of the black vote, even when head-to-head with the wife of the honorary “black” president. The downside, as Hillary’s campaign seems to be trying to exploit, is that racial identity politics married with appeals to upscale yuppie whites, is beginning to turn off other minorities such as Asians and Hispanics, as well as working whites. One lives and dies with appeals to the tribe, whether intended or not. A good example was Cruz Bustamante’s run for governor during the California Gray Davis recall. Suddenly commercials ran with crowds of Mexican-Americans shouting and waving red flags, and his ratings nosedived with each spot that aired.

Obama may well capture the nomination, but there is an outside chance that he will lose to Hillary all the key states so important in the general elections—California, Florida, Michigan, New Jersey, and New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Not a good sign for the November elections.

Much of the rhetoric of the Obama campaign concerns mortgage and student loans, with the clear implication that the borrower has been victimized, and is need of federal redress. Two observations: prior to the mortgage meltdown, the rhetoric had been “home ownership” or the notion that the “non-traditional” borrower had to be accommodated to get him into a first home. Now such marginal borrowers apparently were “tricked”, or coerced into buying more home than they could afford.

The same logic will apply to student loans, as we begin to hear all sorts of bail-out programs aimed at those “burdened”. Perhaps true, but in a great many of cases, many had no business going into debt for college, since they were not yet motivated and only limped through the undergraduate years, attending class haphazardly in a holding pattern, unsure whether to graduate or work or sort of both.

It may be a conservative canard, but the common theme of the Obama rhetoric is that the US is a depressingly oppressive place, where the poor citizen has not much income and gets no help from an uncaring government. It all sounds like 1929, not the entitlement colossus of 2008.

[Tolik]

    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out.

Links:    FR Index of his articles:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson
                His website: http://victorhanson.com/
                NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp
                Pajamasmedia:   http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/

[Luke21]

Like choosing between two forms of a deadly disease.

[oust the louse]

"Obama would probably be a disaster as President; I’m still not voting for McCain."

Look at what you are saying...seriously...you don't even know McCain's running mate plus you'll choose disaster just to stick to your principals. Props to you for having principals,(as do I) but I'll be damned if I let this socialist muslim kook with the middle name of Hussein disgrace the same office x42 got his BJ's in...

[oust the louse]

kjo my post above should be a reply to you and not uncledave...my bad.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Obama would probably be a disaster as President; I’m still not voting for McCain.

Then you effectively voted for Obama.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

"... frankly do not see any of the three candidates as being good for the country."

This is true. Unfortunately, it is coming down to "who is least-worst for the country?" At least one of the three remaining candidates will defend this country against foreign enemies and is not a foaming at the mouth rabid socialist. It is sad, but he's the one we must vote for.

[hosepipe]

What the campaign releases is bull sperm..
Democrats Alzeheimers disease makes them forget after beng elected.. And since democrats cannot remember or even CARE what happened last week.. They will not notice either..

[dennisw]

bttt

[Paradox]

The Obama Candidacy is one of the most embarassing things foist upon us in a long time. Not because Obama is a terrible person, but because his CANDIDACY is based on smoke and mirrors, the triumph of style over substance. It is everything we all, including Liberals (at least they USED to say) hated about the American Electorate.

We have fought our battles over our Republican candidate, we got no traction with the conservatives. Thats it, I lost that battle, but the war against Liberals and even worse, this "Oprafied Candidacy" goes on. I WILL be voting for McCain in the general election. I will have to hold my nose, yes, but I will do it.

Freepers are DREAMING if they think that they are going to teach the Republicans a lesson, and that history will repeat itself and the NEXT Republican will be the reincarnation of Ronald Reagan, and he will win because the Democrat will neccessarily be disasterous... that all will not matter, because by then, Obama and the Liberal congress will stack the courts, they will enact HARD socialist policies that would make FDR blush. They will be able to do this because the ELECTORATE is different than it was 25 years ago.

The voting electorate is at a weak point and primed for Socialism, and as we all know, once the government giveth, you will NEVER take it away later. Income tax? Social Security? Medicare? Folks, if Obama makes it to the White House, we will see Liberalism run amok for the next 4 to 8 years in a way that we cannot imagine. The things that THEY feared WE would do over the last 8 years (but never really did), THEY will do to us.

[monkeyshine]

I’m not a fan of McCain, in fact I’m a bit frightened by his presidency (should he win) but I will vote for him if the choice is McCain vs Hillary or Obama as it seems likely. I’d even give McCain some money. VDH is right. McCain for all his faults understands our place in the world. Its not the ideal situation but of the three I am compelled to vote for the most trustworthy given all circumstances. Its not about 1 or 2 issues but the whole gamut of issues and potential calamities that may befall us in the future.

McCain has at least made some very obvious mistakes in the past, and those may even betray his true self. But better to have a President who has made some mistakes so that he may have learned from them, then to have one of the two inexperienced leaders making mistakes for the first time.

[Louis Foxwell]

Marxists have 2 candidates they can happily support. Why is is there no electable conservative candidate? Is it, perhaps, because the Republican party is not the home of conservative politics?
The radical left has political power that the conservative right is lacking. The pursuasion and direction of leftist politics in America is clear and strong. They are not lacking for standard bearers. The same cannot be said for conservatism.