Posted on 08/01/2008 7:15:27 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
WASHINGTON -- As the presidential candidates enter the three-month sprint to November, Barack Obama must be wondering: If that did not do it, what will? The antecedent of the pronoun "that" is his Berlin speech. The antecedent of the pronoun "it" is assuage anxieties about his understanding of the need to supplement soft power (diplomacy) with hard power (military force).
He spoke in Berlin at the bullet-scarred base -- it was in the crossfire 63 years ago as Russian troops neared Hitler's bunker about a mile away -- of an 1873 monument to German militarism. To be precise, the monument celebrates the Franco-Prussian War and lesser triumphs of the militarism that would help ruin the next century.
Anyway, at that monument Obama exhorted Germans -- does the candidate of "change" appreciate how much beneficent change made this exhortation necessary? -- to be more willing to wage war, in Afghanistan. He was right to do so.
But polls taken since his trip abroad do not indicate that Obama succeeded in altering the oddest aspect of this presidential campaign: Measured against his party's surging strength in every region and at every level, he is dramatically underperforming. Surely this fact is related to anxieties about his thin resume regarding national security matters, the thinnest of any major party nominee since Wendell Wilkie's in 1940. But the fact also might be related to fatigue from too much of Obama's eloquence, which is beginning to sound formulaic and perfunctory.
Even an eloquent politician can become, as Benjamin Disraeli described William Gladstone, "a sophistical rhetorician inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity." John Kennedy said in Berlin, "Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free." That half-baked and badly written thought was either trivial because it was tautological (when one man is enslaved, not every man is free) or it was absurd (when one man is not free, no man is free). That absurdity is dangerous because it makes a grandiose mission seem imperative, as in President George W. Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands."
Does Obama have the sort of adviser a candidate most needs -- someone sufficiently unenthralled to tell him when he has worked one pedal on the organ too much? If so, Obama should be told: Enough, already, with the we-are-who-we-have-been-waiting-for rhetorical cotton candy that elevates narcissism to a political philosophy.
And no more locutions such as "citizen of the world" and "global citizenship." If they meant anything in Berlin, they meant that Obama wanted Berliners to know that he is proudly cosmopolitan. Cosmopolitanism is not, however, a political asset for American presidential candidates. Least of all is it an asset for Obama, one of whose urgent needs is to seem comfortable with America's vibrant and very un-European patriotism, which is grounded in a sense of virtuous exceptionalism.
Otherwise, "citizen of the world" and "global citizenship" are, strictly speaking, nonsense. Citizenship is defined by legal and loyalty attachments to a particular political entity with a distinctive regime and culture. Neither the world nor the globe is such an entity.
In Berlin, Obama neared self-parody with a rhetoric of Leave No Metaphor Behind. "Walls"? Down with them. "Bridges"? Build new ones between this and that. "A new dawn"? The Middle East deserves one. And Berlin was the wrong place to vow to "remake the world once again." Modern Berlin rose from rubble that was the result of the last attempt at remaking "the world."
Of course, from Obama, such tropes, although silly, are not menacing, any more than they were from Ronald Reagan, who was incorrigibly fond of perhaps the least conservative, and therefore the most absurd, proposition ever penned by a political philosopher, Thomas Paine's "we have it in our power to begin the world over again." No. We. Don't.
The world is a fact, and facts are indeed stubborn things. After eight years, if such there are, of an Obama presidency, if such there is, the world will look much as it does today -- if we are lucky.
Swift and sweeping changes are almost always calamitous consequences of calamities -- often of wars, sometimes of people determined to "remake the world." Wise voters -- polls might be telling us that there are more of them than Obama imagines -- hanker for candidates whose principal promise is that they will do their best to muddle through without breaking too much crockery.
That George Will sure has a way with words! Great read.
Cosmopolitan works fine for a New York businessman. But I want the President of the United States to be only for America. Sorry, that is my requirement. Same as I want the person running my corporation to be only for my corporation. Be cosmopolitan on your own time.
Good analogy. Pretty good piece. Bottom line: Obama jumped the shark in Berlin. It's now an observable fact.
the hollow people
have their eloquent
hollow man.
Maybe a great read, maybe. But at times I wish George would follow the advice he gives the haloed one. Stop pontificating George!
Maybe a great read, maybe. But at times I wish George would follow the advice he gives the haloed one. Stop pontificating George!
You pontificated twice :o)
This is classic George Will and what I like most in his writings, his ability to deflate political hyperbole with a plain folks metaphor.
- Will's THE best.
Yeah but I never take myself seriously. Well almost never.
There does seem to be a declining interest in Obama’s persona - especially his oratory.
People have observed that the orations have become so intrinsically grating for whatever reason that they simply have stopped listening to him.
Obama knows almost as little about politics as George Will.
The idiots in Obama’s campaign listen to the focus groups tell them that Obama is not experienced enough in foreign policy... So they send him to Europe and the Middle east to show how well he was received by the powers in the middle east and in Europe. It was a bust. That was quite predictable.
Obama has made lots of statements on Foreign Policy, if the voters agreed with the statements and positions Obama has taken, then they would not tell focus groups that Obama does not have enough experience.
NOT HAVING ENOUGH EXPERIENCE TRANSLATES TO THE VOTERS DON”T AGREE WITH OBAMA’S POSITIONS ON THE ISSUES!!!
Get a friggin clue.
Think about it. Imagine a voter saying I agree with Obama on the immediate pull out of IRAQ. Imagine a voter saying I agree that we need to talk to our worst terrorist enemies face to face with no conditions. Imagine a voter saying, we should listen to the Germans and French and then do what they approve of us doing..
Then imagine that same voter saying, but Obama does not have enough foreign policy experience.
Look at him like a ball player. A player who has never played a single inning of professional ball gets a major league try out. The major league team has their best pitcher try to strike him out. But every pitch is out of the park for a home run.
Then they put him in Right field and start hitting balls to right field.. He never misses a single one and throws each fielded ball to the catcher with a perfect throw.
Do you think they would say.. The guy is perfect ball player, but he needs more experience. When a player can’t hit, field, or throw well.. they say he needs more experience.
VOTERS THAT DON”T LIKE YOUR POLICY WILL CLAIM YOU DON”T HAVE ENOUGH EXPERIENCE.
The problem with Obama changing his positions to agree with the voters positions on the issues, is most voters won’t believe his new version.
THE SECRET TO WINNING VOTER SUPPORT IS TELLING THE VOTERS WHAT THEY WANT TO HEAR.
The most inarticulate speaker known to mankind will defeat the worlds greatest speaker, it the worlds greatest speaker is saying what people don’t agree with, and the inarticulate guy is saying what they want to hear,.... even if the candidate they agree with, is a lousy speaker, he will still win.
The world is a fact, and facts are indeed stubborn thingsDown, George, down. Follow your own advice.
Speaking of 'stubborn facts,' Will has his own "Iraq problem." Get over it, George, the President was right. Quit bloviating and get over your idiotic anger at the President. Indeed, reality intercedes: hell, even you managed to switch seats from Cambden Yards to National's Park.
Yes, George, freedom overseas is a benefit to all the world, ourselves included. Freedom in Iraq is, indeed, a guardian of our own freedom.
This is not a reassuring statement.
"Of course, from Obama, such tropes, although silly, are not menacing, any more than they were from Ronald Reagan, who was incorrigibly fond of perhaps the least conservative, and therefore the most absurd, proposition ever penned by a political philosopher, Thomas Paine's "we have it in our power to begin the world over again." No. We. Don't. "
Well, at least someone has finally said it.
Obama's Magical Mystery power trip seems to be "We have it in our power to make the liberal over again." He's redefining liberalism (i.e., socialism). And remember what Marx said about when history repeats itself...the second time around as farce.
Obama's campaign is like one of Dieter's dreams. After each absurd, grandiose fantasy is unveiled, you're waiting for Mike Myers to yell, "Touch my monkey!" in an avant-garde German accent.
"Vould you like to touch my monkey? Touch him! Love him!"
“I want the President of the United States to be only for America.”
Reminds me of the story (true or not, who knows) that Reagan’s Secretary of State, George Schulz, would call newly appointed ambassadors into his office and ask them to point out to him their country on a large map. Those who pointed to the country they were being assigned to were reminded that, no, their country is the USA.
LOL! Never seen this quote before.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
