The difference between them [Bush and Obama], which is why Obama is the more dangerous man ultimately, is he has very little by way of a skill set to understand the complex problems he wants to address, but he has this unbounded confidence in himself. ...
... He was an adjunct, and we always hoped he’d participate in the general intellectual discourse, but he was always so busy with collateral adventures that he essentially kept to himself. The problem when you keep to yourself is you don’t get to hear strong ideas articulated by people who disagree with you. So he passed through Chicago without absorbing much of the internal culture. ...
... He was always a tremendously engaging and charming individual, but he’s not the kind of guy who likes to be pushed. He has a way of listening to you to make it appear as though you’re the only person in the world who matters. And then when it’s all done, now what does he believe? He’s amazingly good at playing intellectual poker. But that’s a disadvantage, because if you don’t put your ideas out there to be shot down, you’re never going to figure out what kind of revision you want. His mind is set in concrete. If he thought a stimulus would work in 2009, he thinks it today.
To sum up, Obama was a charmer, which attracted others on the faculty, but he held himself aloof, preoccupied with his own interests, as though he lived in his own little world.
This allowed him to maintain his great self-confidence intact, but he didn't really test himself against real world obstacles, didn't grow, didn't adapt his thinking to difficult realities.
So yes, there is something Peter Pan-ish or narcissistic about the man, at least according to one of his former colleagues.
Thanks for your post and link.
I think Epstein is right but may have gone easy on Obama just because he’s the president, but it’s only a suspicion.
Remarkably insightful.
Boy are we screwed.