Respectable Conservatives Still Don't Get Obama

The American Thinker ^ | November 22, 2010 | Jack Cashill

[Scanian]

If United States Senator Al Franken -- it hurts to say that -- ever had a redeeming moment, it was in the role of Stuart Smalley, a character he created for "Saturday Night Live."

In the most memorable of Smalley's "Daily Affirmations," the lisping, wildly insecure psycho-babbler hosts Michael Jordan. After explaining to his audience that Jordan is "a basketball player for a professional basketball team," Smalley says to him, "You should be very proud of yourself."

"Well, thank you, Stuart," says Jordan, "I am."

Stunned by Jordan's self-assurance, Smalley blunders on:

"I can imagine that the night before a game, you must lie awake thinking, 'I'm not good enough. Everybody's better than me. I'm not going to score any points. I have no business playing this game'."

"Well," answers Jordan in perfect deadpan, "not really."

Not even Stuart Smalley would accuse Jordan of narcissism. In real life, as in the Smalley skit, Jordan simply exhibited the confidence that comes with being the world's best practitioner of his art.

From the beginning, too many "respectable" conservatives have thought of Barack Obama as a political Michael Jordan, the best and brightest the system had to offer. Jonathan Last works off this assumption in his current Weekly Standard article, "American Narcissus." Dinesh D'Souza did the same in his recent book, The Roots of Obama's Rage. So too did much of the respectable conservative media (RCM) in the months leading up to the 2008 election.

Whereas William Buckley would have challenged the assumption, son Christopher bought in. "I've read Obama's books, and they are first-rate," he wrote in endorsing Obama weeks before the election, "He is that rara avis, the politician who writes his own books. Imagine."

David Brooks, who graduated from the Weekly Standard to the New York Times in 2003, proved no more discerning. "I remember distinctly an image of -- we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant," Brooks wrote of Obama, "and I'm thinking, a) he's going to be president and b) he'll be a very good president."

No self-described conservative proved more effusive than columnist Kathleen Parker. In an article days before the 2008 election, she hailed Obama as "more Reaganesque than Reagan" and, in a corollary reflex, disowned Sarah Palin, "the winking wonderwoman of Wasilla."

[DooDahhhh]

YUK

[chickadee]

An excellent article. The author has nailed the Peggy Noonan types. Old Peggy is wistfully sitting out there hoping that O recovers his “game” so she can go back to fluttering about him.

[Quiller]

David Brooks: "I remember distinctly an image of -- we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,"

- First off, when one 'man' starts writing about checking out another man's leg, I am reminded of Chris Matthews saying Obama gave him a thrill up his leg.

Brooks wrote of Obama, "and I'm thinking, a) he's going to be president and b) he'll be a very good president."

Brooks should have stopped at the first thinking. His second thinking took him from 1.000 to .500. (actually, he's so wrong on that second thinking, I'll deduct points and take him down to .250).

[Scanian]

What’s the deal with Brooks? Is he homosexual?

At the Times, he’d be in the majority if he were.

[Scanian]

I think that all too often the “sensitive” types who are good at writing are also easily taken in by ear-tickling charlatans.

[skr]

Trouser crease’s are a mark of attention to appearance either by the man, his wife or his servant. Hardly a mark of capability about anything else.

[pepsionice]

A crease is the sign of a gentleman. A extremely crisp crease is a sign of a Harvard gentleman. I would imagine that Mr. Obama’s man-servant ensured crisp creases.

[J Edgar]

” ... An excellent article. The author has nailed the Peggy Noonan types ... “

So now we are to consider Peggy Noonan a “respectable Conservative”?

I think not! She is a paid opinion shaping operative who has no principles.
In the 1970s, the Church investigation found that 1,200 high profile media personalities where on the CIA payroll.

May I suggest that Peggy’s income is not single source!

[Haiku Guy]

Our Betters have to think they are better at discerning the truth and evaluating people than We Humble Peons. So while anybody could look at Obama and see an over-rated, doctrinaire, Socialist rabble-rouser, it takes a fine Harvard intellect to decode the meaning of his trouser creases.

[carcraft]

The one thing left out in this article is that these “elite” people saw in Obama WHAT THEY WANTED TO SEE! A con artist really doesn’t con people people, he helps them con themselves. The two most telling points were the attacks on Joe the Plumber and Palin because they showed Obama for what he really was and the the press for what it was creating, a false image. Since there could be, obviously, nothing wrong with the elite and their image of Obama there was something wrong with Joe the Plumber and Palin so they had to be destroyed! Having been hood winked and hooked they are now embarrassed about their gullibility. This has caused Matthews to say he never said he got a tingle, yet we have all seen the video. Parker is now embarrassed for acting like a ditsy school girl with a hormone laden crush on the star quarter back. Palin is getting grudging respect, but only because she told them so...

[Quiller]

Trouser crease’s are a mark of attention to appearance either by the man, his wife or his servant.

Good point.

Would one expect a narcissist to have uncreased trousers?

[wildandcrazyrussian]

I don’t recognize Christopher Buckley, David Brooks or Kathleen Parker as “conservatives” , so the entire premise of the article is false.

[BobP]

Did they ever hear Rev Wright? Did they ever see him throw a baseball? Did they ever ask a tough question of him?

Sadly the answer for all these loons is no, no and no.

The libturds built Zer0 up as their messiah, and now he's looking like a one-term failure who will have a worse reputation than Jimmy Carter.

When do we prosecute these Kool Aid drinking fools? I'll be damned if these traitors and tax cheats get to flip us off one last time in a lame duck session, then come slithering back as lobbyists next April.

Obama

---

We expect a leader to be effective in his job, not just a public relations artist who is "all hat and no cattle."

[Scanian]

“... now he’s looking like a one-term failure who will have a worse reputation than Jimmy Carter.”

I hope that’s all he turns out to be. I fear that he has his bureaucracy and aide structure set up to create an economic conflagration we may never recover from in order to punish “the man” and try to “level” all parts of society.

Redistribution (i.e., spread misery and mediocrity around) will be the aim and destruction the result. And vulturres like Soros can buzz in to pick the bones.

[Scanian]

Remember, those are “respectable conservativees.” I.e., “conservatives” who are accepted by the likes of the NY Times.

A joke here in the blogosphere, perhaps, but still very influential with the Republican establishment and the media.

They have their impact. look what that type did to Christine O’Donnell and do daily to Sarah Palin. They are classist and elitist and they are tolerated and sometimes used by the liberal media—but never liked by them.

[ari-freedom]

“I think that all too often the “sensitive” types who are good at writing are also easily taken in by ear-tickling charlatans.”

We need more math types.

[Tucker39]

“Trouser crease’s are a mark of attention to appearance either by the man, his wife or his servant.”

WADR, while I have no problem with the gist of your reply, you made an all-too-common mistake in punctuation; e.g., “trouser crease’s.” instead of trouser creases.

By using an apostrophe you did not create the plural of crease; you created SINGULAR POSSESSIVE of crease. Which automatically triggers in the reader’s mind: Trouser crease’s what? Trouser crease’s sharpness? Or trouser crease’s length? Understand? In most cases, a plural can be created from a SINGULAR simply by adding the letter S. But NEVER by adding an apostrophe WITH the S. That creates NOT A PLURAL, but a SINGULAR POSSESSIVE. No charge for the foregoing info. ;oD

[TalBlack]

“types who are good at writing are also easily taken in by ear-tickling charlatans.”

Not by WHITE charlatans they aren’t. Brooks et al didn’t require the simplist standards of the black fellow. Form of racisim, you know.

[GlockThe Vote]

Sarah was the only one truly vocal about the danger of obama.