Obama the Unready

Frank Rich, a very foolish man, writes in his typical foolishness:

Washington’s conventional wisdom has it that the worse things go in the war, the more voters will want to stick with the tried and true: Clinton, McCain, Giuliani. But as Mr. Obama reminds us, “Nobody had better Washington resumes than Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld.” In the wake of the catastrophe they and their enablers in both parties have made, the inexperienced should have a crack at inheriting the earth, especially if they’re clean.

Rich’s premise, so obvious to readers of the Times, is that the liberation of Iraq is a “catastrophe,” and he needs not develop that within the echo chamber. He jumps from that to the absurd notion that the reason is turned out so irredeemably bad is that “Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld” are Washington insiders — which he does not prove, but merely considers proved by virtue of juxtaposition. More importantly, he ignores the fact that Obama is running for President, and the person he proposes to replace, George W. Bush, had no Washington resume at all. Rich’s argument is just that he likes Obama, as it is fashionable to do in his circles, so what the hell. Well, in my book, too, being a stranger to Washington is a big plus, but so is executive experience, and a few grey hairs. Obama has none of those.

I am reminded of the first national election candidacy of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who ran for Vice President on the Cox ticket in 1920. You may forget the Cox candidacy, which was plowed under by Warren G. Harding — regrettably, it seems, considering how bad Harding turned out — but they did not forget FDR, who was only 38 during that election. The subsequent years were cruel to FDR, who had until that time lived a life of privilege and luxury. He contacted polio and, many say, the experience introduced a strain of humility into a personality previously identified with a sense of entitlement. The man who became President in 1936 was, physically, far less than the man who ran for Vice President in 1920, but by all accounts far more of a man overall, more even than a typical 16 years of seasoning would do for any of us in the passage into middle age.

God has given us the tools to make the disease that crippled Roosevelt amenable to cure, and no one would wish on this Ivy Leaguer what happened to the previous one. In our time, the tests of character are largely different from those faced by our grandparents. Obama’s life has not been a hard one, though it does not compare in terms of ease and privilege with that of FDR’s early years. But still the comparison seems apt: He is surely not ready for the Presidency, and, from the point of view of Democrats, might make a fine ornament for a Clinton ticket.

Win or lose, that campaign will establish him as a national figure, and give him the opportunity to mature, perhaps in an adult role rather than the quasi-adolescent job of United States Senator. Perhaps he will earn the opportunity to be considered for the highest office rather than being nominated on the basis of demographic polling preferences, political expediency and cynical guilt-based politics. The fallacious, obsequious reasoning of the Frank Riches of the world notwithstanding, it cannot seriously be contended that Barack Obama is presidential timber. But, like Roosevelt, he would probably be a fool not to catch the wave presented to him now to enhance his stature, experience a national campaign, and test himself. With God’s help, he’ll have his chance in 15 or 20 years. But I can’t promise I won’t be tanned, rested and ready then, myself. So he takes his chances.