I see that even before being sworn in, President Obama is lowering expectations. It’s hard not to be snarky about it, but any snark should be directed at Obama’s fevered supporters, not the President-elect himself. He’s increasingly shown himself to be a more serious politician than a lot of his critics (including me) thought he was.
Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy.
{ 4 comments }
I had a post going trying to toss some of the snark back on Obama but, you’re right, Dean. Most of it needs to be heaped upon his supporters. Hopefully, they’ll learn their lesson. There is no candidate for "hope and change." He doesn’t exist. You don’t get change by electing one man to one office. Hope and change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. Your government will reflect your values and if you don’t work for what you want in your own life, and instead want it handed to you, you’re going to be disappointed.
So, yeah, the snark belongs with Obama’s supporters. So too does our pity. We, the ones that didn’t support the Obamessiah, saw it clearly. He could never do half of what he promised, nor most of what his flock thought he promised.
Here’s hoping in 2012 they’re ready to vote for Sarah Palin.
With due respect to the president-elect, and while not disagreeing with the host per se, I respectfully object to the point.
A president – and especially a president-elect who is by definition a no-experience rookie – is supposed to be serious and take his new job seriously. But thanks to the last two Boomer presidents (the philanderer and the frat boy – sorry W, but that’s the impression you allowed to settle), it’s been at least 20 years since we’ve seen a president-elect that most Americans can believe will treat the position with some earnestness.
I don’t see anything particularly notable in the president-elect’s bearing so far – except when compared to his peers. We’ve defined deviancy down so far that all Mr. Obama needs to do is stand up straight and prevent himself from acting like a
Member of Congressjerk and we write posts about how "serious" he is.Good for him, he does indeed deserve respect and (where appropriate) praise so far. But let’s try to buck our standards up a bit from here out, shall we?
The Black Republican’s last blog post..Blacklisted Again: Three Times Not The Charm
At least 20 years? That would be putting us back in George H.W. Bush territory.
But, I don’t really see it your way anyway. Clinton was hardly the first philanderer in the White House, and it always seemed to me that Bush’s "frat boy" image was way exaggerated, especially for a guy who doesn’t drink at all.
History will be the judge.
If you go back and actually READ any of the news stories about Bush’s transition to power and his initial 200 days in office (pre – 9/11) you’ll see that even his detractors seemed impressed with his serious, ADULT approach to being President, especially when compared to the all-night pizza and jeans approach of his predecessor.
9/11 changed everything. But people seem to have a very poor recollection of history.
CosmicConservative’s last blog post..Hillary’s influence peddling?
Comments on this entry are closed.