Rove On Obama

A reader shares his thoughts in the WSJ:

Is Obama Ready For Prime Time?

Ed Morrisey answers that rhetorical question, suggesting a later time slot would be more suitable for Obama:

In a way, Obama is the Jon Stewart candidate. He sits on the edge of politics, making “wry and sardonic” comments about what other people do without doing anything himself. No wonder younger voters love him; he gets to be ironic while taking no responsibility for anything. And when people press him for action, he’d prefer to eat his waffle in peace until he can find a way to act as a commentator rather than as a real agent for change.

OK, back to Karl Rove:

The Democratic Party has two weakened candidates [one named Hillary]...

And what of the reborn Adlai Stevenson? Mr. Obama is befuddled and angry about the national reaction to what are clearly accepted, even commonplace truths in San Francisco and Hyde Park. How could anyone take offense at the observation that people in small-town and rural American are "bitter" and therefore "cling" to their guns and their faith, as well as their xenophobia? Why would anyone raise questions about a public figure who, for only 20 years, attended a church and developed a close personal relationship with its preacher who says AIDS was created by our government as a genocidal tool to be used against people of color, who declared America's chickens came home to roost on 9/11, and wants God to damn America? Mr. Obama has a weakness among blue-collar working class voters for a reason.

His inspiring rhetoric is a potent tool for energizing college students and previously uninvolved African-American voters. But his appeals are based on two aspirational pledges he is increasingly less credible in making.

Mr. Obama's call for postpartisanship looks unconvincing, when he is unable to point to a single important instance in his Senate career when he demonstrated bipartisanship. And his repeated calls to remember Dr. Martin Luther King's "fierce urgency of now" in tackling big issues falls flat as voters discover that he has not provided leadership on any major legislative battle.

Mr. Obama has not been a leader on big causes in Congress. He has been manifestly unwilling to expend his political capital on urgent issues. He has been only an observer, watching the action from a distance, thinking wry and sardonic and cynical thoughts to himself about his colleagues, mildly amused at their to-ing and fro-ing. He has held his energy and talent in reserve for the more important task of advancing his own political career, which means running for president.

Karl Rove, echoing David Brooks, had previously been more specific about instances in which Obama ducked opportunities to join a bipartisan Senate deal.  Here is Mr. Rove from late February:

Mr. McCain can now question Mr. Obama's promise to change Washington by working across party lines. Mr. Obama hasn't worked across party lines since coming to town. Was he a member of the "Gang of 14" that tried to find common ground between the parties on judicial nominations? Was Mr. Obama part of the bipartisan leadership that tackled other thorny issues like energy, immigration or terrorist surveillance legislation? No. Mr. Obama has been one of the most dependably partisan votes in the Senate.

As Jeralyn Merritt noted, Barack Obama is very cautious about husbanding his political capital.  With Barack Obama, political capitalist, it is always change tomorrow and never change today.

ERRATA:  Re: "A reader shares his thoughts..." - let's move the Insufferability Threat Level to Yellow.

Comments

[MarkO]

Many witnesses tell compelling stories when their lawyer asks the questions. This witness has not been cross-examined. In fact, he finds it demeaning. There is too much impeachment out there for him to make it through.

I only wish I could ask the questions.

[Jane]

Me too Mark. Me too.

[Jane]

Sometimes TM is so good that there is simply nothing else to say.

[windansea]

Sometimes TM is so good that there is simply nothing else to say.

+1

Karl wields a mean verbal stiletto too don't he?

[ParseThis]

What a joke! The "Gang of 14" is an albatross hanging around McCain's neck. Did bipartisan leadership tackle the thorny issue of energy? Let's check: price at the pump, ethanol, food riots. Immigration? Isn't that McCain-Kennedy amnesty? Terrorist surveillance legislation? The retarded lies surrounding that are just too numerous. And then you want to talk about the Democratic congress without mentioning the filiblustering Republicans and their record-breaking obstructionist blocking of the nation's business.

Those who don't compartmentalize contradictions to the extent on display here have little use for Rove or the daily affirmations of those who choose to keep his company. As much as you take pleasure in the premature Icky Shuffles and in the reassurances from the mixing and matching of sundry core fictions to create the fashionable myth of the moment, you deny the fundamental lack of credibility that's been so thoroughly well earned and that is the basis of the disgust you believe you can change in people's minds. And it is in this hope that you will continue to be surprised by just how easily you can be dismissed out of hand.

[clarice]

I second that, windandsea.

[Rick Ballard]

"when he is unable to point to a single important instance in his Senate career when he demonstrated bipartisanship"

Until Boy Wonder can point his crooked limp finger at something that refutes that fact, Parse, then we just have to read your name to realize that you're pumping air through your nether orifice. If it's easy to dismiss something otu of hand, why are you tooting so much smoke here?

[JB]

"What a joke! The "Gang of 14" is an albatross hanging around McCain's neck."

"And then you want to talk about the Democratic congress without mentioning the filiblustering Republicans and their record-breaking obstructionist blocking of the nation's business."

Democrat obstructionism on judges -- bad for McCain; Republican obstructionism on other issues -- bad for McCain. Got that?

[hit and run]

TM:
A reader shares his thoughts in the WSJ

Heh -- now that is a good line.

Oh, gosh, but wait though, him being a reader may mean I should pause before SSP'ing

::pause::

One man's genius come to fruition

Not that he would mind being called a genius -- but I cannot claim to have been fully authorized to divulge some of the details.

I hope he doesn't get mad.

[Paul Zrimsek]

Those who don't compartmentalize contradictions to the extent on display here have little use for Rove or the daily affirmations of those who choose to keep his company.

I thought scrutinizing the company people keep was supposed to be a Typical Distraction.

[windansea]

I second that, windandsea.

I rest my case

the Clarice endorsement is all

[Jane]

That's simply great Hit. As usual.

[hit and run]

Heh, thanks Jane. I'd been holding that for a while -- waiting for Rove to make his move.

And there he sat, ojectively analyzing the race on Fox. No controversy. No conspiracy theories about him rigging the election or anything. So finally, I had make my own move with this op-ed.

You go to post with the magnificent bastard you got, not the one the lefties tell you he is.

::sigh::

(but don't tell them that)

[bgates]

And it is in this hope that you will continue to be surprised by just how easily you can be dismissed out of hand.
I cannot Parse That. I'll be surprised in hope? What does that mean?

[Pofarmer]

"filiblustering Republicans "

Maybe I missed it. What have they filibustered?