It takes a lot of chutzpah to want to be President at the age of 46. I guess it take a lot of chutzpah in general, but, for me at least, the age problem is Obama’s, not McCain’s. In an era when 70 is the new 60, McCain’s age doesn’t seem a problem at all. [Aren't you being a bit self-serving there?-ed. Maybe.]
What’s interesting in this, however, is that both men trumpet being able to cross the line into bi-partisanship but only one of them has actually done it. I have been thinking about that for some time and was pleased to see Chris Wallace digging into the question:
WALLACE: And we are back now with Senator Barack Obama. Senator, one of the central themes of your campaign is that you are a uniter, who will reach across the aisle and create a new kind of politics. Some of your detractors say that you are a paint by the numbers liberal and I’d like to explore this with you.
Over the years, John McCain has broken with his party and risked his career on a number of issues, campaign finance, immigration reform, banning torture. As a president, can you name a hot button issue where you would be willing to cross (ph) Democratic party line and say you know what, Republicans have a better idea here.
OBAMA: Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans in some cases may have a better idea.
WALLACE: Such as.
OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ’60s and ’70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.
Blablabla…. Actually, Obama has done pretty near Zippitty Doo Dah in this regard in real life – and what puny amount he did didn’t come within a country mile of “risking his career” on it, as Wallace described McCain. In fact Barack could be called a Profile in Extreme Liberal Traditionalism as opposed to a Profile in Courage, to channel that other forty-something who ran for President in a very different era.
Of course Obama hasn’t had the chance to prove himself at all in this. And therein lies the point. In this day and age, only someone of unbelievable arrogance would think himself qualified to be President at 46. You can tell me that Kennedy served at the height of the Cold War – the Cuban Missile Crisis and all that – but I was there then and I remember. We had nowhere near the divided country that we have now in the post-Vietnam era. Now… reaching across the aisle, which was once pro-forma, is far more difficult, while being if anything more crucial. Someone who has walked the walk in that regard has the potential to be an invaluable leader. Someone who has just paid it lip service and then walked the other way is suspect from the outset.
MEANWHILE: This should go viral, although I wish the tempo had been a little faster and they flipped a few more cards… oh, well…
PJM Home
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
16 Comments
1. srlucado:Nobody who bowls a 37 should become President of the United States, regardless of age. Ye gods.
We know he hasn’t spent time in a bowling alley, so where has he been spending time? Decades of immersion in commie propaganda isn’t exactly the kind of seasoning we need for chief executive.
What does he really think of Americans as people–not an unnamed, unwashed mass, but as a conglomeration of individuals?
I’m a total nobody, but I’ve met a few US Senators and governors (including George W. Bush), and I’ve seen a common thread of decency and humanity among them. I haven’t met Obama in person, but he seems to be completely lacking such characteristics. It’s all about him.
(The problem for Democrats is that Hillary isn’t any different.)
Scott
Apr 27, 2008 - 5:12 pm 2. Barrett:If McCain is smart, he will use Regan’s line when questioned about his age. Regan answered (with a smile), I won’t hold your inexperience against you (or something to that effect).
Scott, BHO probably doesn’t know how to put his fingers into the holes and that should disqualify him right off. I wonder if he could stomach a beer with the “typical white” people who “cling to their guns and religion” and, let’s not forget, bowling balls.
Of course, it’s all about him. All of us little people should be thankful that one of the elite would be willing to tell us what we should think and do. How magnanimous!
Apr 27, 2008 - 5:30 pm 3. David Thomson:I don’t think “Barry” Obama thought his campaign would last this long. He would have distanced himself from Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayers a long time ago if he suspected the odds were in his favor. 2008 was supposedly Hillary Clinton’s time to shine. Obama was merely hoping to become better known for future political opportunities—and also increase his value on the lecture circuit. Obama was probably downright stunned when he came first in Iowa and Senator Clinton came in third. This changed everything overnight.
Apr 27, 2008 - 6:42 pm 4. Charlie (Colorado):I hate to admit it, but I really do have a little trouble with a President who is that much younger than me.
I hate having a younger doctor too.
I guess I’ll have to get used to it eventually, but at least not with McCain.
Apr 27, 2008 - 6:50 pm 5. John West:Look, I don’t trust Obama either, but bowling? C’mon, the golden age of bowling has been over for so many years I’d forgotten it even existed till all this came up. What Chris Wallace SHOULD’VE asked him about is the price of gasoline. Everything we buy, everything, moves by truck, and where I live diesel is $4.07 a gallon.
The Telegraph newspaper over in the UK ran a story on Thursday about how strategists at Lehman Brothers think the oil boom is gonna deflate. And in it was this tidbit: “Lehman Brothers said the price of oil had been pushed to inflated levels by a $40bn inflow into commodity index funds this year, much of it coming from Mid-East sovereign wealth funds.” In other words, some of our Arabs ‘allies’ have been double-dipping; with the money they get from selling their oil at inflated prices they bid-up oil futures, thus raising prices even further, which gives them yet more money to do it all over again. Sweet, huh? That’s something maybe the President could do something about, and it’d be interesting to hear Obama’s take on it.
Apr 27, 2008 - 7:29 pm 6. Roger:VEry interesting, John West. I don’t know about that. And I certainly agree with you about bowling. Who cares?… BTW, one of the best things you can say about Obama is that he plays basketball pretty well for a forty-something. Check it out on YouTube.
Apr 27, 2008 - 8:00 pm 7. LarryD:“Lehman Brothers oil price” found it. Top ‘o the list.
The roaring oil boom of the last few months may be on its last legs as economic growth slows hard across the world and a clutch new refineries come into operation, Lehman Brothers has warned in a hard-hitting report.
“Supply is outpacing demand growth,” said Michael Waldron, the US bank’s oil strategist.
“Inventories have been building since the beginning of the year. We have pretty significant projects starting soon in Saudi Arabia, and large off-shore fields in Nigeria,” he said.
The Saudi Khursaniya field has just opened with 500,000 barrels a day (b/d) of production, and the new Khurais field will start next year with a further 1.2m b/d.
The Saudis have pledged to spend $90bn (£45bn) on their oil industry over the next five years, lifting capacity to 12.5m b/d by the end of 2009.
Apr 28, 2008 - 9:21 am 8. Carl Spackler:It really seems going to Harvard and then getting a law degree is a form of brain damage. Then, going into politics is like a rehab drunkard getting a job in a bar.
Apr 28, 2008 - 9:24 am 9. Lem:Obama stay with his choice of spiritual mentor for 20 years tells me a lot about what kind of reaching out there would be on an Obama administration.
If you are not convinced just check what the ‘reverend’ believes about right / left, black / white brains.
Perhaps we should have a voter guide reflecting what side of the brain Obama will be reaching out from so as to avoid confusing Palm Beach voters yet again
Apr 28, 2008 - 10:08 am 10. Lem:‘At the end of the day’ McCain should have the ‘clinging’ chads pretty much locked up
Apr 28, 2008 - 10:28 am 11. TerryeL:John:
What exactly can the president do about world oil prices? I mean really?
In fact if I remember correctly the Democrats ran for Congress promising to bring down gas prices and not only have they failed, prices have gone up more since they took over than they did before.
Apr 28, 2008 - 2:47 pm 12. TerryeL:I just think Barack Obama is a phony. In fact I heard that his socalled landmark speech in 2002 against the war was not kept on video or audio. He “recreated” it for the sake of campaign ads. Now that kind of reminds me of the whole “fake but accurate” kind of politics we have seen before.
Apr 28, 2008 - 2:50 pm 13. John West:John:
What exactly can the president do about world oil prices? I mean really?
Hi, TerryeL. I’m not sure he can do anything. That’s why I said “maybe.” On the other hand, the Gulf States are defense clients of ours. Remember Kuwait? They’re rich but weak, and it’s the U.S. that protects them against local predators like Saddam. That’s a pressure point for a President willing to play hardball, which is what the Arabs are playing with us by using their sovereign wealth funds to manipulate oil prices.
Additionally, a stronger dollar brings oil down. To that extent, our current monetary policy is killing us at the pump, and there may well be room for a new administration to do better.
I noticed just now that there are some thoughts on this subject up at the Hillary website. Her bullet points sound good, at least at a quick read. But the idea that so-called ‘energy independence’ has anything to do with this is absolute rubbish; as well, the Dems would do well to walk away from the Global Warming junk science burlesque while they still have a little dignity left. I’m lookin’ at you too, Barack.
Apr 28, 2008 - 5:58 pm 14. TerryeL:John:
I understand your point and you might well be right. But one thing I have noticed is that there are not any shortages. I am not sure this price hike is really being driven by any shortage of supply. If that is true increased production from the Gulf states might not have much impact.
In fact the other day it was reported that Brazil was going to start exploiting a huge reserve of oil off her coast and the markets did not even react.
Apr 28, 2008 - 7:34 pm 15. TerryeL:I would think that stronger dollar would help, but I think the primary concern of the Fed right now is growth. And to be honest, I am not sure how much the administration has to do with that.
Apr 28, 2008 - 7:36 pm 16. dclydew:The gas hike has several contributing factors… the biggest of which appears to be the weak dollar. When the dollar is weak, investors take their money out of investments that rely on the dollar and stick their capital in ’safe’ bets, like Oil and Gold.
This means that ‘demand’ is up… demand from investors, that is, and thus price goes up for us at the pump as a side effect. I am willing to bet that some of our ME ‘friends’ are part of the problem, but if you take a look at the data, you’ll find that a lot of the Oil buys that are whacking our gas prices come from Red-Blooded, Green-Pocketed American Investors. They’re trying to keep their capital safe and investments in companies right now doesn’t look great.
The best that the Feds could do, I think, is find a way to make the dollar an attractive investment again. Given the current state of things, I’m not sure how they could go about doing that. The sub-prime mess is still affecting investor thinking (and worse yet uneducated consumer thinking), and a lot of international investors that I’ve talked to are finding other places to sock their money. More than a few of them have decided that ’something is not quite right’ (as a British friend put it) in our current US economic situation. Bernake and the gang need to figure out what that ’something’ is (real or imagined) and fix it.
Then, maybe, the price of oil will drop again.
One of the things that has been blowing my mind is the complete disconnect that both the Dems and Reps show on this topic. Gas is not high because of shortages… therefore, drilling in ANWAR will not drop the price of Oil, it will just make more oil for investors to hide their capital in. ‘Green’ energy will not drop the price of Oil, because A) It doesn’t exist yet and even the most promising tech is a good 3-5 years away from mainstream and B) demand for ENERGY is not what is pushing the oil market, demand for safe investments are.
But, what the hell, most Americans don’t bother with the details, so why should our politicians? Vague policy statements, rhetorical political memes and good old fashioned Stump Lies will do fine to get someone elected.
Bleh.
Apr 29, 2008 - 9:13 am