Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

I have to confess

That I like the Obama Christmas ad better than the others, though Rudy’s ironic politicizing of Christmas (surely a response to Huckabee’s) is far superior to HRC’s non-ironic effort along the same lines.

Should it be a requirement that our President be capable of irony? If so, HRC is surely totally unqualified.

Discussions - 8 Comments

Tell HRC I don't want presents of massive government growth under my Christmas Tree or in my stocking, please!

The Rudy and Hillary Christmas ads are both blatantly political and contrary to the true Christmas spirit. Rudy's is at least somewhat human and funny.

Oh my word . . . I am beyond words. Clinton's ad was like watching her in a Saturday Night Live skit that she didn't get. I guess it's true, Virginia . . . there really is a Santa Claus and her name is Hillary? I actually hope that she plays that ad a lot . . . and then I hope that whoever does get the Republican nomination plays it over and and over again.

Lawler's right though . . . Obama wins this round hands down. And he was right to let Michelle speak first. Very clever. You heard it here first . . . Obama will be a much stronger force to be reckoned with if he does not get the nomination this time. He's very media savvy--much more so than the older generation that precedes him. As he matures and moves away from all those abstract nouns (like Hope) and more toward specifics, he will be quite formidable. If he ever gets half as much substance as he pretends to have, I think he very well may be our President.

Obama's "substance" is left-liberalism, pure and simple. NLT'ers -- THERE'S NO THERE THERE!!!!!!

What was the "there" with Bill Clinton? There was less "there there" with him and it took him for quite a ride. Clinton was savvy--for his generation--in the same way that this guy is for the next one. Did you hear that he's hinting at a cabinet post for Arnie? I'm telling you that you're missing something with Obama. You mistake my acknowledgment of his strengths with awe . . . I am not fooled by him. But he has the ability to fool many and is fooling a good number now. Barring disaster, he will only get better at doing it. Ignore it or learn from it. It's your choice.

Your suggestion that Obama may get more "substance" made me think, reasonably enough, that you believe there's a good chance of this happening. I was saying: there isn't. Obama is empty, a shallow liberal cliche-mouther. Might he become formidable in a strictly political sense, as Clintoon (spelling intentional) did? Sure. I've never denied that. When people say "there's no there there," they aren't saying the individual in question can't go a long way. They're saying he shouldn't go a long way, or shouldn't have. Big difference. Glad you've clarified that you see though Obama. On NLT, where there's been so much praise of him, it's often hard to tell.

All of which should really have been clear from my previous, very short and simple, post.

Get substance or adopt it or appear to have more of it than he actually does have . . . it will all have the same political effect. He is very good at what he does. I will not be surprised to see him President some day. All my elders here think he's a flash in the pan. Their elders thought that about Bill Clinton. Obama captures the age. Not happy about that, but there it is.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/11610