There's something about Barak Obama that reminds me of George Bush. Actually there are a lot of things that are very similar.
George Bush started campaigning for the Presidency very very early. He travelled the country raising funds and making lots of paid speeches, but never came out and said anything just like Obama is starting to do now.
George didn't side with the established Republican elites of the time but instead pushed to mobilize the Christian right to get his vote out. Obama is not siding with Democratic elites like Hillary Clinton over issues like the Iraq war.
The press had very little bad to say about George Bush prior to the 2000 election just like they have very little to say about Obama. Actually they have less to say about Obama, because he appears to have done even less than Bush did.
Both politicians speak in a language that resonates with their base: Bush-Perot like good ol' boy catch phrases, Obama-Idealistic intelligenestia styled phrases.
Bush was offered up like a golden child, son of a former president and Obama is offered up like a golden child product of the Democratic party.
In short, they are both long on mobilizing their base with words and very short on actual results. Many people have been asking if Obama has staying power to keep his public appeal up. He appears to be following the Bush model for presidential elections.
He is pitched as the once in a generation leader like Kennedy, but unlike Jack Kennedy what has Obama done?
He just got elected to the Senate, he did not serve in the military and definitely was not a war hero. He does not herald from a familiy with 60-80 years of politics in the blood lines that stretch over continents like the Kennedy's and doesn't appear to share the Kennedy's fascination with the underworld even though one of his advisers recently resigned under the spectacle of corruption.
Bush was well liked by his base and moral. Obama is inspiring which is the Democratic equivalent for his base. Obama may be able to inspire, but an inspirational leader is not necessarily a leader that can get things done.
I for one would much rather see someone that can get things done. Bush has shown us the results of ineffectualism at the helm. Obama stated in New Hampshire this weekend, "I think what's going on is people are very hungry for something new; they are interested in being called to something larger. " Sure American's want something new, they want a leader that can get things done as opposed to a new flavor as the last thing we need is inspired ineffectualism.
No comments:
Post a Comment