Revolution « POWIP

7Mar/100

Revolution

At AmSpec, Quin Hillyer's right on the money, IMO:

There is something way off balance in the character of Barack Obama. Something in the realm of zealotry, with a touch of megalomania, and perhaps an authoritarian impulse too. He combines Alinskyite tactics and outlook with an air of self-assumed moral superiority in a way that fails to respect the usual, small 'r' republican limits on American presidents. All presidents, of course, think at some level that they know best about policy choices. But almost none of them (Woodrow Wilson perhaps excepted) were so willing to disdain, in pursuit of such radical policy upheavals, such intense and overwhelming public opinion as has been evident in the current health takeover attempt.

Grandiose plans are one thing. Most presidents fall prey to them. It's another thing entirely, though, to refuse to accept the ordinary republican restraints on implementing grandiosities without public support, and furthermore to do so by A) bending existing rules; B) directly violating multiple personal pledges; C) ignoring constitutional limits; D) directly lying; and E) demanding that other politicians sacrifice their own political careers.

A little humility would be nice. So would a sense that he answers to the public rather than to some self-proclaimed (and self-determined) imperative of history and/or call of destiny. What Obama seems to fail to understand is that his own, overblown self-assurance and self-mythologizing is actually hampering his own goals. One need not stretch too far to observe that one of the factors adding to public opposition to Obamacare is a growing public disquietude about the lack of responsiveness, the authoritarian certitude, and the zealous near-fanaticism of the government that would run the new health-rationing system -- all character traits as embodied by the president himself.

Some of these defects were why I opined that Obama would be a one-termer, before OTP. He was so thoroughly airbrushed by the media for so long that he came to expect it as his due, and to believe that the lack of scrutiny was a result of deserving rather than of bias. That's why Axelrod is flummoxed by the difference in treatment between the campaign and now, and why he thinks its simply a matter of adjusting the message, rather than the substance, regarding Obama's policies and the way he pursues them.

The above excerpt, though, reminds me of a kid I knew who called himself Blade. Scotty and Joanie were a pair of affable, kind hippies in Iowa City. Between their previous marriages (one each) and their present one, they had, I believe 12 kids, but it might have been 13. One of the middle brood was this Blade.

Every summer, I'd organize a big outing to a group campsite in a state park, either in Iowa or Wisconsin, and Scotty and his brood, or at least a portion of them, would come along. Once or twice, Joanie did, too, with the young ones. On one occasion, Blade brought along his Tamagotchi or whatever those electronic pets were. I was setting up the site, and he was expressing frustration with this electronic pet.

Scotty and Joanie were affectionate parents, but their system was kind of free-range child rearing. I think they've given up pot since then, but at the time, they smoked daily. Scotty was a musician who played a variety of instruments, but mostly the kalimba. The brood wandered in and out without a lot of supervision, and you could say that the general rule was that nobody was to judge anybody else, as long as nobody was being hurt. Very kindly people, in a hippie way, but certainly not at all disciplinarian.

"What's the matter with it?" I asked Blade.
"I think I killed it."
"How?"
"I think I punished it too much."