John Kerry on Obama’s unique attributes
Even though it happened a couple of weeks ago, John Kerry’s bizarre assertion that an Obama Presidency could help the cause of moderating Islam around the world simply because he is a black man bears revisiting.
Here’s the clip (and for a longer excerpt, go here):
I think the Kerry quote is important because it illustrates a number of principles:
(1) This is what passes for an intellectual in this country, a man of nuanced and subtle thought, far superior in brain power to President Bush.
(2) But for some tens of thousands of votes in Ohio, this man would be President today.
(3) This is the sort of magical power that Obama supporters have invested in their candidate.
(4) This power is inherent—as Kerry makes clear—not in anything Obama need actually do. No, it flows from his inherent qualities: what he is.
(5) What Obama is (and the source of his power, see #4 above), is rooted in identity politics, one of the hallmarks of the Democratic Party today.
(6) Obama supporters such as Kerry are allowed to point this out. Hillary supporters such as Geraldine Ferraro are excoriated for doing so.
(7) Kerry sees these identity politics as not only operating in the US, but as something operating around the world.
In case you didn’t listen to the longer clip, Kerry’s fuller statement was that Obama as President could talk to other countries better, go around their dictator leaders and reach their people better, and “bridge the divide of religious extremism” in Muslim countries, even to the point of encouraging moderate Muslims. Why? Because he is a black man, who comes from a place of “oppression and repression,” and just knowing his life story will empower them.
And they call Bush naive about the nature of the Muslim world. Does Kerry really believe that, somehow, the life history of this one black man (who actually has a white mother and African father, and has been privileged to attend some of the finest schools in the United States) will somehow serve to temper Muslim extremism?
Not only is Kerry’s comment naive about the Muslim world—whose track record on racial tolerance is not all that fine, by the way—but it is naive about people and politics in general. To have that sort of effect, Obama would have to be something beyond a politician or even a statesman. He would have to be an inspirational religious figure of major proportions.
Obama jokes about his messianic hype. But, as I wrote here:
[Obama] might not actually believe he’s the Second Coming. But he believes that somehow, by sheer dint of his personality, he can work magic. And his wife has said the same in no uncertain terms, with no hint whatsoever of irony.
See this. I am with Newsweek’s Andrew Romano, who wrote that such statements [his “epiphany” remark, for example] of Obama’s “both [lampoon] and slyly [encourage] the perception” that he has these special powers. This perception is an inherent part of his campaign.
It seems that John Kerry has fallen prey to that perception. Whether the belief in Obama’s special powers is overtly religious or not—and in Kerry’s case it is not—it shares with religion the idea of being outside the realm of the logical or the practical. Rather, the idea is that this is a special person with an aura that will effect internal change in those who merely behold him, that there is something about his presence and his essence that can almost literally work miracles.
This may be too fine a quibble, but I disagree with your assertion that:
“He would have to be an inspirational religious figure of major proportions.“…
… because leadership in humans is independent of philosophy.
He’s running an act, without having the core to make it work.
The New York Times maintains it’s stature as “the paper of record” with it’s dwindling market share not because it doesn’t report news, but it reports news the way certain people like it presented.
The Democrat party rules inner cities not because it improves the lot of the people there, but because it blames the plight of those people on others – year, after year, and now after generations.
Obama has seized a double fistful of the tattered threads running from the hem of the identity politics tapestry and is going to keep that fist clenched until November. The only limit on what he will say or do is that which will prevent him from assuming the power of the presidency.
He’s smart. He’s well read for his age. But he’s not fit to be a senator, nor does he even come across as much of a citizen of this republic. He shrugged off the first rumblings of the Wright affair in perfect honesty; in his world, black people can’t be racist because their victimhood ranks any other consideration. He was forced to maneuver but hasn’t changed any deeply held beliefs. And he never even considered making any concessions to his base, because they already knew the rules.
There has never been a candidate remotely close to the presidency with such a demonstrated lack of confidence in representative democracy, liberty as an individual right independent of government, or American exceptionalism.
And if he does in fact win (a possibility that I would reject outright had I not lived through TWO Clinton terms and experiencing the current campaign where Hillary is his only party rival) there is no limit to the power he will wield, at least not in the short term.
Enough voters of the stripe that would deliver a win for Obama showing up will translate into downticket landslides for Democrats. And they won’t be any check, or balance, to an Obama administration. Far, far from it.
They will be as kids in a candy store.
So basically we should elect Obama for propagandistic reasons, according to Kerry? Thanks neo for posting about this.
It is really odd to talk to someone who is voting for Obama for that reason alone (or to “break” the cycle of rich white man dominance of the presidency). Obama says he doesn’t want someone to vote for him based solely on his ethnicity. Yet I talk to a few people I know, they are voting solely on that reason. I’ve even had people suggest I don’t get it.
I am not participating or voting on behalf of a cult of personality. Obama’s personality won’t save the world, that is something I DO get and they don’t. Hopefully, if my candidate is victorious, I can use the “Yes We Can” slogan as a joke, “…actually, no you can’t”.
There is the possibility that what appears to be identity politics run amok into transcendental mumbo-jumbo, is instead, normal political blarney.
It’s just that this particular brand of blarney isn’t targeted at neo’s demographic.
On the other hand, it’s also possible that Kerry is as dumb as a post.
The Sudanese example of mistreating the blacks of Darfur, has, perhaps, not gotten into Kerry’s knowledge base?
How about the history of Arabs enslaving black Africans?
On the other hand, it’s also possible that Kerry is as dumb as a post.
Well, yes. After all, he is John F Kerryman.
When people are benighted enough, politics based on audacious hopes, expecting miracles and cult of personality does work. Svetlana Allilueva, Stalin’s daughter, writes in her memoirs that once her father asked her: “You think you are Stalina? No. You think I am Stalin? No. Here is Stalin!” – and pointed at his portrait on the wall.
“Fred” got it right: the history of Arab supremacism in Africa, taking black Africans as slaves, AND the false premise that in Islam blacks are the equal of Arabs in dar al Islam. Arab Muslims look down their noses at black Muslims, even though they talk a good game.
John Kerry is only showing us how utterly ignorant of Islam he is. It’s obvious he’s never read the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the Sira. If he did he would never utter such a breathlessly stupid statement. A President Obama would not abrogate or ameliorate jihad. And anyone who thinks it would is a fool.
It just goes to show you the cravenness of dhimmis in the West, particularly our elites. No amount of bowing and scraping will cancel out the Muslim duty to wage jihad against dar al Harb. Only our conversion, death, or dhimmitude will stay the hand of jihad terror.
I have not seen any evidence that Barack Hussein Obama really knows or understands Islam. And if he had been a true Muslim he would indeed be “fighting in the way of Allah.” As it was, he was just a kid being taught how to read and pronounce Arabic words from the Qur’an that he did not understand, which is the condition of the vast majority of Muslims in the Ummah. Most Muslims get defensive when we, who have read the Qur’an, tel them what’s in it. They don’t know what’s in it, because they don’t know classical Arabic, the language of Allah, hence translations from classical Arabic are not accepted in the Muslim world. It’s a vicious circle for most Muslims. They have to accept the Qur’an as a divine dictation, and yet do not have access to what it means. When we tell them what’s in it, they fall back on their prejudices that kafirs do not know what they are talking about, and dismiss our critical examination.
FredHjr: you may notice that the link I posted to the words “whose track record on racial tolerance is not all that fine” is to the Wiki entry on Islam and slavery.
Neo:
“It seems that John Kerry has fallen prey to that perception. Whether the belief in Obama’s special powers is overtly religious or not–and in Kerry’s case it is not–it shares with religion the idea of being outside the realm of the logical or the practical.”
I dont think Kerry has fallen prey specifically with Barack Hussein Obama’s charisma. I just think he’s another liberal, and this is how liberals think.
Its amazing how a John Kerry or a Ted Turner can rise to the levels they have acheived and be complete fools elsewise. It can only happen in an America where prosperity is more likely to raise even those boats with severe leaks in them.
Ironically, if these same fools had their way, that would no longer be true, leaving only the fools in power.
Yes. What Harry said. All kidding aside, after careful consideration and analysis, I have concluded that John Kerry is a tool.
Cappy: Is that TOOL or FOOL?
Kerry is a older liberal politician – that is he knows he can say what he wants and the general media will spin it to mean something good and his detractors as evil racists. He has no real reason to censor his words.
Really, outside of the blogosphere is this any news? Do we see it anywhere else? No, and the only way we would is if a republican happens to comment on it and they will be called a racist. Kerry is still living in the 90’s wherein they can do anything and not only get away with it but have it be a *plus* and to a large extent that is still true.
Unfortunately for Kerry, the blogosphere is actually important now and still growing in importance. Kerry doesn’t believe that at all – I can assure you he is smart enough to know that what he is saying is BS. However it can (and may very well) end up being good politics. It will not be widely reported unless a republican happens to make a comment that can be “spun” to be bad for them and then we will see all sort of excerpts and edited versions to show the republicans are evil. As to how bad this will be for Obama is yet to be seen (and it also depends on how well McCain does with it too)
This doesn’t even come close to the idiocy and hubris the democrats displayed during the govt shutdowns during the 90’s that the republicans are still suffering from – even a large portion that now distrust the media nearly 100% do not question the rhetoric from back then (and it was MUCH worse). While those days are coming to a close it still isn’t here – this did exactly what it was supposed to: either garner some idiot republican saying something that the media can harp on or be lost to time and the few who saw it. Do this enough and some republican somewhere will eventually bite and it will be the main focus of the news for weeks and there is little to no hurt to the Democrats.
Well, it’s only proper that Yalies should be worshipful of Columbians. 😉
It’s true that Obama is not from ‘the ‘hood’, but it’s a clever tactic nonetheless: if Americans accept Kerry’s argument that Obama should be elected for what he represents – to us and to the world – rather than strictly for who he actually is, then that makes Obama largely immune as a candidate to criticisms of his personal shortcomings. In doing so, Kerry seems to be rejecting Dr Martin Luther King’s hope for judgement based on character, not skin color.
Gringo: Actually, both.
Aside from media spin, I don’t know how anyone objectively watching or listening to John Kerry could ever consider him an intellectual. He’s a completely empty suit. He just knew enough important people to get him started on the road to national politics and has learned to imitate enough political mannerisms to keep him there. I doubt he could have achieved that remarkable feat, considering his innate (in)abilities, anywhere (or very few places, at least) outside of Massachusetts.
Then we must forget Darfur; Muslim Arabs killing Black Christians and Muslim Africans. Yea, I’m sure having an African American president in the US would do wonders for peace in that portion of the world.
That world didn’t listen to JFK, as I remember. He found out that resorting to the assassination Patrice Lumumba in 1961 had a greater immediate impact in the Congo than any espoused international hope for maintaining that country united.
Unfortunately, the world in general does not respect good intentions, rightly or wrongly. It is what it is and no matter of wishing/hoping for it to be different will change it.
Unfortunately, too often perceptions are everything. The perception of President Kennedy not being strong, as Mr. Kruchev noted in his book, ended up giving us the Cuban Missile Crisis. Looking at Mr. Obama’s résumé doesn’t cause me to believe that he will be perceived any better and in fact worse, since Mr. Kennedy was at least a war hero. No thank you Mr. Kerry; I don’t want to live through something like that again.
strcpy; I believe largely in what you say is true with the exception that I think Kerry, (and Ted Turner with his latest remarks), actually believe, or like to believe they are true the moment they say these things. The rest ties in with what you say that their remarks are never questioned, so they never have to examine their thoughts. Couple this with the fact that words to them are tools they use to keep themselves afloat among a constituency that isnt interested in anything other than identity politics anyway.
Will Obama help the cause of moderating Islam in the world by simply being simply a black man? Sure, why not? It sounds good. Maybe the Islamic world will see that America has voted in its first black Jimmy Carter, see that we’re not such racist pigs after all and will adopt a more favorable opinion of us. Sure It sounds like racial pandering, but its what the democrats are good at.
Hell, it beats having a conviction.
The situation with Obama can be really much worse than most of his critics believe. The quotes from his book depict him as clinical paranoic with life-long habit of successful dissimulation of normalcy:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=17EEFD33-E50C-4E5B-AFB9-7D3F581A1F85
Well we could vote for a woman for the same reason. Just consider the place of women in the Muslim world…I am sure that if the Muslim world were forced to deal with a woman as the most powerful person in the world their attitude toward women would change.
Needless to say I am kidding.
All of your points are good, but these two hit the nail squarely on the head
“(3) This is the sort of magical power that Obama supporters have invested in their candidate.
(4) This power is inherent–as Kerry makes clear–not in anything Obama need actually do. No, it flows from his inherent qualities: what he is.”
I’d substitute “religious” for “magical” but the point is the same. The adoration accorded Obama by some of his followers is downright creepy.
What’s interesting is that if it was all reversed, and Obama was a republican, the lefties would be comparing his followers to storm troopers or religious zealots, and his “Audacity of Hope” to “Triumph of the Will”.
And as far as his being able to “bridge the divide of religious extremism”, you’re right, this sort of thinking shows a stunning lack of knowledge about the Muslim world.
Tom ,
You hit the nail on the head. Obama’s acolytes give off the whiff of the brownshirt. Listen to them chanting O-ba-ma, O-ba-ma.
Neo, it is going to be really ironic if theocracy comes from a Democrat being given power instead of the usual line about right wing religious nuts.
Of course, that’s just be about par for the course when speaking of Democrats.
Pingback:Monday Musings « Obi’s Sister
Perhaps democrats sense their need for therapy and are actually choosing a national therapist in Obama.
Makes me wonder how many therapist are slick enough to have all their clients pay by automatic electronic withdrawal.
Hmmmm