« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

I am the One I have been Waiting For

Superman Comes to the Supermarket

Superman

Nobody is more dangerous than he who imagines himself pure in heart; for his purity, by definition, is unassailable.

James Baldwin

President-elect Barack Obama’s busy schedule yesterday of epic-length non-hybrid motorcades (11:00 a.m.: En route TBA. 12:05 p.m.: En route TBA. 1:45 p.m.: En route TBA. 2:55 p.m.: En route TBA. 5:20 p.m.: En route TBA.) was interrupted by what we may, as Jules once did, describe as a “moment of clarity.” For perhaps the first time since the beginning of this campaign, Barack Obama finally realized who he is, and the power of what he represents.

In his closed door meeting with House Democrats this evening, presumptive Democratic nominee Barack Obama delivered a real zinger. According to a witness, he was waxing lyrical about last week’s trip to Europe, when he concluded, “this is the moment, as Nancy [Pelosi] noted, that the world is waiting for.”

“I have become a symbol of the possibility of America returning to our best traditions,” he said.

As Dana Milbank refers to it, Obama’s “adoration session” with House Democrats came at the end of a day spent serving the needs of mankind. The Obama, so generous with his time, spent a good portion of the day at a fundraiser at the Mayflower Hotel, where any common man or woman could have a picture taken with him for a mere $10,000. $10,000! Such a bargain for a brief touch of the aura of the lightbringer! Can you imagine the spiritual benefit of being in the incredible presence of this … I am sorry, I was going to write “man,” but I mean: SYMBOL?

Parting with mere money for this opportunity is a no-brainer, my friends. How much would you have paid for a Polaroid with St. Peter? Well, now you can meet the Symbol who gave him the keys in the first place.

Humility makes great men indeed. “It is difficult for men in high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion,” Calvin Coolidge said. We are glad that Obama has seen fit to heal himself – he knows what he represents now, to America, to the World, to the Hosts of Heaven.

He is beyond us now – it is not enough to say that women want him, and men want to be him. He has become the HopeChange of our Generation, who exceeds all our greatest dreams of what humanity could achieve in this mortal sphere.

Consider: even the facts bend for him now, as the reeds of the Nile from whence he was taken in a basket. One need only examine the scene that played out in the midst of last week’s otherwise fawning coverage of Obama’s long overdue trip to Iraq, in which he was accompanied by all three anchors of the broadcast news as befits the travels of any Symbol (some might say the three mewed and cowered at the heels of the New Yeshua as cerberus in toy poodle form, but they are the non-believers, and deserve only to be shunned).

After meeting with top U.S. military brass, talking with soldiers at a gym rally, and engaging in as limited media opportunities as possible, Obama sat down for a brief interview for Nightline with ABC’s Terry Moran, a skeptic and a doubter, who posed a dangerous and heretical question:

“The surge of U.S. troops, combined with ordinary Iraqis’ rejection of both al Qaeda and Shiite extremists has transformed the country,” said Moran. “Attacks are down more than 80 percent nationwide. U.S. combat casualties have plummeted, with five this month so far, compared with 78 last July. And Baghdad has a pulse again. … If you had to do it over again, knowing what you know now, would you support the surge?”

“No, because,” Sen. Obama responded, “keep in mind that, that…”

The incredulous Moran couldn’t help himself, interrupting: “You wouldn’t?”

“Well, no, keep in mind – these kinds of hypotheticals are very difficult,” Sen. Obama said. “You know, hindsight is 20/20. But I think that what I am absolutely convinced of is that at that time, we had to change the political debate, because the view of the Bush administration at that time was one that I just disagreed with.”

There is no audacity in this statement. The Obama merely suggests that his position opposing this critical and now undeniably successful military strategy was adopted, in opposition to the strongly held opinion of men like Gen. David Petraeus, for the purpose of “chang[ing] the political debate.”

You may think this is a demonstration of callous disregard for the very real consequences of a decision impacting the lives of millions and the future of an entire region. But remember that only a year and a half ago, Obama introduced his Iraq War De-Escalation Act in that soon-to-be discarded institution known as the United States Senate (what need have we for checks and balances when we have this man in the White House?), calling for a phased redeployment that would have commenced no later than May 1, 2007, and removed all American troops from Iraq by March 31, 2008.

There is no subtlety to Obama’s January 2007 plan – no malleable phrases, no wiggle room, no possibility for misinterpretation. The facts are clear: he emphatically opposed the strategy that made possible nearly all of the gains made over the past year and a half, in which brave men and women from our nation and others have laid down their lives to give the Iraqi people hope – not hope for a politician, but for a future Sen. Obama never believed in.

But his otherwise irrational opposition can now be explained, you see. Yes, even the mainstream media now admits the surge policy they once opposed has been an overwhelming success. Yet this is not a man, not just a candidate – he must be a Symbol for us, not a mere politician.

“We had to change,” the Adonis invokes his watchword, his handsome eyes shining with the depth of a galaxy of stars, “the political debate.”

You see, Obama’s policy for withdrawal came at a time when he wanted to clearly focus the minds of Democratic primary voters on his opposition to the unpopular war effort, and create distance between his pure anti-war record and that of former war supporters and total heretics Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. By embracing fully the doctrine of surrender, favoring running from the field in spite of the recommendations of the wisest and most experienced military minds, Obama achieved his purpose, and changed the political debate in the Democratic Primary. This had to be done, you understand, not because it was right, but because it was necessary: for this was a moment the world has been waiting for, foreordained since the foundations of the planet, and even Obama could not argue with the Fates.

Of course Obama considered the results of his politically motivated view, had it prevailed in 2007. Of course he weighed the results for the Iraqi people of a nation lost in chaos – measured the price to the global economy of a Middle East that could spend a generation locked in civil war – and paused to consider how many lives, so many of them the lives of young Americans, would have been lost in vain had his argument won the day. But do you not see: these are the costs we must be prepared to bear for the sake of this moment of achievement, not just for ourselves, but for the whole human race.

So come! Exult! Make a joyful noise! Dance in the streets with garlands of the finest flowers! Sing glorious hymns of praise to the firmament above! Behold – the Son of Man comes, riding upon a golden ass!

The weight of His glory is a heavy burden, indeed – but He will bear it, yes, for you and for me.

COMMENTS

  • Crowe

    over-the-top stuff like this is about all that’s appropriate in commenting on The Obama. Regular punditry is left speechless because it presupposes a somewhat-reasonable position held by an opponent who would deign to carry on a conversation and risk being shown the fool.

    Neither of those apply to this guy and his acolytes.

  • bk

    We thought no one could ever come off as arrogant and haughty as Jean Francois Kerry.

  • Crowe

    Can we get the Obama campaign’s “O” logo in the obvious place in this image so that Obama may truly transcend the pettiness of mere human “names” and assume his unpronounceable designation?

  • clacourr

    Heute Amerika, morgen de Welt!

    • clacourr

      Heute Amerika, morgen die Welt!

      • tgharris

        Milbank seems to think the media is getting a little unhappy with the Democrats’ presumptive nominee. If you’re Senator Obama, that ain’t good.

        As for the Moran interview….how can Obama “think” he is “absolutely convinced of” something? In other words….he “thinks” he’s sure….but he’s not sure he’s sure? That’s the stuff stern leadership is made of. (NOT.)

        • speciallist
          • aaronbg

            ….Sorry, I just could not help myself.

  • mzforrest

    but our boy Barry

    Real Classy! RedState should just change their name to LGF.

    • Mason617

      .

      • Moe_Lane

        Next post, please.

        • streetwise

          The hype has been hyper, and the distance from the pedestal to the ground is looking downright awesome!

        • caztaz1

          The Republican machine is so blinded by hatred for Senator Obama, that the hypocritical statements/actions promulgated by Senator McCain are often overlooked. I am sure this diarist is aware of Senator McCain’s tirade against the Operation in Bosnia, “If we find ourselves involved in a conflict in which American casualties mount, in which there is no end in sight, in which we take sides in a foreign civil war, in which American fighting men and women have great difficulty distinguishing between friend and foe, then I suggest that American support for military involvement would rapidly evaporate.”
          CONFLICT IN THE BALKANS; Senator Who Saw War Up Close Doesn’t Want to See Another By MICHAEL WINES,
          Published: May 5, 1993-NY Times

          Yet when the same view was held by Democrats, suddenly the namecalling and insults were unleashed by the Republicans. Appeasers, Weak on Terror, Defeatists, etc. Senator McCain forcefully embraced the Iraq Conflict and its strategy just as he embraced President Bush on stage in the now infamous photo.

          I also would venture that the diarist has viewed Senator McCain’s booming rant in the Senate demanding that U.S. troops be WITHDRAWN from Somalia and Haiti in the 90′s. Could it be because the President at the time just happened to be a Democrat????

          The “Surge” headline is just another tunnel-vision example Republicans MUST rally around because their presumptive candidate is void of an inspirational message or vision for our country. So instead of objectively discussing Senator Obama’s policies, he is attacked.

          THE IRAQ CONFLICT/WAR SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ORDERED.

          • Moe_Lane

            That’s why the banning didn’t go through.

            Well, easily fixed.

            Not In Your Name, caztaz1.

          • Moe_Lane

            …at you using their site resources to spread hate speech. Do we understand each other? Signify your understanding by staying away.

  • anonymous_coward

    I am Barack Obama, king of kings
    Look on my words, ye mighty, and despair!

    • bs

      Isn’t he cuuuute? You don’t see those out in the wild very much.

      “Oh dad, can we take his picture?”

      “Sorry, son, but the nice moderator had to get rid of him before he hurt himself.”

      • bk

        that were led by people who had used chemical weapons, claimed to have stockpiles of WMDs, or posed any threat to the US in any way shape or form.

        If anyone on the left wants to look for war criminals, how about the rampant bombings in the Balkans under Wesley Clark? How many innocent civilians were killed as a result? And if Bush didn’t have enough of a UN mandate to suit some people, as I recall there was no UN mandate at all in the Balkans – wasn’t it strictly a NATO action? When are our troops getting pulled out of there? Gore lied about it during one of the earlier election cycles, saying our guys would be home by year-end, then Clinton just renamed the mission and left them there.

        • speciallist

          n/t