There's been much ink spilled by leftists trying to explain President Obama's failure as leader. Maureen Dowd concludes her latest attempt to explain Obama:
But as Drew Westen, a liberal psychology professor at Emory University wrote in The Times on Sunday, puzzling about what has happened to his former hero’s passion, the president never identifies the villains who cause our epic problems.
It’s unclear, Westen wrote, whether that reflects his aversion to conflict or a fear of offending donors, or both.
Obama’s assumption that you can rise above ascribing villainous motives has caused him to waste huge chunks of his first term seeking bipartisanship from Republicans who were playing him for a dupe. And it has led to Americans regarding the nation’s capital as a place of all villains and no heroes.
First, I disagree with her premise: that Obama hasn't sought villains. He indeed has. He's made blaming Bush a high art form. He blames Bush, that is, when he isn't blaming Tea Partiers or the rich or jet owners or whatever focus-grouped catch-phrase or sliver of the populace deserves demonizing this week (don't forget those evil SUV owners with big families!). He's spoken of bipartisanship but has poisoned every well with his villain du jour.
Second, part of being a post-modern liberal is being mealy-mouthed. It goes with the territory. There is no right or wrong. There are no objective, self-evident truths. Good and evil are scorned, quaint religious concepts.
Intellectuals intellectualize and analyze and theorize and justify and ...are you exhausted yet? If you've watched BBC analysis of the rioting malcontents you know what I'm talking about. Fancypants politically correct experts abound--expounding ad nauseum about the causes, don't you see, dahling, of this Very Unfortunate Episode. Solutions? Not so much.
That's Obama to a T. He's the college professor inveighing and inculcating and annoying the ever-living-crap out of anyone not passed out in the classroom of his Most High Excellency's theater at Better-Than-U University. And he's saying precisely nothing and sounding vaguely smart doing it.
But that doesn't work so well when the country and world is sliding into chaos partly due to the Professor's own stupid and failing theories being put into practice.
People want answers. They want some authority. They want some responsibility. They want leadership. They want clearly delineated and morally unequivocal stances. They want decisions.
Well, they don't want Barack Obama, then, because he's got none of that. And really, they don't want any liberal, because they're all wired for moral confusion and intellectual vanity.
Pretense of smart doesn't cut it when actual experience and decisive responsibility is required. Unfortunately, we're stuck with President Blame. He's named villains, but he can't name a solution because he has none.
As for Maureen Dowd's continual wrong-headedness when it comes to diagnosing Obama's problems: Take off the beer goggles, honey. You made a mistake. Don't worry. You're not alone. Most of the country was enamored of the lightweight from Chicago. As you note:
“We are choosing hope over fear,” Senator Obama told a delirious crowd of 3,000 here the night he won the Iowa caucuses.
Maureen, like nearly every other Beltway buffoon got swept away in delirium over Barack Obama's cool awesome. For three years, they've been denying the obvious and now attempt to explain it away or pretend it was those 3,000 folks from the midwest.
No, it was you, too. You bought the hype.
As for naming villains, how about some self-examination, liberals? You helped get us here. Or if you absolutely must blame someone, I have an idea: Blame the Villain In Chief.