I don’t get it. He has neither charm nor likability. It’s not like these are his ‘secret weapons’ In a battle of wits and leadership....he went unarmed.
I have read today that he has been nicknamed ‘No Drama, Obama’ for his famously even temperament’. I can’t imagine who gave him that name other than, perhaps, the writer of the article I was reading. But he is a thin skinned drama queen - it’s all about him. He has snapped at reporters who dare interrupt him while eating a waffle, snarled, turned on his heel, glared etc over minor issues, virtually burped the phrase “I won” when statesmanship was called for, called a reporter ‘sweetie’, sneered at those who are ‘wee weed up’ when he was annoyed - I never saw Bush carry on the way ‘sensitive way’ that Obama does but NO ONE gave Bush a nickname lauding his even temperament.
I have again read of his usual soaring rhetoric...again...I got nothin’. His rhetoric is fuzzy and soft focus and dreamy and promises the impossible - by that isn’t soaring rhetoric - it’s empty promises not even delivered well or persuasively. But Reagan delivered soaring rhetoric when eulogizing the astronauts who died with a well delivered quote about “slipping the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of God”.And journalists do not pepper articles about the Reagan administration with comments about his soaring rhetoric.
I remember the day I read a post that suggested that a famous actress (Julia Roberts) must have had a clause written into her contract that would require every movie she was in to imply, in at least one scene, that she was a head turning ‘stunner’ of a beautiful woman. The writer gave a few examples - the one I remember was Matt Damon (Ocean’s 11) getting all misty eyed waiting for the ‘best part of his day’ which was the moment he ‘got’ to watch Julia Roberts arrive- walking down a flight of stairs. The ‘moment’ arrived and we are ‘treated’ to a swan like entrance of a head turning stunner. The author pointed out - she isn’t a memorable head turning stunner. At first I thought he was wrong but I began to see his point - she is famous and pretty but there seems to be a formal effort to train the public to think that all activity stops whenever this unbelievably beautiful woman walks into the room (in Hollywood? In Casinos? On planet earth) - it’s a fabricated legend and it is possibly specified in her contract in order for the legend building effort to stay on message throughout her career.
And now I am watching the same technique - the ‘training’ of people to consider him charming - even his critics - when in fact he isn’t. He isn’t a great orator, he isn’t a policy wonk, he isn’t even tempered but even his critics, at times, say “well he can do soaring rhetoric but...” or “he can be persuasive but...” To which I say - he can’t.do.anything.people.say.he.can. Except pose. He CAN do that. He can pose. Like Barbie.
THe short version of my monster post above (wish I could move this ahead of it) is that Obama is not persuasive or charming - he was the public option would have sailed on through. He is devious and manipulative and these skills require alot of staging that he has to control (Totus etc)in order for it to succeed and the campaign permitted that sort of magic show and the presidency does not.
I’ve never liked Julia Roberts. There was always something about her that didn’t sit well with me. Granted she’s certainly not ugly, at least on the outside, but this so called sex symbol never translated for me.
good analysis of The One
Very interesting observations in your comparison of Bambi and Julia Roberts, the artificially manufactured "stunner."
I think you're right, all he can do is stand around with his head stuck up in the air and have his myth-makers go to work. They are telling us that we shouldn't believe our lying eyes and what we are really seeing in his mechanical face is greatness, what we are really hearing in his stumbling, nasal delivery is the greatest orator since Demosthenes, what we are finding in his half-baked, outdated radical leftism is the principles of a saint, etc. And if they just keep telling us this, and the press and the rest of the world sign the contract and agree to keep on telling us this, too - why then, it must be so.