The Obama Delusion

McCain and Hillary offer known partican qualities, with no hope at all of instituting a single real change in how Washington does business. Obama's policies are no different than many other Liberals (on that you are correct), but actually executing those policies via non-partisan collaboration, and the exclusion of lobbists, is the "change" he speaks of. One can not work with others if one demonizes them. I can't believe someone who makes a living writing about these issues so widely missed the entire point of the Obama campaign. Change is about changing how business is done, not about having a wholly new idea on how to solve every policy problem. If that is your standard for change Mr. Samuelson, I fear no human would ever reach it.

I am tired of people saying that Obama would be a great leader because he inspired them. Hitler also inspired. He made speeches that shook the nation. He made the Germans feel good about themselves. He gave their hope . He made them feel that they could change history. And they voted for him. yest voted for him and gave him power. And we know what he did with that power. A great speaker does not make a great leader. If great speaker were all great leaders Lenin would have benn greatest of them all.

As often happens, you've missed the point.

The reason is that the American electorate doesn't want to vote for public policies any more. They have learned, to their utmost despair, that campaign promises are all garbage - and tell you nothing about how that person is going to govern. Try "Compassionate Conservatism" on for size. Try "No Nation Building" on for size.

What Americans are interested in electing, now, is the person - the person who has the hopes and aspirations that they hold for America. Not the one with the best talking points.

They want someone who recognizes the long-term clinical depression we have suffered as we watched our nation kill off its young soldiers, torture prisoners, make enemies of most of the rest of the world (remember American Fries?), subvert the Constitution while more than a thousand (mostly African-American) drowned or died of dehydration or lack of medical care in New Orleans. Someone who can offer hope for a better America, respected throughout the world for our compassion, even-handedness, non-ideological approaches to HIV/AIDS and other world catastrophes. A country that works for all the people, not just the fringe wedge-groups that have driven re-election campaigns for years, if not decades.

So I don't give a damn about Barack's "concrete" proposals, and few other voters do. What we care about is a man who embodies our hopes, a man of reasonable integrity, a man who is not owned by corporations, religions or lobbyists.

If you don't get this, well you don't get this. You're a wonk. Most of us are not. Most of us (as the victories attest) are buying into his message of hope.

Perhaps, when all is said and done, you're just too cynical to buy into it yourself.

Sure, the other two are known quantities. And because they are, I know for sure I won't vote for either one. I'd rather vote for a cipher than vote for a known, experienced quantity who supported the war in Iraq and determine their ideologies by the day's polls (even McCain, with his recent vote FOR torture).

Sorry you can't get it, Samuelson. Your loss.

Alan Arthur Katz

This article is not supported with facts. In fact, there are zero facts in the article. I think that speaks for itself. I think if you people reading will do a little research, you'll find Hilary's senate record has no more substance than Obama's. I think the other factor he ignores is that a lot of people, myself included, feel our government has performed very poorly and ignored many serious issues for many years and don't give credit to people like Shrilary and John McCain for having had the experience of screwing us over for so long.

I don't really understand why she's used the so-called experience angle so much. To a lot of people it's a negative rather than a positive.

I'll just say also that I'm an independent in Texas and will vote for Obama but would have regardless of the Republican situation. I have no interest in the candidates they trotted out this year or the same tired old platform they're pushing and I really think people take it far too easily on both parties by continuing the partisan bashing.

It's absurd and has never served us well.

Obama is a fad.
Once folks start hearing the specifics of his walter mondale ideas the bloom will be off the rose.

"People love Obama because he makes them feel powerful,potent..."
Don't worry.
As soon as he's elected president that effect will wear off.

OK
So even Obama supporters admit he hasn't done a single thing of note in the senate.But as president all of a sudden he'll be a man of action!
Except none of the Obama supporters are defending his /mondale/gore,warmed over policy ideas.
You guys love him for one reason.
He looks nice on tv.
How substantive.

what???

Thanks for your opinion, which i believe is rather misleading. People love Obama because he makes people feel powerful, potent, willingness to try to fix the mess we have lived in for the past 8 years. He gives something much more palpable than words...hope that is action towards good. Even if your work were objective, it is untrue.

This argument just doesn't hold water. Number one, president's don't make law and number two, if you look closely you'll find Hilary's senate record has no more dearth than Obama's beside which why would I give anyone who has been a part of the mockery that is our government for the last 20 years a free pass for having experience. I don't and a lot of people don't.

Obama's momentum doesn't have as much to do with people falling in love with him as it has to do with a lot of people realizing exactly what they get with Clinton or McCain in my opinion. People don't want the same old crap and realize where it has gotten us.

I'm in Texas, so I'll be voting for Obama, but with the candidates the republicans trotted out this year and the same tired old platform, I wasn't going to throw in with the republicans even if it hadn't been decided. Both of these parties have a lot of work to do in my opinion and I think a lot of people are being far too easy on them by continuing the partisan bashing.

It's absurd and never gets us anywhere.

I think this is a well written piece. He is promising the moon with ZERO thought of how to PAY for the promises. That is NOT the realism and truth telling he speaks of. What really concerns me is that I think he truly believes that he can do all that he says. How naive is this guy?

The problem I have with this piece is the TIMING. I think that you are taking a shot at being the first to start to turn the tide of journalism on Obama now that he will most likely get the nomination. I find it disingenuous. Classic devil's advocate after the media spends a year building this guy into the Bono of Presidential Politics. I mean, did you JUST NOW figure Obama out?? You're like a republican admitting in 2006 that George Bush might not have it together. The damage is done, pal. Obama will most likely get the nomination, and fall flat on his smiling face once he becomes president. In large part due to the media's penchant for building a star and then taking him down for extended fun and ratings when it's TOO LATE to do anything about the real version of Obama. That coupled with an electorate so desperate for a new direction they will follow the Pied Piper that is Barack Obama. This will lead us to the second coming of Jimmy Carter. Only this time, things are far more desperate and in need of a strong president. It's a crying shame. A chance for real leadership and change, and it's going to get wasted on a motivational speaker. Ugh. Mark my words, Clinton will be the Al Gore everyone will wish had won by 2010. But hey, forget about me, listen to the music BO makes... let's all follow it... sounds so pretty..