March 27, 2007

Punching Above His Weight

The AP wonders whether the Barack Obama boomlet has run its course. According to political reporter Nedra Pickler, Democrats have been wondering where the beef is, too:

The voices are growing louder asking the question: Is Barack Obama all style and little substance?

The freshman Illinois senator began his campaign facing the perception that he lacks the experience to be president, especially compared to rivals with decades of work on foreign and domestic policy. So far, he's done little to challenge it. He's delivered no policy speeches and provided few details about how he would lead the country. ...

The differences were on display Saturday in Las Vegas, where the Democratic candidates answered questions about health care.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, the only other candidate to serve less time in elective office than Obama, described in detail his health care plan to provide insurance for all Americans. New York Sen. Hillary Clinton doesn't have a written plan yet, but no one questions her expertise, since she was the chief proponent of the issue during her husband's presidency. ...

David Peter, a child support case worker and member of the SEIU in Las Vegas who was also in the audience, said Obama may have been better off not participating in the forum. Peter is a local organizer for anti-war candidate Dennis Kucinich, but said he was impressed with Clinton's health care plan and disappointed in Obama.

"He wasn't prepared for it," Peter said. "I saw him speak here about a month ago and it was on his issues and just on sort of introducing himself to the people and I thought he was much better on that speech than he was in this forum."

What a shock! The candidate with an entire two years of experience in national office turns out to be a policy lightweight. Who'd a-thunk it? It had to hurt that Obama got compared to John Edwards, widely considered an empty suit himself, and found wanting.

In 1984, Walter Mondale flummoxed Gary Hart by asking, "Where's the beef?" when debating the issues. Hart had a habit of speaking in nonspecifics, and Mondale rightly pinned him down on his inability to give specifics on his policy initiatives. Of course, Hart had been in office for over nine years at that point, unlike Obama, who has more of an excuse for his superficiality on policy.

I'm not even certain he wanted to run in this cycle; he may be a lightweight, but he's not stupid. Obama has to know that his thin experience would not generate confidence in his ability to lead the nation. Obama would do better to finish his term in the Senate and then win the governorship in Illinois, coming back in 2016 for the nomination a much stronger candidate -- and still at the young age of 54.

The more Obama campaigns and the veneer wears off, the more people will understand him to be a neophyte. Those of us who can count already knew this. For those who failed to realize that a two-year track record would reveal inexperience and a lack of depth, I award the Captain Louis Renault award. Shocked, shocked they must be who find Obama and his focus on "new politics" to be as substantive as gossamer.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/cq082307.cgi/9519

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Punching Above His Weight:

» "The Captain Louis Renault Award" from Ed Driscoll.com
Ed Morrissey is shocked--shocked!--that Barack Obama, a presidential candidate "with an entire two years of experience in national office turns out to be a policy lightweight. Who'd a-thunk it? It had to hurt that Obama got compared to John Edwards,... [Read More]

» Punching Above His Weight from Bill's Bites
Obama’s Kerry Moment Bruce Kesler Does this remind you of anyone, like John Kerry for instance? Barack Obama’s autobiography contains self-puffery and invented events. Kerry made of himself a great war hero, beyond whatever credit is deserved. Obam... [Read More]

» Punching Above His Weight from Old War Dogs
Obama’s Kerry Moment Bruce Kesler Does this remind you of anyone, like John Kerry for instance? Barack Obama’s autobiography contains self-puffery and invented events. Kerry made of himself a great war hero, beyond whatever credit is deserved. Obam... [Read More]

Comments (20)

Posted by Only_One_Cannoli [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 6:29 PM

Does this mean there will be no exit visa? Obama's stuck in House-ablanca.

Posted by ThomasJackson [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 6:31 PM

Obama isn't as qualified as the wise and experienced Hillary? And how many terms did Edwards serve? In fact how much experience did Bush and Clinton have?

Given the performances of presidents since Reagan I'd rather have good judgement and clear vision than a trumped up resume.

Posted by docjim505 [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 6:49 PM

The freshman Illinois senator began his campaign facing the perception that he lacks the experience to be president, especially compared to rivals with decades of work on foreign and domestic policy. So far, he's done little to challenge it. He's delivered no policy speeches and provided few details about how he would lead the country.

Um... Which one of his two chief rivals have "decades of work on foreign and domestic policy"?

Silky Pony? As the Pickler herself points out, he didn't even finish his one term as Senator (I blush that my fellow North Carolinians were stupid enough to elect that hustling shyster). His career has otherwise been spent bamboozling simple-minded jurors into lining his pockets with big punative damage awards, designing his colossal estate in Orange County, and styling his hair.*

The Hilldabeast? She can boast only one complete term as Senator plus eight long, weary, disgusting, DAMMIT-WILL-THEY-NEVER-END years as "co-president". And let's not be tricked by Pickler's reference to the Hilldabeast being the "chief proponent" of health care "reform" during the sorry years of the stained dress: she made herself into a real liability for Slick Willie by her bullying attempt to socialize the US health care system and had to be dragged through the courts to get her to disclose her secret task force meetings. Except for a stint as an attorney assigned to the Watergate investigation some thirty years ago, the Hilldabeast has spent most of her "career" as... Slick Willie's wife. Oh, but she is an absolute genius at cattle futures trading!

As for running on empty platitudes... Hey, it worked for the DNC in '06 ("Vote for us because we're not Bush!").

I appreciate that we've had presidents with pretty slim resume's (Lincoln leaps to mind), but to claim that Obama's rivals grossly overshadow him in experience is a little ludicrous.

I hate to sound like a conspiracy-monger (it's so liberal, yech!), but could it be that Pickler and / or the AP have decided that Obama must be stopped and they're the ones to do it? After all the MSM made Obama, and it isn't a stretch to think that they could break him. As for motive, I offer two possibilities:

1. The Clintons. The Hillabeast feels that she f***ing DESERVES to be president for putting up with all of Bill's s*** while he was in the g** d****d Oral Office, and Obama is starting to look a bit too much like competition. If this doesn't work, it's a jog in Ft. Marcy park for Obama!

2. The general election. Maybe the MSM has read the tea leaves and decided that a black man with a foreign name and possible muslim roots hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of making it to the White House. Gotta stop him lest he win the nomination and torpedo the dem's fond hopes of winning the House and keeping the Congress in '08. Kind of like what they did to Dean.

----------------

(*) By the way: is it just me, or is anybody else deeply disgusted with Edwards' decision to drag his cancer-stricken wife out on the campaign trail? Dude, your wife may well be dead in a year or two. How about running for president in '12 and letting her spend what may be her last time on earth with her children and family at home instead of dragging her to every whistle stop you can find, you revoltingly selfish bastard?

Posted by Adjoran [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 6:57 PM

We need to give Hillary some credit for her years with Bill. While she had no elected office or official policy position, she was constantly sticking her nose in the details both in Arkansas and in DC.

Edwards served about 1/5 of a term or less, if you go by his attendance for votes and committee meetings. That doesn't include the Intel Committee meetings he skipped, because they don't disclose attendance.

Clinton had six two-year terms as Arkansas Governor for executive experience. Bush had six years as Governor of Texas and five years as a highly-regarded General Manager of the Texas Rangers franchise.

Obama has never run anything larger than his Senate office staff. If his constant stream of generalities, bromides, and clichés is what some consider evidence of "good judgement [sic] and clear vision," I suggest they are lacking in both themselves.

Posted by dwightkschrute [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:08 PM

I'm figuring as much of a neophyte may be he still knows the Constitutional Amendments

Rudy not so much

Posted by pilsener [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:10 PM

I don't think Obama, or any other Democrat, can overcome the professionalism, money, name recognition, and ruthlessness that is the Clinton campaign. That said, I think he can run a credible campaign that enhances his poltical stature without ever getting into specifics.

I find the "presidential resume" issue interesting in this election cycle. None of the major Democrats has anything resembling a strong resume unless you count First Lady as a training position for President. Bill Richardson is the only Democrat running who has a serious Presidential resume.

The Republicans have 3 strong resume candidates - Romney, Giuliani, McCain. Even Fred Thompson's isn't bad.

But barring some major foreign policy or economic crisis, this appears to be a campaign that will be a personality contest.
Apersonality contest that could come down to who the voting public likes best.

Posted by unclesmrgol [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:31 PM

I thought that, in politics, style is substance.

Posted by gaffo [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:35 PM

Jubus Christ!!

Ruby and what - 20 yr pulbic servant does'nt even know the Amendments to our Constitution??!!

There goes my vote - and yes he was a contender for my vote even though he is a Republican.

Well, if he don't the 2nd nor 1st, then he sure a crap don't know the 3rd - illegal for gov. to force a homeowner to house/feed troops.

nor the most important and core amendment - the 9th. Affirmation of Jury Pardon, Inalienable Rights, and Revolution by the People if need be.

so much for "experience" - me? I have no record in the US House nor Senate nor Mayor or Attorney - but I sure as shit know the first 12 Amendments to our Constitution!!

thank you George Mason.

Posted by Rob D [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:45 PM

As far as experience goes, it is interesting to note that by the next election Obama will have had 4 years in the US Senate plus 7 in the Illinois Senate. More years in elected office than Clinton and Edwards; more than Guiliani, Romney, and F. Thompson. Not as much as McCain, Huckabee, T. Thompson and Brownback. Obama has no executive experience, but neither do 5 of the other 9 named. (And there is no comparison to 8 years as NY Mayor). Obama's experience is indeed light but in this he is not alone.

Posted by gaffo [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 7:53 PM

Bidon has as much experience as McCain (more actually). sure he ain't no rock star - but you said there were no Dems with experience. you are incorrect, - most do not have experience - Bidon however has lots, and in lots of senate commitees - important ones.

IMO he has "too much" experience in that he is a dinosaur and spent 35 yrs in the Senate, but that is another topic.

Posted by starfleet_dude [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 8:25 PM

Ed, your metaphor contradicts your message. To "punch above your weight" means, literally, to fight at a weight class above what you actually weigh. Floyd Patterson punched above his weight, and didn't do too badly himself. Obama may also, even if he loses this particular title bout... :-)

Posted by conservative democrat [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 8:31 PM

Heres how I translate the honorable CE's column: We conservatives don't have a clue who WE want to run for president, so in the meantime lets drag down all the dems, so that when we decide we possibly could win by default. C'mon GOP, get behind ONE candidate like you always do, and then my side can start taking potshots at him. Is the gop just confused? You people generally march in lockstep, early primaries this time, better get going.

Posted by Fight4TheRight [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 8:43 PM

Pilsener states: "I don't think Obama, or any other Democrat, can overcome the professionalism, money, name recognition, and ruthlessness that is the Clinton campaign"

And I TOTALLY agree. The key word you used is "ruthlessness." The Clintons are a machine and quite frankly, Obama's lack of Senatorial experience is nothing compared to his inexperience in a campaign outside the Leftist Confines of Illinois. I wouldn't be surprised to see him sobbing (Ed Muskie style) by the Spring of '08.

Hillary's biggest challenger is not Obama or Edwards or any of the others running. Her biggest enemy is going to be MoveOn, Howard Dean and the rest who will be nervous as cats on a hot tin roof over her disapproval ratings being so high probably even as late as the Spring of '08 and that is why, in my estimation, you will see (hold on while i grab a chuck bucket) Al Gore come storming in , early '08.

I would not be surprised to see Obama drop out of the race by March of '08 - by then the Clinton Panzer will have left him sequestered in a South Chicago hotel, phoning George Stephanopolous to see if he can replace him at ABC.

Posted by Bennett [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 9:51 PM

I am not so sure that lack of experience means much of anything these days. And experience in what exactly? Government is not held in much regard these days, it's not like a lot of time in means people are going to think you really know what you are doing or even what you should be doing.

If you look good, appear relatively smart and minimally competent with a compelling back story and a nice family, well that may just be enough to win the Presidency in 2008.

When Bush won in 2000, he didn't have much in the way of experience or big new ideas either and that was supposed to be okay because he was bringing all these heavy weights with him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, etc., all of whom have been pilloried over the past 8 years as incompetent or clueless.

If people like you, trust you and conclude that you won't screw up the country too much, it seems like you have at least a fighting chance of winning regardless of how long or short your resume might be or how sophisticated your ideas sound. Maybe not with the media types or the bloggers, but certainly with the people who count, the voters. This also explains why Fred Thompson has a certain appeal and he can't claim to have any significant "experience" either.

Posted by Mwalimu Daudi [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 27, 2007 11:37 PM

I don't agree with Fight4TheRight's "pre-mortum" of Obama's dismal future after he loses the Democrat nomination.

I predict that Hilly the Hun will take Obama the Empty Suit as her Veep. The Democrats love to play the race card, and they believe that Obama would be the ideal race-baiter - he could say and do what he likes while deflecting all criticism of him as "racist".

On the other hand ... being the Hun's Veep is a dismal future. Perhaps Fight4TheRight is correct after all.

Posted by LarryD [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 28, 2007 8:29 AM

Reality check to all Members of Congress (MoC) and a lot of pundits and political operatives who ought to know better: Legislative experience is not a qualification for an Executive position. You need administrative experience (Governor or Lieut. Governor of a State, Mayor of a huge city (like NYC), and so on).

Posted by Fight4TheRight [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 28, 2007 8:40 AM

Mwalimu Daudi: I certainly can accept your disagreement (and appreciate your last sentence, smile).

And I agree with you that being Mrs. Clinton's VP would be no bed of roses but I doubt that she would WANT Obama as a running mate - after all, Hillary has the personality of a bag of bricks and the monotone speech delivery guaranteed to cure the ills of the National Insomniac Society - she is NOT going to want to be upstaged by her running mate.

And afterall, for her to win the General election, she will need someone who can take the edge off of her "50% won't vote for her" detractors. Her choice of running mate will be critical - I think it will be viewed as her first test of "Executive Ability" and right now, I think there are a lot of names in that hat and yes, some would shock the life out of you.

Posted by Jeffrey Carr [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 28, 2007 9:16 AM

Are you kidding me? You guys voted for G W Bush TWICE! What were his great qualifications for being president? Where was his vast knowledge of foreign policy? A 'C' student at Yale who can barely speak a coherent sentence, and who couldn't tell you the name of the President of France or the Prime Minister of Canada during the election season of 2000. A ex-governor of, let's face it, a state that's the equivalent of a 3rd world country in education and prison systems. And now you claim to be worried about "credentials"? Give me an f'ng break!

Posted by krm [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 28, 2007 10:53 AM

Legislative experience is not executive experience (and may even be a detriment to functioning in the executive capacity).

And Obama will not run for Governor in Illinois. The state's Dems have a couple of long established and strong factions, each with their own prospective candidates to succeed the current Gov. Obama is not one of them, and isn't going to become one.

Posted by Bostonian [TypeKey Profile Page] | March 28, 2007 4:36 PM

Jeffrey,
I'm sure you said similar things about John Kerry, who did worse that Bush at school, who never ran a company let alone a large one, and whose political instincts told him to "report for duty" although he had slandered our troops to Congress.

Right?