TheAgitator.com
Political Celebrity
Tuesday, August 26th, 2008I don’t take politics very seriously; I see little point. Politicians always win elections, which means the rest of us lose. The name of the candidate or the nature of the loss–economic or social–doesn’t make much difference to me.
But I’m having a particularly hard time taking seriously the criticism of Obama’s “celebrity” from the same people who sent a B-movie star to the White House. Just sayin’.
–Mary Q. Contrarian
Acting in B-movies does not a celebrity make. He was also governor of the largest state in the US, a state whose economy is larger than most countries of the world. This is far more experience than either of the bozos now runnning have.
And also President of one of if not the largest Unions in the US.
Just sayin’
Yes yes, all hail Reagan. Wasn’t trying to criticize the Gipper. The point was that accusing someone of being a celebrity is just kind of a ridiculous line of attack.
This is not to mention that John McCain’s a regular celebrity himself. He’s been on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno 13 times, Letterman 10 times, The Daily Show 12 times, he’s hosted Saturday Night Live, he’s had cameos in 24 and Wedding Crashers, and he’s trying to disparage Obama by calling him a celebrity?
And if that wasn’t enough, he’s from the party that reveres a B-Movie actor as a national hero and who nominated and elected The Terminator to be Governor of California, and he claims that it’s Democrats that are looking for a celebrity to lead them?
It’s simple … Obama has a God-complex … Reagan never did. Overall I agree though. Too many actors think they know more than the rest of the country so they think we give a damn about their opinion.
These celebrity criticisms are coming from the guys who proudly paraded Daddy Yankee in front of the cameras. Pardon me if I don’t take them seriously.
Internal consistency has never been a hallmark of political hack commentary, particularly by modern conservatives. See also the 2004 criticism of Kerry for getting his wealth by marrying an heiress, or the 2008 criticism of Obama for adding to his ticket a senator from a small state with policy experience (which is what Bush did in 2000).
Sure it’s a ridiculous line of attack, except that celebrity is really all that Obama has to offer. I’d love to be able to discuss/debate/promote/attack his experience but he doesn’t have any.
The point was that accusing someone of being a celebrity is just kind of a ridiculous line of attack.
Agreed. Unfortunately, ridiculous lines of attack seem to be much more effective than rational, relevant lines of attack.
“The point was that accusing someone of being a celebrity is just kind of a ridiculous line of attack.”
Not when that’s all he is.
I’m curious about why you guys think Obama is only a hollow celebrity. He graduated from Columbia and Harvard Law where he edited and became president of the Law Review. Then he taught constitutional law at U. Chicago among other things. That’s pretty darn impressive for anyone, much less someone without well off parents. One can certainly have issue with his philosophy or positions on issues, but it’s pretty hard to argue he’s an empty suit.
I’m with Billy Beck & Scott: the gravamen of the “celebrity” charge is that he is *only* a celebrity — that it’s not much different than if Matt Damon or Meryl Streep was running for president.
I’m no presidential historian, but I can’t think of a president with anything near as thin a resume as Obama’s. I mean, a couple of years as US Senator, 8 years in a state legislature, some work as a part-time law professor and some work as a “community organizer”? That qualifies you to be president?!?
Obama is clearly a smart guy. But he’s never been “the boss,” the guy with whom the buck stops, anywhere. He’s never run a business, a law firm, a military unit, a political party, a government agency, anything at all. Much less a state or a nation.
I think Obama’s partisan detractors (not to be confused with those critical on principle, among which I count myself)) despise Obama for the same reason they despised (Bill) Clinton:
People really, really like him. And that just pisses them off.
MassHole, being editor of the Harvard Law Review and a part-time lecturer at the University of Chicago shows one thing: he is very smart. That is not the same thing as experience. Well, the teaching would be relevant experience if he were applying for a job as full-time law professor. He is not. He is “applying” to lead a country of some 300 million people.
#4 It’s simple … Obama has a God-complex … Reagan never did.
That’s cause Reagan was too concerned about his fairly tale life… that and the fact he was senile for most of his second term…
In terms of legislative or CEO style experience, Obama does lack in comparison to McCain and many others. However, some see that as a feature and not a bug. I can think of many examples of “very experienced people” who have made poor decisions and surrounded themselves with poor advisors. I’m not pimping for Obama here. Experience doesn’t always equal superior performance.
Lest we forget that the actual job description of the president is to faithfully execute the laws of the United States and to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. If it isn’t in Article II of the Constitution, it ain’t his business. If anyone will stick to that, I’d vote for them in a heartbeat.
No one, and I mean NO ONE is qualified to be everything this country expects a president to do, let alone the shmoes that usually end up nominated (this year included).
[...] knew Reagan, and Obama’s no… Mary Q. spews on The Agitator: But I’m having a particularly hard time taking seriously the criticism of Obama’s [...]
I think our present Commander-in-Chief has clearly demonstrated that all of us, everyone, are qualified to be President. Maybe even over-qualified.
Personally, I think less experience as a politician increases the chances of being a decent human being.
He is “applying” to lead a country of some 300 million people.
As Suentonius points out above, that’s not in the job description. I think any candidate who believes they can or should “lead” millions of people should be automatically disqualified for harboring delusions of grandeur.
It’s one thing to argue that Obama doesn’t have enough experience for the job of President, it’s quite another to state that he’s nothing but a celebrity. The first argument is merely specious, the second is a blatant falsehood.
The current occupant of the White House spend most of his early life as a drunken ne’er-do-well who made his living cashing in on his daddy’s name and position. He then managed to serve six years as Governor of Texas, a constitutionally weak office in a state where the Lt. Governor has more real power. Yet most of the people kvetching over Obama’s supposed lack of experience no doubt supported Bush in 200 over the much more qualified Democrat. Why was that, do you think?
Experience means little if you are unable to make sound judgments. Experience means even less when you aren’t able to view those experiences in an objective light. McCain may have experience, but his judgement of foreign affairs is highly questionable, particularly when his methodology is of the ‘shoot-first-and-ask-questions-later’ type.
The guy was practiaclly drooling to go toe-to-toe with Russia. Over what? Georgia? And Iran? Really old guy? Do you have a deadline or something? Trying to get all of this in before you kick the bucket?
J.D.
LOL. Yeah, maybe he’s trying to invade all the evil countries of the world before he finally kicks the bucket.
So we have this year . . . what? Warmongering big government R versus blank slate liberal D?
giant douche v. turd sandwich
Guess I’m staying home.
Sertorius -”I’m no presidential historian, but I can’t think of a president with anything near as thin a resume as Obama’s.”
I don’t know, how about a drunken frat boy who’d failed in every business he’d been in (bailed out by daddy and his friends), who’d never been out of the country, and whose only political job was that of part-time one of Governor of Texas (where the Lt. Governor does most of the work)? Obama’s resume is a tome compared to W’s.
I would rather candidates be attacked for being lawyers…I detest lawyers. Lawyers should be ineligible for ANY political office due to conflict of interest and just on the base grounds that they are bottom feeders.
“I don’t know, how about a drunken frat boy who’d failed in every business he’d been in (bailed out by daddy and his friends), who’d never been out of the country, and whose only political job was that of part-time one of Governor of Texas (where the Lt. Governor does most of the work)? Obama’s resume is a tome compared to W’s.”
That’s what I love about some of the idiot comments on here. Switch the (d) and (r) on the above and suddenly Eyewitness up there would be going on and on about the 8 years as Governor of the state of Texas over the handful of years as a part time legislator and 143 days experience of US Senator before running for president. Probably would still hit all the talking points from 8 years ago though.
“But I’m having a particularly hard time taking seriously the criticism of Obama’s “celebrity” from the same people who sent a B-movie star to the White House. Just sayin’.”
unbelievably shallow thinking. This is what is filling in here?
buzz, just because one recognizes that Bush is a brain-dead frat boy who never accomplished anything on his own doesn’t make one a Democrat. I loathe the dishonesty and incompetency that is the Democratic Party, but that doesn’t make me blind to dishonesty and incompetency that is the Republican party. That said, even though I’m not going to vote for Obama, the giddily retarded President we currently enjoy makes him look like Thomas fucking Jefferson.
Plus, Obama’s a Muslim.
Ah, experience. You know who has experience? Robert Byrd and Ted Stevens. How’s that for a bipartisan dream ticket? You guys on board?
sigh…
when i first met Mr. Agitator HE was a ‘brain dead frat boy’ …. sorta. Sigh… good times at IU.
But.
1) what are the duties of the president? (like someone else said – check Art 2)
2) I was under the assumption that most people here favored limited gov… so wouldn’t McCain be better? In that everyone knows that the Senate and house will be D… divided gov works better for us, right? Keep them fighting among themselves… so they oppress us as little as possible…
[...] Quite. [...]
Of all the defences of Obama above, surely the least convincing is that ‘he’s not just a celebrity – he’s also an academic lawyer!’ *I’m* a lawyer, and used to be an academic, and that resume makes me want to slap him…
From here:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=5660266
“Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama’s big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.
The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos’ National Football League team plays.
Some 80,000 supporters will see Obama appear from between plywood columns painted off-white, reminiscent of Washington’s Capitol building or even the White House, to accept the party’s nomination for president.”
exhibit 54 for the God-complex ….. or maybe it’s a ‘Zeus-complex’ ?
Cogswell,
You mean better other than the constant bombing and invading?
[...] Mary Q. Contrarian guestblogs at The Agitator: I don’t take politics very seriously; I see little point. Politicians always win elections, which means the rest of us lose. The name of the candidate or the nature of the loss–economic or social–doesn’t make much difference to me. [...]
Shallow thinking indeed; it’s not even a good comparison.
Detractors mentioned Reagan’s celebrity history because they couldn’t accuse him of having no experience for the job of President.
Obama’s celebrity is a recurring item [b]because[/b] of his lack of experience. His popularity among voters has itself eclipsed the fact that he’s done very little to prepare him for the job.
With Reagan it was red herring. With Obama it’s the elephant in the middle of the room.
McCain has made his POW status a celebrity nature- that is all he has to talk about- he didn;t remember he has 7 homes because he was a POW- he doesn’t email becasue he is a POW and on and on.
Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Now there is experience we can believe in my friends.
Just curious, what would the detractors on Obama’s experience consider a good resume to be the executive of a nation of 300 million people? There really is no way to be prepared for this job, it’s a unique position.
To take the celebrity/rock star analogy further, I think some people are naturally suited to do well at the presidency and some just aren’t. For example, nobody can be prepared by nomal life to have the fame, money and success of a rock star, but the Rolling Stones have been able to handle it and succeed for decades. Other’s who may be as talented crash and burn like Amy Winehouse. You can never really know who might be suited for a unique situation.
The reason I like Obama (and I do have many disagreements with him policy-wise) is that he is cool under fire, we know he’s intelligent, he’s not an idealouge and he understands nuance. While that doesn’t alway sell in our 15-second sound bite world, forgive me for wanting a president who can intelligently think about any world crisis that comes up, understand the various factors at play and has the curiosity and smarts to learn about what he doesn’t know. I’ll take that over McCain/Bush vapid and belligerent comments about “evil” and patriotism every time.
obama is “cool under fire”, richard? when he was asked the (not-unforseeable in a political campaign) question of “when do you think life begins?”, his calm, cool answer was ….
“ummmm, ahhh, well, y’see, the, uhhhhh, thing is, mmmmm, well, that question is, like, totally above my pay grade, k?”
we “know” he’s “intelligent”, “not an ideologue”, and “understands nuance” because *that’s what his ads say*. his record says something else. how exactly can the proven to be most liberal member of the senate be considered to be “not an ideologue”?
you wanna vote for obama, fine. but save the half-assed rationalizations for someone who’ll buy them.
Life usually begins at about 5:00 PM on Fridays.
Ricard – Your rockstar analogy fails, as you’re comparing “job” with “lifestyle”.
Both Mick Jagger and Winehouse were obviously prepared to be rockstars. Whether you agree with their lifestyles or not, both spent a lot of time and effort honing their craft of song writing, recording, and live performance.
Obviously Winehouse has a miserable existence, perhaps due to being unable to deal with pressures and such… but her ability to perform the job of musical artist – until recent months due to drug addiction – was unquestioned.
You may not care for the policies of Reagan nor Bush, but both had substantial experience in either governing or business. Being a state governor does give one insights into dealing with legislative bodies and huge budgets, moreso than if one has merely been a state legislature or won their first trip to Congress.
Obama’s had a few piano lessons and won a blue ribbon at the county talent show – that doesn’t make him ready for Carnegie Hall. Strange that so many people are buying tickets for the performance, based mainly on how well he promises he’ll play.
(yes, i see the typos too. I’m on a new keyboard and still concentrating more on not hitting capslock than correcting my spelling/grammar)
Strange that so many people are buying tickets for the performance, based mainly on how well he promises he’ll play.
I think it has something to do with the fact that the only act for the last 8 years has been a monkey with a ukulele, so folks figure even a 1st grader with 6 months experience has got to be better.
Personally, I’m more concerned with the police departments around the conventions that have morphed themselves into Brute Squads.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/aug/27/abc-producer-arrested-outside-brown-palace/
http://wcco.com/rnc/confiscated.video.equipment.2.804214.html
http://blogs.citypages.com/gop/2008/08/minneapolis_cop.php
This is not going to end well.
“Laugh about it, shout about it, but when you’ve got to choose/ Any way you look at it, you lose.”