After writing the first post of today I came across the following quote from David Bromwich article “George W. Obama” found here
“Indeed, Obama's understanding of international morality seems to be largely expressed by the proposition that "there's serious evil in the world" -- a truth he confided in 2007 to the New York Times conservative columnist David Brooks, and attributed to the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr -- combined with the assertion that he is ready to "face the world as it is." The world we seek is, of course, the better world of high morality. But morality, properly understood, is nothing but a framework for ideals. Once you have discharged your duty, by saying the right words for the right policies, you have to accommodate the world.
This has become the ethic of the Bush-Obama administration in a new phase. It explains, as nothing else does, Obama's enormous appetite for compromise, the growing conventionality of his choices of policy and person, and the legitimacy he has conferred on many radical innovations of the early Bush years by assenting to their logic and often widening their scope. They are, after all, the world as it is.
Obama's pragmatism comes down to a series of maxims that can be relied on to ratify the existing order -- any order, however recent its advent and however repulsive its effects. You must stay in power in order to go on "seeking." Therefore, in "the world as it is," you must requite evil with lesser evil. You do so to prevent your replacement by fanatics: people, for example, like those who invented the means you began by deploring but ended up adopting. Their difference from you is that they lack the vision of the seeker. Finally, in the world as it is, to retain your hold on power you must keep in place the sort of people who are normally found in places of power.”
This is the most damming indictment of the Man who would be President. A man who it appears feels that once he has voiced his concern about an evil he has discharged his duty to mankind. It is the mark of a man who says he has convictions about good and evil, but at the end of the day lacks the determination or the will to change the situation. In the minds of most people this is not a leader. I am not sure that it makes a really good follower. On the face of it, at best he is a mediocre President. Barack might be a great campaigner, and he might have been a good senator, given that the Senate is purported to be a deliberative body, and it appears that he like to be deliberative. But in the area of original thinking, and conviction, well not so much.
Senators do not make very good presidents, and I feel that unless there is some miracle this ex-senator/president is destined to join the list of the poor, undistinguished. History will remember him, but it will not be a kindly rememberance.
The following is a list of Presidents who were Senator prior to be President and their ranking. There are 14 names on the list
James Monroe 2nd Quartile, John Quincy Adams 2nd Quartile, Andrew Jackson 1st Quartile, Martin Van Buren 3rd Quartile, William Henry Harrison 4th Quartile, John Tyler 4th Quartile, Franklin Pierce 4th Quartile, James Buchanan 4th Quartile, Andrew Johnson 4th Quartile, Benjamin Harrison 4th Quartile, Warren G. Harding 4th Quartile, Harry S. Truman 1st Quartile, John F. Kennedy 2nd Quartile, Lyndon B. Johnson 2nd Quartile and Richard M. Nixon 3rd Quartile.
63 percent of the Presidents ranked in the 4th Quartile have the dubious honor of having first served in the Senate. 50 percent of the above list presidents who were senators have the dubious honor of making the 4th Quartile. This 4th Quartile also has it share of Generals (2), or 66 percent of Generals who were elected President without holding any prior elected office.
So what have we learned? Senator more times than not do not make good Presidents, Generals more times than not do not make good Presidents.
Back to Barack, given a choice I think that most men would rather have tried and failed, then not tried and failed. With the first path there is a chance of success, with the second path there is the certainty of failure.
It is my opinion that Barack when given a choice, 9 time out 10 Barack will choose the option with the certainty of failure.