Kathleen Parker frets. President Obama “appeared weak.” It is “amateur hour.” He is “not fully formed.” He “wants too much to be liked.” My, what a revelation it has been.
Excuse me, but this should not exactly come as a surprise. Indeed, the pundits told us many of these qualities were actually positive attributes in a president. We were tired of “macho, cowboy-style” presidents. We wanted someone who could admit error. We didn’t need someone with years inside the Beltway. Professional politicians got us into the mess, so we needed someone untouched — “unformed” I supposed — by the brew of D.C. politics to fix it. What was important was to be smart (which meant “degreed” not accomplished) and worldly.
The guy with the years of legislative experience, who understood the importance of projecting strength, who was going to stick to his guns and who had no tolerance for ethical missteps lost. We decided on change — an unformed premise for a presidency if ever there was one. So if we get a president who lacks executive acumen and “maturity”and appears to be a push-over, the voters have no one to blame but themselves. But they might have a bone to pick with all the pundits who thought none of this would be a problem.