Topic category: Other/General
Obama: Not Nearly As Smart As Advertised
Whether acerbically or impishly, Ann Coulter titled one of her books, "If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans."
That title is hyperbolic, of course, but, as usual, Ann has an important point.
Barack Hussein Obama, Jr., current frontrunner for the 2008 Democrat presidential nomination, not only has proven to be not nearly as smart as people were led to believe by his campaign and his media allies, but now he is brazenly testing whether the delegates to the 2008 Democrat national convention have enough brains not to nominate him even if he wins a majority of the elected delegates.
It became the conventional wisdom that Obama is a brilliant young man, having graduated from Columbia University and Harvard Law School and having become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review.
It also became the conventional wisdom that Obama was a post-racial candidate who transcended race.
As history has shown, the conventional wisdom is not necessarily sound, of course.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough to have a "Sister Souljah" moment, because he was depending upon nearly unanimous support of black voters.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough NOT to make those condescending remarks about economically pressed Americans embracing religion and firearms out of bitterness while someone was recording.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough to distance himself from that man who Obama reported in his first book (Dreams From My Fatherhad brought him to Jesus Christ and from whom he took the title to his second book (The Audacity of Hope, Rev. Jeremiah A. "God damn America" Wright. Jr., before he ran for president.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough to "disown" Rev. Wright in his Race in America speech after some of Rev. Wright's hateful and absurd words had been televised nationally.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough to refrain from equating "disowning" Rev. Wright with disowning the black community and his white grandmother.
Unfortunately for Obama (but fortunately for America), Obama was NOT smart enough to refrain from equating Rev. Wright's incendiary sermons from the pulpit of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Illinois with his white grandmother allegedly telling him privately that she was concerned for her personal safety when she encountered on the street black men whom she did not know.
Unfortunately for the Democrats, the bulk of the elected delegates had been chosen BEFORE the choosers appreciated that Obama was a typical political opportunist who had tied himself to Rev. Wright and deliberately remained tied to him for twenty years, prayed privately with Rev. Wright just before announcing his presidential candidacy in 2007 and only disinvited him from appearing with him at the announcement because he had been advised that it might be politically dangerous, and treated Rev. Wright as a beloved uncle whom he could not disown even after his incendiary remarks had become public knowledge and finally did so only several days after Rev. Wright first publicly explained, in essence, that Obama was a politician who had to pretend to disagree with him in order to become the President of the United States.
Obama's handling of his Rev. Wright "problem" has been a series of mistakes that show that Obama is not up to the job to which he aspires.
Still, Obama is using his brain (and benefiting from suggestions initially announced by Obama supporter Doug Wilder, formerly a governor of Virginia and currently the mayor of Richmond, that there would be rioting if Obama is not nominated) to try to intimidate the delegates (who have a right to change their minds and a duty to do what they think best) into nominating him if he receives a majority of the elected delegates.
1. Obama was successful in the earlier primaries and caucuses because he was NOT properly vetted by the national media or yet caught spewing Marxist theory on religion to please wealthy far left secular extremists at a San Francisco fundraiser.
2. Polls now show that Hillary Rodham Clinton would be a much stronger general election candidate.
3. Obama does better in polling than he does in actual voting.
4. Momentum has shifted back from Obama to Clinton.
If Democrats are smart, they will nominate Clinton, because she's not quite as extreme as Obama; is much more experienced than Obama; would be consulting with her husband, former President Bill Clinton, instead of Michelle "Black Community first and foremost" and "America is a mean country" Obama; and is NOW clearly the stronger candidate, especially in the major battleground states (Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Michigan).
As one who considers Senator John Sidney McCain a significantly preferable choice over either Obama or Clinton (albeitly hardly an ideal candidate), I should be hoping for the Democrats to nominate Obama and I am.
As an independent commentator and realistic observer, however, I won't pretend that Obama would be the stronger general election candidate.
If the Democrats nominate Obama, it will be powerful support for Ann Coulter's thesis that Democrats are brainless.
Michael J. Gaynor
Biography - Michael J. Gaynor
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.
Gaynor's email address is email@example.com.