There was a time when I thought nothing could be more thin or flimsy than Obama’s presidential resume – not even an anorexic supermodel. A few years in the Illinois State House and half a term as a US Senator and Obama has a little less than nothing to show for it.

Well, today I stand corrected. The only thing thinner and flimsier than his resume is his “political” hide. Not too long ago, Obama took the New York Times Matron, Maureen Dowd, to task for her comments on his ears. Shame on you, Maureen!

Yesterday “W” took time to address Israel’s Knesset. In this speech he uttered the following words which today have the entire Democratic Party’s collective thong* in a tightly wound bunch.

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history. (Emphasis Added)

Evidently Obama has been paying about as much attention to W’s speeches over the past seven years as he claims to have paid to Jeremiah Wright’s sermons. This isn’t a new schtick for W and frankly his assessment of history is a correct one. There’s a reason why history reveres Churchill and reviles Chamberlain. Evil must be opposed, not appeased.

W made no mention of Obama specifically or the Democratic Party in general, but Obama immediately took offense at the “false political” and “appalling attack” and claimed:

George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.

Obama’s nueralizer isn’t working very well because I still remember him promising to meet with the leaders of Iran and North Korea “without preconditions”. Memo to Obama: Meeting with state sponsors of terrorism qualifies as “engagement”. End Memo.

Obama has also called in the cavalry to refute this appalling attack. Thus far 2004’s presidential loser Senator John “Lurch” Kerry and “former” Senate Majority Leader Tommy “Puff” Daschle have come charging to the microphone banks and expressed their collective outrage and in Puff Daschle’s case his personal sadness. Kerry lives his life in perpetual outrage and Daschle has been sad since 1967. If these two characters are the best surrogates Obama can dispatch, then he has bigger problems than I can imagine.

Politics requires a very thick hide. People get tired of hearing a candidate complain every time someone says something which could possibly be offensive about them. In the case of Obama, me thinks the candidate doth protest far too much.

Now if the proverbial shoe fits – which I think Obama’s own utterations prove – then he’s going to spend the better part of the next six or so months in a state of perpetual outrage.

*I now apologize for any of you who have now pictured Ted “Dude Where’s My Scotch?” Kennedy in a thong.

Comments