I’m back in California, where the left-turning lanes have signs posted over them reading “cars turning left must yield to oncoming traffic on green.”  To which I say:  Thank You!  Because I often forget the rules of the road while I’m driving!  I have a right to be stupid!  It’s a free country!

I thought since I did a job on McCain in my last post I’d better even things up with a job on Obama.  It’s pretty well known by now that Obama’s mental m.o. is reflective hesitation.  He always sees both sides (in this country there are only two sides, ever, sic et non) and, while he can decide between them on an ad hoc basis, he’s always tormented by the thought that his choice wasn’t right, or wasn’t purely right, not right enough, not clean.  This, of course, is a virtue:  it’s being philosophical.  The problem is that he clearly believes that a very great deal rests on his getting things right, on his moral purity.

Every five pages of his book, Dreams From My Father, someone says to him (some version of) “lighten up, Barak.”  He records it faithfully, but he can’t do it.  In the book’s most telling scene, a girlfriend dumps him with the words, “it’s all about you Barak, isn’t it?”  Again he writes it down, and he agonizes over it.  But he can’t get the message.  He’s not constituted that way.  Because it is all about him.  The word rests on Obama’s shoulders.

He reminds me of no one so much as St. Augustine.  There’s a great scene in the Confessions where Augustine wrestles with the question of whether he’s taking too much pride in his humility.  Of course this is a problem without a solution, because the more humble he is (the more it’s not all about him), the more he’s got to be proud of (the more it is all about him).  It drives him nuts.  But this kind of thing doesn’t drive everybody nuts.  The craziness is not necessary.  It doesn’t follow from reflective moral engagement.  In fact it’s just a big time-waster.  Lighten up, Barak!


5 thoughts on “Obama

  1. Can you explain how it doesn’t follow from reflective moral engagement?

    As far as the torturing paradox, it seems the craziness comes from the impossibility of escaping the self, which, is a problem in reflective moral engagement especially when trying to get around Kantian metaphysics.

    Reflection that never escapes (nor ceases) to reflect, I think, is an important metaphysical distinction.

    specifically i’m thinking about Simon Blackburn’s twist on Humean metaphysics/reflective moral engagement.

  2. Hilarious — seriously, do the VPs. I want to know your take on Palin.

    Another way to see him through the eyes of U.S. history would be to see him as embodying (or at least trying to embody, or at least propagate the myth of embodying) the republican (small “r”) ideal of moral purity, which the early Americans believed to be the only foundation upon which a monarch-less society could rest. Is this Lockeian? You would know better than I.

    Did you catch Palin’s characterization of him as Moses? (“After he parts the waters….”)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s