Obama - American President or American Idol?

There are moments in time when we all stand back and watch a potential disaster developing which we are powerless to stop. Mouths agape, it is only after the event when some helpful soul exclaims, "Boy, we should have seen that coming!"

The tidal wave of support that is now causing a bandwagon effect for Senator Barack Obama, a wave that may propel him into the world’s most powerful office, could be that unanticipated disaster unfolding before the nation’s eyes. It is worth remembering that a tidal wave, while compelling and beautiful to watch from afar, eventually hits shore where its true nature is manifested.

Now, there is no saying that an Obama presidency would in fact be disastrous. But, it is worth asking what the basis for the mania is and should someone peek behind the curtain to make certain the Wizard is all people want him to be.

Has there ever been a more telling example of our celebrity-driven culture than watching a man, engaged in national politics for less than one Senate term, on the threshold of winning the presidency? We have become so accustomed to fawning over people who are famous, not for achievement, but for the fact of being famous that we now willingly abdicate our duty as citizens to take the measure of a person, instead opting to bask in the reflected glow of an illusion.

Senator Obama’s oratorical skills are impressive indeed. He has the natural ease and apparent sincerity that can inspire voters and sweep them off their feet. His delivery can be both professorial or passionate, although it is undoubtedly the latter which is winning him this nomination. So complete is his Svengali-like hold becoming that it is almost considered to be bad form to criticize or question his qualifications.

If one wishes to base their support of him on his qualities of leadership - defined in this election as the skill to lift people up to frenzied plateaus of hope – then that leadership has been tested where? When? To give people hope is no small feat and should not be dismissed. However, it also nothing we cannot get from Sunday morning pulpits or personal growth courses peddled on late-night infomercials.

Much has been said about momentum. There are a host of voters who are seduced by the desire to be on the presumptive winning side and are casting votes unfettered by deep thinking. Records go platinum and stars are born on this mob phenomenon. But, it is a very dangerous way to elect a president of the United States.

Even without a crystal ball, one can see that the next administration will have a resurgent, aggressive and motivated Russian Federation to deal with. The recent recognition of Kosovo in its split from Serbia is a potential flashpoint between the US and a Russia that desperately wants its superpower status back. China, already emerging as the ‘dominant power in waiting’ of the 21st century, is yet another player in what has all the makings of a very dangerous global game.

Whatever one’s political leanings, a base level qualification for president should be a demonstrated familiarity and competence with issues that may affect the nation’s safety and security. Both Senators Clinton and McCain have, at the very least, a long-standing acquaintance with the levers of power, the international players and the sometimes distasteful way politics is exercised in order to accomplish what one can which is not necessarily everything that one wants.

Given that both candidates in the Democratic race have signaled their intention to quit Iraq, provide a type of universal health care and re-engage the world community, what then is to choose between them? If there is so much common ground, why should an observer object to Senator Obama over Senator Clinton as the nominee in November?

It’s a fair question. One response is that Senator Obama has not left himself any room for moderation of policy without the inevitable disappointing of an electorate who are expecting nothing less of him than full implementation of his stated goals. No politician familiar with the ebb and flow of a volatile world should commit to absolute positions. Our leaders are not our surrogates, sent to Washington to do our bidding. We choose superior individuals to do, not what we want, but what is best for us as a nation.

That job description sometimes means that the candidates we select might not be the most likeable. If they are, that should be considered a bonus and not a requirement. But, Americans need to "like" their president. It could be suggested that currying favor is no more difficult than trying to be all things to all people.

Every person’s vote is sacred. It would be arrogance to suggest that any of us knows better than our fellow citizens what the "right" choice is. But, we do have the right to demand that votes are cast on the basis of sober, serious reflection - informed by both present and potential issues. Only then should they be given to the candidate best qualified to lead. A stratospheric popularity is difficult to ignore. But, as we all know, what goes up will come down. When it does, the thud is sometimes deafening.