Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
TOP NEWS   LeftArrow - Townhall.com   RightArrow - Townhall.com  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Emmett Tyrrell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Obama and the Weird
by Emmett Tyrrell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Who should John McCain pick as his running mate?














WASHINGTON -- Anyone who has followed politics studiously over the years is aware that there are gifted politicians who, for whatever reason, eventually find their campaigns haunted. I do not mean haunted by accidental events or by a clod or two at campaign headquarters. I mean haunted . I mean visited by the weird, by supernatural pranksters, by what our Islamic friends call jinn.

Clearly, after months of suave upward mobility, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is now in this unfortunate condition. The bizarre is his companion. The paranormal is a constant possibility. Though the members of the press are too stuffy to mention it, recent setbacks to his campaign are not normal.

The gifted young senator appears in San Francisco amongst his fellow moral and intellectual colossi. For an instant, he lets down his guard. In this closed meeting, he blurts out what he really thinks, and somehow his remarks are taped. A "friendly" Web site posts his remarks, and all hell breaks loose. Of a sudden, every politically alert American knows that in San Francisco (of all places!), Obama explained that religion is the opiate of the gun nuts, who have been out of work and living angrily in jerkwater for "25 years."

How did that tape ever get out, and why would Obama's friends at that Web site not recognize its potential for ruin? Or consider a more recent and even more bizarre interlude. Obama is having breakfast in Scranton, Pa. A reporter asks for his reaction to former president Jimmy Carter's meeting with the thugs of Hamas, and Obama waffles. Perhaps, that is not so surprising, for he has waffled frequently along the campaign trail. But now comes the paranormal part. The wretch waffled while actually eating a waffle -- reportedly a Belgian waffle, not even an American waffle. Weirder still, Obama acknowledged his waffle, exclaiming to the reporter: "Why can't I just eat my waffle?" and "Just let me eat my waffle."

After the Pennsylvania primary, I suspect Obama's odd occurrences will multiply. There will be freakish moments, as there have been with other ill-starred leaders, reminiscent of Jimmy Carter being attacked by an amphibious rabbit in 1979 or Richard Nixon photographed while strolling along a sandy beach wearing wingtip shoes before impeachment was even contemplated. The media's focus of Obama's campaign will change from their recent absorption with his fabulously charismatic inanity to speculation on his next calamitous occasion. When might he next bump his head on a waffle or while exiting an airplane? Remember when President Gerald Ford captured headlines by bumping his head? For Ford, it was the best press he had gotten in months.

I do not anticipate that Obama's diabolical infestation will receive the extensive media coverage that was accorded to Carter, Ford and Nixon. The journalists esteem him. They believe he is different from the common politician they encounter. He says he is, and they believe it. He is for "change," for "community," for all Americans to "come together." That does not sound very different from anyone else who has sought the Democratic presidential nomination, but the mainstream journalists forget things. They also ignore indelicacies, for instance, the Obama supporters now under indictment, at least one of whom has some disturbing Middle Eastern financial sources. The journalists also have paid little attention to the fact that in 2005, the newly elected senator from Illinois bought a $1.65 million dollar house for $300,000 less than the asking price.

Actually, I dissent from my journalistic colleagues' belief that Obama is different. He has been a political hustler all his life, much as the Clintons have and many other Democratic miracle workers, too. When he graduated from Columbia University, he came to Chicago and at 23 became a community organizer in a poor Chicago neighborhood, whose residents viewed him as a slick outsider, which he was. Here, again, we see him as not unlike the left-wing Clintons of the late 1960s or Jean-Francois Kerry or Al Gore. Soon Obama returned east for a Harvard Law School degree, after which he immediately entered Chicago politics. He has been in politics all his adult life. How does that make him different from other top Democrats?

Well, allow me to return to that Scranton waffle. Certainly the Clintons, and probably most of the other erstwhile Democratic presidential contenders, would have the good sense not to mention it while waffling before the press. But then none of these contemporary Democrats has Obama's problem with the paranormal. Perhaps this is a matter for the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's professional services.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is founder and editor in chief of The American Spectator and co-author of Madame Hillary: The Dark Road to the White House.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Emmett Tyrrell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Subject: More Conservatives Against Tyrrell
Roger Clegg, president of the conservative Center for Equal Opportunity, on Emmett Tyrrell getting caught in his lies:

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=13040

Tyrrell vs. Chavez [Roger Clegg]

Apparently R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., wanted to write a column praising Grover Norquist’s new book, which is fine. He then decided that the column needed a catchy opening, and so accused Linda Chavez of dissing Norquist on Fox News’s “The Live Desk.” This not fine, because it’s not true. Anyone who knows Chavez also knows that Tyrrell’s thesis-- that she curries favor with liberals in order to advance her own ambitions (ambition to what, exactly?)--is absurd.

In all events, in the Fox News tradition, you judge whether Chavez refers with “condescension” to Norquist in “chill terms” as “an obscure” and “margin[al]” figure of whom she “does not approve.” Here’s a transcript of what she said:

All of this [speculation about Condoleezza Rice as John McCain’s running mate] started because she showed up at a meeting of Republican activists--a meeting that is run by an activist named Grover Norquist--and she’s not the kind of person who normally comes to those meetings, and so people thought that, well, maybe she’s doing that in order to shore up her base among conservatives.

Wow! How will Norquist ever recover from that! Oh, but you think that perhaps it was the way she said it? Fine, here’s a link to the show itself (at about the 3-minute mark) [link: http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?videoId=b6628d2 5-3d58-4a4c-a3a1-2928eeeb1bb1&sMPlaylistID=]. As I said: absurd. Mr. Tyrrell owes Ms. Chavez an apology.

Conservatives Lash Out At Emmett Tyrrell
National Review's editor Katherine Lopez on the Emmett Tyrrell getting caught in his lies:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDQ2NTkxMjg2OWU3Ym E3MTJlMmE1MmU0NjBlMTBlNGQ=

Nothing Beauteous About It [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

Bob Tyrell's column this week has a bizarre opening accusing Linda Chavez of attacking Grover Norquist on Fox. You can watch the video here — all she said was explain in the broadest terms who Grover is.

Breaking news: Not every American watching Fox News knows all the players at your average right-wing shin-dig.

She also explained who Tim Pawlenty is, something non-geeks outside of Minnesota might have found useful. Should the governor be insulted, too?

I don't always agree with Linda, but the suggestion that she does such things to fit in with the Left seems silly. I think she plays it like she sees it, and it often puts her in the position of having no natural ideological niche. Bob Tyrell may have legitimate differences of opinion with Linda, but his column didn't get at them.

National Review's Ramesh Ponnuru on Emmett Tyrrell getting caught in his lies:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Y2ZjZDdjNmUzM2Q2MT Q2Njc2MzBjNGIwYTJmNjg2NDU=

Chavez, Norquist, Tyrrell [Ramesh Ponnuru]

I agree with Kathryn. I have not been shy about objecting strongly when merited to things Chavez has written, but in this case Tyrrell is just wrong. When Chavez said that Condi Rice is not the type of person who usually goes to Norquist's meeting, undoubtedly she meant only that it is unusual for a Secretary of State—as opposed to, say, an OMB director or Secretary of the Treasury—to attend. She was right, and nothing slighting was meant.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State: