[Obama's] too detached and cerebral . Too deferential to Congress. Too willing to compromise . And he's too much of a law professor and not enough of a commander in chief, as Sarah Palin recently admonished.Lasky responds:
These are some of the qualities for which the president, rightly or wrongly, is criticized. They are also the qualities that make him well suited for another steady job on the federal payroll: Barack Obama, Supreme Court justice.
I am sure I am not alone in failing to see how Barack Obama measures up to these qualities. The "smackdown" alone that Rosen mentions reveals he does not have the temperament, and then there are plenty of instances of his rush to judgment ("the cop acted stupidly") and his hectoring ("I am the only one standing between you and the pitchforks") and straw man arguments, his hyper-partisanship, his blame-shifting; and his history of misunderstanding the law.No, Ed, you are not alone. I, too, fail to see how Obama ever got the reputation of being "cerebral" (or "too cerebral", as it is usually phrased). What on earth has he done, what has he ever said or written, to make people believe that he is a deep thinker, a first-rate cogitator, a visionary politician, a top-flight statesman? You don't need a first-class mind to be filled with hubris, and even the most arrogant of our presidents have rarely suffered so many pratfalls, so early in their presidencies. Rosen has endowed Obama with qualities he clearly does not possess, and is thus touting him for a job (another job) for which he is manifestly unsuited. Be sure to read Lasky's piece for a short, but comprehensive, fisking of Rosen's hallucinatory ravings.