It's not him, it's us

Although I disagree with Kathleen Parker's characterization of President Obama, her words do contain a hint of truth. About his Thursday jobs speech, she writes: "Instead of commanding, Obama seemed bossy. Rather than inspiring, he came across as hectoring. This is partly because Obama was trying to be something he’s not. He is not a pot-banging politician but reflective and cautious. Rather than quell the emotional disarray born of fear and resentment, he pounded the drum of class warfare. He shouldn’t expect to see white flags in response." Parker's notion that Obama came across as bossy is clearly a minority (and very Republican) view. Chalk it up to "seeing-what-I-want-to-see-itis." She's right about Obama's reflective nature. And he is cautious to the extent that he doesn't shoot first and ask questions later. Obama does equate politics with pornography, in his heart of hearts. And he is not wrong. But his discomfort with "pot-banging" is a liability if not his Achilles Heel. Yet that says more about us than him. A public that can only be mollified by emotional bunkum is afflicted with infantilism and destined for self-destruction. Ironically, Parker unwittingly says as much. The cheap shot at Obama was a sidebar to the main theme of her column. To wit: "Sept. 11 caused us to go temporarily insane." She observes that the events of that traumatic day "damaged our collective soul and seems to have released a free-ranging hysteria that has contaminated our interactions ever since." No kidding. And columnists are clearly not immune.