A Fantasy Election, an Imaginary Man

[NickTheCage]

A Fantasy Election, an Imaginary Man by Andrew Klavan - City Journal

The mystery Obama—the hollow receptacle of out-sized fantasies left and right—is not a creation of his own making, political chameleon though he may well be. It emanates instead from a journalistic community that no longer in any way fulfills its designated function, that no longer even attempts the fair presentation of facts and current events aimed at helping the American electorate make up its mind according to its own lights. Rather, left-wing outlets like the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, NBC News, ABC News, CBS News, and the like have now devoted themselves to fashioning an image of the world they think their audiences ought to believe in—that they may guide us toward voting as they think we should. They have fallen prey to that ideological corruption that sees lies as a kind of virtue, as a noble deception in service to a greater good.

Theirs are largely passive lies and lies of omission. The active frauds—NBC’s dishonest editing of videos to reflect a leftist worldview, ABC’s allowing Democratic operative George Stephanopoulos to masquerade as a newsman, the Los Angeles Times’ suppressing even the transcript of the video in their possession that shows candidate Barack Obama at a meeting with a PLO-supporting sheik—these are only egregious salients of the more consistent, underlying dishonesty. The real steady-state corruption is revealed in the way Obama scandals like Fast and Furious, Benghazi-gate, and the repeated breaking of federal campaign laws have been wildly underplayed, while George W. Bush’s non-scandals, like the naming of Valerie Plame and the firings of several U.S. attorneys at the start of his second term, were blown out of all proportion.

And it is revealed in Obama’s blankness, his make-believe greatness, and the suppression, ridicule, and dismissal of any evidence that he is not the man this powerful media faction once wanted so badly for him to be. No other modern president could have associated so intimately with lowlifes like Wright and Ayers and the now-imprisoned Tony Rezko and not had those associations exposed in every detail. No other president could have made the radical remarks he’s made—about wealth redistribution, religion, and the federal government’s alleged ill-treatment of blacks—and not had them headlined all over for weeks. No other could have presided over such a crippled economy and such universal failures at war and in foreign policy and escaped almost without mainstream blame.

The Obama of the imagination is the media’s Obama. Out of their fascination with the color of his skin and their mindless awe at his windy teleprompted rhetoric, they constructed a man of stature and accomplishment. Now, with the White House on the line, they’re waging an ongoing battle against the undeniable evidence that he has never been, in fact, that man. The result in these quadrennial autumn days has been media coverage of a fantasy election, an election in the news that may bear no relation whatsoever to the election as it is. Polls consistently skewed to favor Democrats in percentages beyond any reasonable construct of reality have left us virtually ignorant of the state of the race. Orchestrated frenzies over alleged gaffes by Mitt Romney have camouflaged an imploding Obama foreign policy, an Obama economy threatened by a new recession, and an Obama campaign filled with vicious personal attacks and lies.

Governor Romney’s unprecedented dismantling of the president in their first debate—an encounter so one-sided it reminded me of the famous cartoon in which Godzilla meets Bambi, with predictable results—was surprising only for Romney’s warmth and clarity. Obama’s hapless fumbling, bad temper, and inarticulate inability to defend his record were actually thoroughly predictable. They were simply facets of the man as he truly is, unfiltered by the imagination of his media supporters: a man who has succeeded, really, at almost nothing but the winning of elections; a man who cannot distinguish between his ideology and life; a man who does not seem to know how the machinery of the world actually works.

...

[BarryG]

Nick, do you think Romney has more substance than Obama? Do you think the right wing does not inflate phony scandals and nonsensical outrage as well?

[NickTheCage]

Nick, do you think Romney has more substance than Obama?

Yes tho I will not vote for him. Bam is the biggest empty suit potus in my lifetime.

[BarryG]

Yes tho I will not vote for him. Bam is the biggest empty suit potus in my lifetime.

I struggle with this, for a long time I was of a "anybody but Obama" mindset, but I seriously have no idea what agenda a President Romney will pursue. Obama may be an "empty suit" in some ways, and he certainly has changed course once President, but at least he has a record to look at. I don't want to debate that record, my point is that I have a hard time believing that Romney will not be just as empty if not more so.

[Giavella Water]

Great article. Will have to keep a lookout for Andrew Klavan and his fair minded ness.

[NickTheCage]

I struggle with this, for a long time I was of a "anybody but Obama" mindset, but I seriously have no idea what agenda a President Romney will pursue. Obama may be an "empty suit" in some ways, and he certainly has changed course once President, but at least he has a record to look at. I don't want to debate that record, my point is that I have a hard time believing that Romney will not be just as empty if not more so.

So there is ur answer. Both empty suits, vote for the guy running a sharty campaign .. GJ.

And please don't think it is a wasted vote. Note sure if you like his platform BUT if you do, there is nothing wasteful voting your conscience.

[carloss]

There they go again, name-dropping Wright and Ayers...

[JoeBaker]

.. GJ.

But GJ doesn't deserve anyone's vote. The guy was a lifelong Republican up until less than a year ago. He put all his (very limited) marbles on New Hampshire (that was Huntsman's strategy too) to get some momentum in the primaries. He failed. Smoked is more like it. So instead of backing the party and campaigning on behalf of all their candidates, he cries, takes his ball, goes home and becomes Libertarian.

The irony is, if he won the nomination he would have the full weight of the R party behind him. Same with Ron Paul. Has he endorsed Romney yet? I don't even know. Frankly, I don't care. They're both jerkoffs for bailing on the party that would have backed them unconditionally had they won. Myself included.

[PhilaCap]

yawn