Let’s Face It: Barack Obama Is Better Than You
That’s the first sentence of Eamon Javers latest op-ed for Politico called “Politics of personal perfection,” at least:
Let’s be honest: Barack Obama is better than you are.
He’s a better father — taking breaks from running the world to cheer on his daughters at soccer and basketball games.
He’s a better husband — zipping his wife off for dinner in New York and Paris.
He’s got a better diet — nibbling on vegetables from his homegrown garden to keep his love handles in check.
And he’s got a terrific jump shot.
You? Not so much.
Call it the politics of personal perfection. The Barack Obama brand is as much about being a personal example to the nation as it is about being a political figure. But the danger of that frothy mix of glamour and domesticity is that President Obama could become in the public mind something he never sought to be: the Martha Stewart of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
And political veterans say the fine line between what’s inspiring and what’s annoying can be difficult to spot in advance.
True enough. That’s indeed a disadvantage. But there is another, bigger and much more important one: modern democracies don’t fare well when the people are made to believe that their elected officials are ‘perfect’ creatures. Obama is a human being. That’s why Congress, reporters, bloggers and other citizens should watch him closely.
When someone is perfect, there is no need to do so, however. In fact, the average citizen may become extremely angry when anybody dares criticize his ‘perfect, grand leader.’
That’s unhealthy in any society, but especially in a democracy, as America’s founding fathers understood all too well.
Obama knows how to win elections, and how to keep his personal favorability ratings up. But in order to do so he, his advisers and his friends in the media have created a myth; the myth of the perfect president. That myth will hurt America tremendously if Americans do not see through it rather quickly.
And if Democrats don’t care about that, because all they care about is winning elections they should remember that Republicans are watching and learning and that they will simply copy Obama’s strategy if they consider it necessary.
Well I don’t smoke.
This is getting to sound like a Dos XX commercial “Barak Obama IS the most interesting man!”
I don’t think that even Obama’s most lovestruck fans believe that he, or any other mega-celebrity, is perfect. Deep down, they know that Obama is fallible. Nevertheless, they admire the man and place his image on a pedestal. More than anything, they believe that the Obamas are living magically charmed lives, compared to their routine lives filled with struggles and broken relationships. No, Obama is not perfect, but he is close enough to embody a fantasy. His fans project onto him their hopes and dreams. Up to now, the Obama team has capitalized on this group psychology very effectively.
There are risks to this approach, however. For one, Obama can only maintain his mega-celebrity status as long as he is perceived by his fan base as delivering results. If Tiger Woods were to go 3-4 years without winning a major golf championship, his hype would cause a backlash. As long as he keeps winning, he will continue to be a megestar, unless:
The other thing that can bring down a megacelebrity is a shattering of the fantasy. Like, if Tiger Woods all of a sudden became an outspoken advocate of Reparations, his popularity would implode. Well, Barrack Obama has been “pragmatic” so far in maintaining his political image, even as he has pushed a very ambitious (statist) agenda. In the long run, though, politics is a rough and tumble sport of compromise and broken promises, so it will become increasingly difficult for Obama to keep his philosopher king image intact. Right now, most members of the mainstream media are very much on his team, but Obama has been maintaining his image somewhat at the expense of their images. Obviously, a scandal could scatter Obama’s image. If Obama’s image takes a hit, what else does he have to rely on?
Finally, Americans might be nearing a celebrity saturation point. In recent years, the numbers of advertisements featuring celebrities has continued to rise. As marketing pros will tell you, and as Obama is learning, a popular personality doesn’t necessarily mean a successful promotion (read: policy).
Finally, Americans might be nearing a celebrity saturation point.
One can hope, I guess, but I don’t see signs of it.
This article is good but what it fails to exam is that when you start a having so called “perfect” politician it forces other politicians to step up their own individual performances. As part of the electorate this can only serve us the voter in providing us with the very best candidates. The pitfall is when we start pushing our moral values and beliefs on others. Viewing them, people of the opposing party, as something beneath us. See; GOP & Hubris
traceon: while it is commendable that a politician might be perceived by some as a perfect father and husband, be a healthy eater, and have a nice jump shot, I’m not sure how such perceptions raise the bar in terms of public policy and poltical leadership, thereby forcing other politicians to be better public servants. I’m especially puzzzled as I really have no way of knowing just how good of a father and husband is Obama and don’t really care.