Wednesday, January 27, 2010

We Are The Robots

As the public awaits President Obama's State Of The Union, he's getting some criticism from his side for his seeming detachment. He's too cool, too even-tempered, to connect with the public. He needs to show his emotional side more and his rational side less.

I disagree with this about every way possible.

First, he shows feeling. He even shouts occasionally. When he was running for President, and riding on the crest of a wave, saying Yes We Can!, people were excited. This was a young, charistmatic leader. He could speak to them about stuff like race and connect with the public as no other leader. I don't recall too many complaints that he wasn't emotional enough.

As far as the arguments he makes to support his programs, they're emotion-laden just like any other politician's. When he rips in Wall Street "fat cats" and says they make obscene profits, that's not dispassionate analysis. He's trying to stir up people. He's sometimes compared to Mr. Spock, but Spock truly tried to come up with the most logical solution, and took himself out of the equation. Meanwhile, Obama's a partisan just like the rest of them.

I think his supporters can't understand why his polls are sinking and don't want to note the most likely reason--the voters have trouble with his policies. (And that even an "emotional" President will drop steadily in the polls with a bad economy or an unsuccessful war.)

True, he sometimes doesn't act as outraged about certain things as we're used to seeing--his calm demeanor and casual clothes when he addressed the issue of the Christmas bomber made him seemed more bothered that the guy disturbed his vacation. But, in fact, I wish he were as rational and calm as his critics claim. I don't need a politician to reach out to me, I just want him to run the government well. So when I hear Obama criticized for being emotionless, I think "if only."

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah yeah yeah, you wish Obama were somebody else completely different but the Star Trek reference is more interesting.

The idea of Spock was that he was only thought through to the most logical solution- I think that was branding and PR though. (Since Spock did it, it must be logical) Go through the episodes- once every 2-3 shows, he is not logical -some of those can be explained by physical condition- raging hormones, poppy seeds or being transported back to a primitive Vulcan time but many times these lapses occur when he is otherwise in normal logical mode (we can also argue about certain decisions he makes which are presented as logical but really aren't)

5:38 AM, January 27, 2010  
Blogger VermontGuy said...

This is reminiscent of Clinton's "I feel your pain". I don't want a President who feels my pain. For the most part, I want a President (and a government) that leaves me alone to go about my business.

Obama won the election, in part, because he appeared cool, calm and collected when the financial crisis hit and McCain didn't. As his presidency goes on, some of his followers seem to want him to act more like McCain.

I'm surprised someone hasn't suggested he take one of his shoes off and pound it on the teleprompter.

6:38 AM, January 27, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We better not reelect Obama because that means some time during his term he'll go through Pon Farr.

9:13 AM, January 27, 2010  
Anonymous Denver Guy said...

Spock's logical lapses in almost every show reflected his human side (he was 50% human DNA). At least in the original series, that was the explanation. Star Trek writers started dropping that as they introduced more vulcan characters, Spock's brother is virtually John the Baptist. In the short "Enterprise" series, which takes place a mere 100 years or so before Spock was born, the Vulcans were quite capable of all sorts of venal emotions. And of course, in the new Start Trek movie, Spock is easily provoked into emotional oitbursts of violence, and has the hots for Uhura.

I'm afraid to stretch the comparisons to President Obama.

9:22 AM, January 27, 2010  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These politicians raise taxes and lower them. Wouldn't it be better for the country if they just set a rate and kept it there for like thirty years. Then people could make decisions without thinking what it would do to their taxes.

6:53 PM, January 27, 2010  

Post a Comment

<< Home

web page hit counter