Obama's Callous Indifference

Obama's Callous Indifference

By Peter Kirsanow

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen declares that Barack Obama is
" 'likable enough' -- in fact, so much so that he is the most
charismatic presidential candidate I have seen since Robert
F.Kennedy." Well, even though I've never spoken with Obama, I don't
like him very much (I did testify with him [and a few others] once
about a bill he'd sponsored on voter intimidation, but at the time he
didn't impress me as unlikable, just a little intellectually lazy) .


This hasn't always been the case. Until early February, I tended to
agree with all the news stories that contained the obligatory man-in-
the-street quotes proclaiming him "decent," "likeable" and a "nice
guy with a beautiful family."


According to the hagiography that passes for reporting about Obama, my
attitude is rare. And, admittedly, unsophisticated. After all, I'm
black so I shouldn't just like Obama, I should love and praise him.
Sure, I'm conservative, but according to a recent AP story the Obama
magic is so powerful that even black conservatives are in a swoon. But
then, I'm also one of those bitter guys from flyover country.


I disagree with nearly all of Obama's positions, ranging from energy
policy to the Iraq war. The National Journal's determination that
he's the most liberal member of the Senate is a serious
understatement. There may not be a more liberal elected official in
all of Washington. But like most people, I like lots of folks with
whom I have major policy disagreements. Put another way, if Barack
Obama came up to me tomorrow, took my hand, looked me in the eye and
said "when I'm president, I'll fight to win in Iraq, beat hell out of
terrorists, appoint Supreme Court justices like Thomas and Roberts,
cut taxes, secure the border, enact free market health care reform,
honor our military and use the bully pulpit to prevent cultural
decay,'' I'd still dislike him. Maybe more than I do now.


To be sure, Obama displays horrible judgment, surrounding himself with
the likes of Wright, Pfleger and Ayers. He has a lot of close friends
who seem to hate America. That's pretty unusual for the average
person, but it's highly peculiar and troubling for someone running for
Commander-in-Chief. It alarms me and makes me suspicious, but it's
not why I dislike him.


Nor is it because he's an empty suit. He's gone further saying
nothing than almost anyone in recent history. He's done nothing, yet
he's poised to become the most powerful man on earth. He looks like
he's never broken a sweat, furrowed a brow or dirtied a knee. That's
not something to dislike. In today's culture it's something to admire-
even envy.


These all may be reasons for voting against Obama, but they're not,
to my mind, reasons for disliking him. No, I dislike Obama because of
his personal qualities.


Wait a minute. Aren't we constantly regaled about all of his endearing
qualities? He makes people faint and write songs about him. Hardened
journalists get tingles up their legs just thinking about him.


Yet certain discrete actions can provide instant insights into a
person's character. They can betray vivid flaws in a seemingly
gleaming persona.


And they compel one to make judgments about the actor.


The acts may vary by degree, in turn prompting different degrees of
reaction: the pillar of the community seen pilfering from the
collection plate; the co-worker who uses a racial epithet behind a
colleague's back. Indeed, people recoiled from the once popular
Michael Vick when they found out he'd abused dogs.


I began to dislike Obama when I discovered that while in the Illinois
state legislature in 2002, he voted against the Induced Birth Infant
Liability Act. The bill was designed to extend the same medical care
to babies who happen to survive an abortion attempt as is enjoyed by
all babies born alive.


I couldn't believe anyone would vote against such a bill. In fact,
when a similar measure-- the Born Alive Infant Protection Act-- was
brought before the U.S. Senate, not one Senator voted against it.
Even NARAL Pro-Choice America didn't oppose the bill.


Admittedly, I'm a bit of a curmudgeon. It's difficult for me to like
someone who's eager to extend a panoply of constitutional rights to
terrorists but who refuses to provide the most fundamental rights to a
living, breathing infant.


Perhaps it's a failure to comprehend Obama's exquisite intellectual
nuance. He rationalized his vote in language that evokes Dred Scott.
Obama challenged the constitutionality of the bill,contending that
conferring equal protection, i.e.,personhood, upon a "pre-viable
fetus" would render the bill an unlawful anti-abortion statute.


At what point after birth does Obama call a baby a person and not a
fetus? One day? Six months?


To be clear: I don't hate Obama as those suffering from Bush
Derangement Syndrome hate President Bush. I just have a hard time
generating warm, fuzzy feelings for someone who voted against helping
newborns struggling to live. But that's just me.


I suspect most people don't know about Obama's position on babies who
survive abortion attempts and it's unlikely that they'll ever find
out. The media seem more interested in reporting on the cultural
implications of fist-bumps or the racial animus of those who question
Obama's policies. I would wager, however, that if more people knew
about Obama's disregard for babies who have the audacity to survive an
abortion, there would be more scrutiny and less adulation.


Peter Kirsanow is a member of the U.S.Commission on Civil Rights.These
comments do not necessarily reflect the positions of the Commission.
.

Quantcast