Oh, My--Where To Begin?

Via Sullivan we find Jennifer Rubin's desperate attempt to dismiss Christopher Buckley's endorsement of Obama, and his recognition of Obama's "first-class temperament and first-class intellect."

Rubin squeals:

"Oh, my–where to begin? A first-class temperament does not consort with terrorists or lie about his affiliation with the same. A first-class temperament does not invoke the race card when presented with legitimate criticism. A first-class temperament does not seek to shed his Leftist skin for political expediency. To conclude otherwise is confuse calm with deceit."

First, of course, Ms. Rubin is wrong about the facts--straining to pull them in a direction that will make them consistent with her conservative aversion to Senator Obama. It's a stretch at the least to say that Obama "consorts" with terrorists--he was on a committee with one once, apparently before he knew who he was. I've been on committees with hundreds of people who I didn't know from Adam. And, I'll bet, so has Ms. Rubin. As for lying about it--well, my guess is that Obama rather spun things in the one direction about as much as Ms. Rubin is spinning them in the other. I don't like it, but this is absolutely within the boundaries of acceptable spin in American politics. Obama's relationship with Ayers was clearly incidental; the paths of most people who rise to the level of Senator have intersected with the paths of at least a few shady characters. No serious person is seriously worried that Obama has political sympathies with Ayers; everyone knows that it's a purely political criticism. So let's at least be honst about that. And Obama has not "played the race card." In fact, it is his opponents who have done so. And on a related note: as for his "Leftist" er, "skin"...well, all one can really say is: look at his writings and his policies. Obama is firmly a centrist liberal. There is no sense in which he can truly be called a "leftist"--unless, say, one thinks that any national health care plan is leftist. That's an argument I'm willing to listen to...though it makes a rough majority of Americans leftists, which seems a little odd to say the least.

Most importantly, though, Ms. Rubin just doesn't seem to know what the word 'temperament' means. To say that Senator Obama has a first-class temperament--which he clearly does--in no way entails that he is not a liar, nor a consorter with terrorists, nor a leftist. He isn't any of those things, but that's irrelevant--having a good temperament doesn't rule them out. And neither does intelligence. Buckley is pointing to two of Obama's virtues in order to give a partial explanation of his support. Rubin unleashes a knee-jerk, frothy, non-sequetorial response, ignoring the substance of Buckley's reasons. It's roughly as if someone said "John McCain is a war hero," and I responded with "A true war hero wouldn't be so ignorant of economics!" The two have nothing to do with each other.

It's a tough time on the right. They are losing and, what's apparently harder for them to swallow, they deserve to lose. (Personally, I have rather the opposite kind of reaction; 2000 and 2004 were so tough not because we deserved to lose, but, rather, because we deserved to win.) And, furthermore, it's not a nail-biter. Rather, they can see the end coming, with great clarity and something that seems pretty close to inevitability. Unfortunately, these are the times that make the internet a dangerous thing. It's too easy to, in anger and frustration, sit down and unleash an intemperate howl in the superficial form of an analysis. This is best avoided. Remember: the intertubes are forever.