Sunday, He Who Walks on Water, as I refer to our Illinois junior senator, Barack Obama, appeared with George Stephanopoulos on ABC's This Week. Senator Obama said

'We need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake. There is an over—reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers.'

He added

'There's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values. And that's to win elections.'

As is usuallly the case when Sen. Obama speaks, people have been falling all over themselves today to swoon over the wisdom and eloquence of these remarks.

Once again, I find myself distressed and mystified by the cult of personality surrounding this guy. Not only does he display a profound grasp of the obvious, his reasonable words are rarely reflected in his extremist positions and votes. I can't take it anymore. I need someone smarter than me to answer a question I've had for nearly two years:

Why does he keep getting away with this routine?

This whole nauseating schtick started with Obama's speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention, in which he sounded conservative themes such as personal responsibility and American exceptionalism.

(We should have known something was amiss when he thanked his introducer by saying "Thank you, Dick Durbin. You make us proud.")

These words may sound statesmanlike and brilliant to some, but when spoken by Sen. Obama, they are just words. They are classic Obama:

state an undeniable, moderate premise when on national television; vote and act in lockstep with leftwing extremists.

This media darling knows the groupies in the mainstream press will never call him on it. Consider Sunday's widely—praised statement regarding judicial filibusters.

Aren't all the Obamaniacs ignoring the critical fact that the very day after he made this statement, he voted to sustain this pointless filibuster against Judge Alito's confirmation? I guess he should have said 'There is an over—reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers, and I'm no exception, but don't let that fact stop you from thinking that I am dispensing lofty pearls of wisdom, sharing insights only a preternatural being like me can see.'

His voting record in the Illinois legislature  is very revealing. Did it occur to fawning George Stephanopoulos to suggest to the Senator that perhaps if his values (bigger government, socialized medicine, same—sex marriage, legally—sanctioned racism euphemistically called 'affirmative action,' and abortion on demand) reflected those of the American people, his party might be able to win elections?

Probably not. One does not challenge the Democrats' rising star, at least not if he's a member of ossified formerly mainstream media.

So I ask again. I don't get it. What am I missing? Why does this guy keep getting away with this act?

Teri O'Brien   1 31 06