The usually thoughtful Christian Science Monitor has a “commentary” essay by an Obama supporter entitled “dare I believe Obama can win”.

Could the quiet seed of joy that was planted in my heart the day I heard Barack Obama speak for the first time take root and grow without fear of the brutal storms of disappointment?

Could a leader that evokes awe in me actually win a presidential election? Could the beauty – and logic – of his words win over the majority of this country’s voters? Could they see past the lies and distractions to the center of a human being who sincerely wants to invoke citizens’ higher selves?

Honey, get a grip. He’s running for President, not God.

“Awe”…”Beauty”…”see past the lies and distractions”…The entire essay is “feel good” language. Not one hard fact, no discussion of his policies, and not one piece of how these policies will be implemented (despite that comment about logic of his words).

And therein lies a big problem for Senator Obama: His enthusiatic supporters see in him the answer for their problems. Yet no president could ever meet these expectations.

But what is worrisome is that Senator Obama encourages this type of person.

Most mature people, confronted with such adoration, would either make a joke about them (McCain), talk nicely to them and then forget what was said (Bill Clinton) or kindly explain that a president wants to do a lot of things but there are limitations on what a president can do they all have to work with her. (Hillary Clinton).

Obama? he goes out and rents a stadium so that all his adoring fans can join in the worship.

And that, my friends, is the action of a demagogue.

The writer is a good example of these gentle true believers, and unlike the Krazy KosKids, an increasingly paranoid Andrew Sullivan, or some who write on the Huffpost whose harsh language against those opposing Obama makes Rush Limbaugh sound like a PowerPuffGirl.

In contrast, the author of this essay doesn’t demonize her foes. Instead, she sees Obama as the answer for

“a system that seems so broken, so moneyed, so corrupt…I have never voted for a presidential candidate who has won, much less in an election that wasn’t considered potentially corrupt…”

Ah yes. Political corruption. Presumably Obama, who rose up with the help of a Chicago political machine not known for it’s honesty and integrity, has emerged from that political swamp without stain of sin. I mean, just because he took $100 000 plus in donations from FreddieMac/Fannie Mae over a three year period doesn’t mean that he was bribed. It was merely a “gift” from generous employees in those agencies who had nothing better to do with their money.

The fact that Obama has “opted out” of campaign finance reform funding says a lot about “idealism”.

So what should we make of a writer who describes Obama with phrases such as”seeds of Joy” and “a leader who evokes awe”?

It reminds me of an informercial. We have a TV, and often my husband Lolo scans the channels to see what is on. And a lot of the channels have people selling salvation of all sorts. Some are selling acne cream. Some are selling health foods. Some are selling Jesus. So now, presumably people in the US can tune into Obama’s 24 hour cable network which is selling Obama.

Presumably he will pay for it with the money he is able to raise by not being limited by opting out of campaign fiance reform money.

But the real danger are not the gentle enthusiasts, or even the corruption of “politics as usual” that undoubtably will be noticed by a cooperative press a year or two after the election occurs. The real danger of Obama’s campaign can be found in the manipulations by very involved political radicals who essentially started the Obama campaign, who hijacked the caucuses (but not the popular vote) so that Obama, not Hillary, won the nomination. They aren’t likely to shrug and say we lost, and hail to the Chief if Obama loses.

To put it bluntly: A loss by Obama result in court cases, recounts, and vocal dissent at many levels that will make Gore’s Florida recount look like a picnic.

But if Obama wins, what will happen? Will he move toward the middle, and become a successful president of all the people, or will he implement by presidential decree or via judicial appointments the “progressive agenda” of his main supporters?

Many of us oppose on ethical and practical grounds some of these policies, especially those on health care, and given the the vile criticism by Obama supporters on blogs and in the media against those who disagree with them, one has to wonder if such personal criticism will next be directed against those who oppose his policies.

As a physician, I worry that legal sanctions in the name of “civil rights” against hospitals and health care workers who still are old fashioned enough to follow the mandates of the Hippocratic Oath.

But in the meantime, let’s allow the true believers their fantasy of hope and truth.

Obama, a leader who articulates my own ideas and intuitions with the most eloquent grace, on the brink of a presidential miracle. …

he believes, as I do, that we could do better, that we could be better, that we are – when stripped of bureaucracy and alienation and skepticism – already better.

A Government without a bureaucracy? Now, that is something I have to see…

—————————————————————–

Nancy Reyes is a retired physician living in the rural Philippines. She writes about human rights at Makaipablog.