<p>I think you’re right, newmassdad. The general public doesn’t appreciate the extent that Obama was a golden boy who turned down easy riches and power in the Establishment to forge his own path to . . . well, we ALL know where now.</p>
<p>Part of the reason for that is that it wasn’t exactly in Obama’s interest to present himself that way. I’m sure that one of the things his pollsters told him was that he had problems with elitism, especially among white, working-class Democrats and independents. To say, “I was admitted to the Inner Sanctum, and walked out” isn’t inherently a winning story. It also raises the question as to WHY he walked out. It’s one thing to respect a guy who built his career from the ground up, but we might be suspicious if we found out that he turned down easy money and real power in order to be humble for a few years. Very few people would make that choice, except maybe for priests.</p>
<p>And, of course, he didn’t turn his back on it all completely. He DID take that University of Chicago paycheck, and he married another Harvard Law Grad who was bringing home the big bucks, at least until their children were born. He was on all those boards with William Ayers, a child of privilege. I’m sure the real story isn’t as romantic as the one-sentence summary.</p>
<p>Finally, the story requires too much esoteric detail. How many Joe Sixpacks know that Sidley & Austin is the snootiest firm in Chicago, that Obama’s summer internship there was intensely competitive to obtain and lavishly compensated? (How many would like Obama more if they knew that?) How many can tell the difference between the Harvad Law Review and the school newspaper? How many can appreciate what it means that the University of Chicago Law School gave Obama the same title it gave Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook, long before he was even a state senator?</p>