Andrew Sullivan reflects on whether he's "delusional" to say that Obama "had an 'objectively miraculous' fortnight."

Fortnight. That's already funny. Imagine if a candidate said "fortnight." He'd lose.

Anyway, "objectively miraculous." Even if you think that, shouldn't you quit offering up the raw material for this kind of mockery?



It's nice that Sullivan is reflecting on the possibility that he's overgushed. But he stands by his position:

What I meant is simply that it's remarkable that a first-term senator's proposals on Iraq, having been decried as defeat and surrender by McCain and Bush, came to be endorsed by the Iraqi "government," and that McCain and Bush had to adjust their own views accordingly. It's rare that any American politician who is not president would bring hundreds of thousands of foreigners into the streets of Berlin. It's rare that a Democratic nominee would be endorsed by the most successful young right-of-center politician in Britain, and be hailed by the conservative president of France. It's rare that such a newbie could pull off a complicated and pitfall-laden foreign tour without any noticeable gaffes or blunders.

Remarkable ≠ miraculous. And it would be a hell of a miracle to do all that and lose ground in the polls, which is what happened.

McCain is attacking Obama as a celebrity because Obama gave him no opening to attack him as an incompetent or unready on the world stage.

But the celebrity ad is very much an attack on Obama as unready — as is the follow-on "miracle" ad embedded above. McCain turned Obama's European success against him — and closed up the gap in the polls. Why not call that "objectively miraculous"?

I think by "objectively," Sullivan means "subjectively."