Category Archives: Politics

Obama/Palin: The Politics of Race Versus Gender

Saturday, August 30, 2008

In her speech in Dayton on Friday, when she was introduced by Senator McCain as his running mate, Governor Palin went out of her way to call upon women voters to help her, on their behalf, be elected Vice President. Now only 44, even if McCain were to serve a full 8 years, she’d only be 52 years old when she runs for President at the head of her own ticket.

“It was rightly noted in Denver this week,” she said, “that Hillary left 18 million cracks in the highest, hardest glass ceiling in America. But it turns out the women of America aren’t finished yet, and we can shatter that glass ceiling once and for all.”

Her objective is perfectly clear. Women need to vote for me to quash the notion that there are limits to what women can do, to the authority and power they can command. Running the country isn’t something women can and will do eventually. It’s something they are ready to do now.

It’s a point which begs the question of whether or not she, Sarah Palin personally, would be an effective President. It could be a case of “right time, wrong candidate” which I’ve made in previous postings about Barack Obama’s campaign. It’s not that we’re not ready for a black President. It’s that Barack Obama, personally, is the wrong black candidate for the job.

Here we have Governor Palin encouraging women to vote for her because she is a woman. There may be other reasons, of course, but gender has got to be high on the short list. Hilary Clinton wasn’t quite so direct, but did frequently remind prospective women voters that her nomination and election would be historic. I’m sure they got the point.

Senator Obama’s nomination and election would also be historic, but for different reasons and, I think, to a lesser extent. From slave to President is a long road, the journey down which is a matter of pride for all Americans as an affirmation of our democracy, and of the self-correcting tendencies of a free society. African Americans are, however, a significant, but relatively small minority of our country.

Women, on the other hand, are half. Their having been discriminated against for so long, in the private and public sectors of our economy, is not only also unforgivable, it has been monumentally inefficient. The unfairness of it all notwithstanding, we have deprived the economy (and government) of the full capabilities of half the population. (It’s something pure capitalism would never have done. It had to be personal.) Fortunately, while discrimination against black and female Americans still exists, it is waning fast and quickly becoming a non-issue right before our eyes. Do we owe Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton anything for proving the point? No. They are just the current beneficiaries of changes in our society which were encouraged by activists, well known and obscure, throughout our history, who forced our country to pay attention.

Unfortunately for the Obama campaign, race doesn’t have equal status in politics. He can’t, as easily, stand up and encourage black people to vote for him precisely because he is black. There’s no point, and it could be counterproductive. Black Americans are going to vote for him anyway, as they have already demonstrated in the primaries. No, what he needs to do is dare white people not to vote for him on the grounds of his race. It’s a pitch which may have worked for many of his Rally People, not to mention an adoring media in the early stages of his campaign, but it’s a more subtle, negative argument which is a much harder sell to the electorate at large than the call to arms Governor Palin is making.


Site Meter

Lack of Experience: The Perverse Argument of John McCain Against Barack Obama

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Political analysts everywhere, working on behalf of the Obama campaign and for the media, have been making the point that McCain’s adding Sarah Palin to his ticket robs him of his argument about Barack Obama’s inexperience.

According to some of those pundits, McCain has opted instead to focus on ideology to energize his conservative base, and on broadening the appeal of his campaign to middle and working class voters. Not incidentally, he’s also re-pitched himself as the real candidate for change by bringing in a Washington outsider – in stark contrast to Obama’s choice of Senator Biden, the consummate Washington insider – who (Sarah Palin) just happens to be a woman.

I disagree that John McCain has taken the experience argument off the table. Quite to the contrary, I think he’s upped the ante on precisely that point. Thanks to Sarah Palin, the Obama campaign cannot argue that she is inexperienced without pointing out, at the same time, the lack of experience of their own standard bearer. They’re making McCain’s point for him.

The fact is, in many important respects Governor Palin is actually more experienced than Senator Obama. More to the point, even if she is relatively inexperienced, she’s only running for Vice President. If Senator Obama would like to switch positions with Joe Biden, that is, let Senator Biden run for President and Senator Obama be his running mate, comparisons between Obama and Palin might make more sense. Unfortunately, Barack Obama is the head of his own ticket. He’s running for President. Governor Palin is only running for Vice President.

Look for the Obama campaign to suppress arguments attacking Palin’s inexperience, and to downplay his signature issue of being the agent of change. That leaves him with arguing that McCain is a Bush clone who “doesn’t get it” – and those are now significantly weaker arguments than they were before Sarah Palin – a working class woman and Washington outsider, that’s been a mayor and now governor — was added to the Republican ticket.


Site Meter

“No way. No how. No kidding.”

“…unfortunately neither Senator Clinton nor Harriet Tubman
is running for President.”

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

In deference to Senator Clinton, her actual words in last night’s rousing speech before the Democratic Convention were, “No way. No how. No McCain.” It may have been good political theater, but unfortunately neither Senator Clinton nor Harriet Tubman is running for President.

Nor will political theater pay anyone’s bills or solve our nation’s many other problems. But I get it. The Democrats are psyching themselves up for the victory they want and anticipate in November. Good for them, and good for the Republicans who are up next.

So why do I feel so uninspired, so disappointed? I’ve thought about it, and the answer is that I’ve had it with form over substance, with the audacity of the presumption that I will be impressed, in any meaningful way, by all this hoopla and rhetoric.

On Thursday, Senator Obama is going to make his acceptance speech at the Denver stadium in front of 76,000+ supporters. His objective is to define his campaign as a bona fide movement, the scope of which transcends what any ordinary convention center can adequately accomodate. The arrogance of it all is unbelievable.

Does Senator Obama really think that hearing the roar and chanting of a stadium full of supporters will make his pitch any more substantive, any more convincing, that it will somehow make him better than his resume? Of course he does. He has to. Like all great magic, the trick is in distracting the audience from what’s really going on. This is the new politics, the “Change You Can Believe In” he’s promised.

As President, will Senator Obama be addressing the nation from The Oval Office, or from FedExFied, the new Redskins stadium? I’m just wondering if any of us can afford the price of season tickets.


Site Meter

Hillary Doesn’t Approve

Tuesday, August 26, 2008

No kidding. Hillary Clinton doesn’t approve of the ad the McCain campaign is running featuring her decidedly negative remarks about Senator Obama made when she was running against him for the nomination. She doesn’t approve, but then she doesn’t retract them either.

Her problem is that she was either purposing overstating Senator Obama’s lack of qualifications to be President, a/k/a “lying,” for those of us who don’t like to mince words, when she made those comments, mistaken, or telling the truth. Pick one.

The first choice strips away her integrity as a candidate and renders her endorsements of Senator Obama and criticisms of Senator McCain less than credible. The second choice suggests incompetence on the part of a very savvy, highly intelligent politician. The third, that she was right, is my personal favorite because it’s factually correct and is consistent with one of the core themes of her campaign, and Senator McCain’s as well.

The fact is, Senator Obama isn’t ready to be President. His resume for that position is all about “Career Objectives,” with pathetically little in the “Experience” section. Everyone knows this, that he’s inexperienced, even his most fervent supporters who believe that what the Senator promises so eloquently, the hope that he sells so effectively transcends the disadvantage of his having never tried and delivered on similar promises in the past.

For those supporting Senator Obama’s candidacy, hope trumps proven judgment and effectiveness. It’s a belief based on the notion that never having done something may actually make you better at doing it if only given the chance. It’s a premise that is occasionally true of newcomers who are not constrained by traditional notions of how things are supposed to be done, but does it work for the person we’re hiring to be President of the United States?

Senator Biden has the same problem with respect to his comments about Senator Obama when he (Biden) was running for President.

Will these people say anything to get themselves elected, or to serve their selfish political interests by supporting a candidate they clearly find deficient? (That was rhetorical.)

It may not be politically correct, but I’d prefer the truth: “Senator Obama is not particularly qualified to be President, but I believe an Obama/Democratic Presidency would be better for the country (and me) than another Republican administration. And here are my reasons why…” Wow, that feels so much better.


Site Meter

Obama/Biden: Hiring Experience. Blowing It Big Time

Saturday, August 23, 2008

It should have been Hilary.  That would have been the bold, masterstroke move that would have assured Senator Obama the Presidency.

On behalf of all of us who have been arguing all along that Senator Obama lacked the experience to be President – including the McCain campaign – I’d like to thank the Senator for proving our point for us.  He agrees by virtue of his choice of Joe Biden as his running mate who adds nothing politically to his chances of being elected, but who has the requisite white hair and senatorial credentials that he (Obama) is lacking.

Now all he has to do is convince us, starting with the Rally People who, with the help of an adoring media, gave him the nomination, that a Co-Presidency is what he’s been selling and they had in mind.  Co-Presidency?  Will Senator Biden simply be a close advisor, in which case he didn’t need to be Senator Obama’s running mate, or is Joe Biden to experience – especially when it comes to foreign policy – what Dick Chaney, Karl Rove, et al, have been to President Bush’s brain?

Senator Obama, it’s a little late in the process for you to admit that your resume needs padding.  Better to have waited 8 or 16 years to run when you, personally, were ready to be President.


Site Meter

“It only seems fair.”

Suggestion of the Day
Monday, August 11, 2008

If it’s illegal for us to lie to the government, why isn’t it illegal for the government to lie to us?

By “the government,” I’m referring, of course, to the President.

I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

True, there’s nothing in the Oath of Office which promises that the President will be truthful when he talks to the American people about matters of significant importance – although voracity might be construed from the words “faithfully execute” and Presidential lying is no way to “preserve” the Constitution.

No, for the President, there is nothing like the laws and simple process which compel ordinary citizens to tell the truth when testifying before Congress, in the courts, and to various other authorities. It is as if the American people are a somehow lesser entity, less authoritative, literally, and less deserving of respect than the institutions we have ourselves created to serve our purposes. We’re left, instead, with little more than the hope that our President is a person of integrity upon whom Congress and the American people can rely for the information they need to understand our circumstances and act accordingly.

How arrogant of any President to lie to us. What a grotesque perversion of the core principles of our democracy. What gives any President the right, if not simply that he or she can so easily get away with it? Maybe we should do something about that.


Site Meter

“Senator Obama, you’re black. So get over it already.”

Give me a break.
Sunday, August 10, 2008

When the McCain campaign ran the ad that featured Senator Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, the Obama campaign and many of his supporters immediately declared it racist. It was because the Senator was portrayed next to two young white women – as if it would have been okay if they’d been black.

So let me get this straight. Is it racist of the Republican Party to be running a white candidate because, during the inevitable debates and town meetings when the two standard bearers are standing next to each other, the juxtaposition of the two will emphasize that Barack Obama is African American – while no one would have noticed if they were both black?

Will Senator Obama refuse to pick a white person – heaven forbid, a youngish white female person – to be his running mate for fear, whenever they appear together, that voters will be reminded that he’s black, or not white, whichever is the worse point of view for his prospects?

No doubt about it, Senator Obama – perhaps as a service to those of us whose only contact with his campaign is via radio – has been reminding us, again and again, that he’s black, daring us not to vote for him. He’s the one who has been instigating the issue of race. The not so subtle strategy is to make those of us who don’t care what color he is, which describes by far and away the vast majority of the electorate, feel bad about not voting for him. Guilt and embarrassment, even on behalf of generations past, die hard. It’s a replay, but on a much grander scale, of what John Kennedy did when he was the first Catholic to run for President. Rather than let his Catholicism be an unspoken, even subconscious issue, he was the one who raised the subject to associate a vote for his opponent as a vote against his (Kennedy’s) religious affiliation.

Will it work for Senator Obama? Not if he overdoes it, a milestone he may have already passed. Beyond that point, he risks a negative reaction, not because he’s black, but because it’s fast becoming a nuisance issue, distracting from whatever positive advantages an Obama Presidency might have to offer. Racism is a negative message which underestimates the intelligence of the American voter.

Why keep pressing the issue of race? Because he thinks he needs it to distract the public from the real issue: his lack of experience. (Just between you and me, I’m not sure I like what this strategy implies about how Senator Obama would run our government, and our foreign policy in particular. It’s not behavior that encourages my confidence or trust.) No one cares what color he is, certainly not enough voters to cost him the election. The question is, does he know what he’s doing? Will he make a good President of the United States? It’s a question that deserves 100% of his and our attention.


Site Meter

Quote of the Day: The Debate Barack Obama Can’t Handle

Sunday, April 27, 2008

“Of the two Democrats running, turns out it’s the woman who’s the only one with the balls to be President.  After all these primaries, debates, ads, soundbites and episodes of “Hardball,” I’ve finally realized what it is that I like most about Hillary Clinton.”  – wf

Our government needs work.  No question about it, but it’s beginning to look like the change Senator Obama keeps promising serves a more personal objective, to remake the political process into something with which he, personally, feels more comfortable.

Unfortunately, we don’t have the time, nor is the Barack Obama model for government necessarily a good thing.  We need a President who can be effective in the context of our current government, and a general election candidate who can beat John McCain in the war of confrontational politics he and his Republican party are going to wage. 


Site Meter

Quote of the Day: The arrogance of Barack Obama’s rhetoric.

Saturday, April 12, 2008

Over the next few days, Senator Obama will use his considerable oratorical skills, and blind allegiance of his Rally People, to refocus attention from the substance of what he said yesterday, as quoted below, to the economy and plight of blue collar working people.  It will be the same redirection he accomplished when he responded to questions about his relationship with Pastor Jeremiah Wright by shifting everyone’s attention to the issue of race which was never the point.

His supporters will look for the truth in what he says, without regard to its implications.  They will excuse his arrogance because he tells them he’s only saying what we all know to be true.  His honesty is brutal, and therefore above reproach.  By proclaiming that what he says is what we already think, it must be so.  Why else would we believe it?  It’s logic that doesn’t make any sense.  It’s doublespeak political slight of hand at its very best.

Working people are not simple, they are not more easily led or coerced than more educated, more financially successful Americans.  Nor do they “cling” to their religion, rather than believe in it and rely on its power and direction, any more so than the Senator subscribes to his own spiritual foundations.

Working people do not grunt their way into their opinions about immigration or international trade, nor are their conclusions on those or any other subjects less valuable because they may be conditioned by different economic and social circumstances than those of their more privileged countrymen.  Indeed, they are not less privileged or less happy because they work in different jobs at lower rates of compensation.  The only meaningful difference is that many of them are unable to afford the medical care, quality education, personal safety and other basics of our national wealth that they and their families deserve to share.  Fixing that is not about rhetoric per se, but about the specifics of intelligent government and economic policy.

Is the Senator’s language his way of bringing us together, or a just a common strategy for eliciting support by making a given segment of our society angry enough to vote against his opponents?

Rally People, your candidate is not the second coming of anything.  He is nothing more, or less, than an exceptionally skilled politician self-packaged to leverage our sensitivities, distract us from his inexperience and lack of substance, and to pander to the understandable optimism and hope of all Americans that an elected leader can somehow make our lives better.

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them, and they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.  By Barack Obama, at a fundraiser yesterday in San Francisco, bold print added by me.

 


Site Meter

Why I don’t want to nominate Barack Obama for President.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

I started writing these notes in response to a comment made by “Paul V” yesterday which I’m going to publish in a few minutes.  His comments are severe and, I think, largely unwarranted, but agreeing with me is not a criterion for guests who visit WordFeeder.  Quite to the contrary, I like the openness of this form of communication, and want to encourage the broad based exchange of ideas which it makes possible.

I’m opposed to the candidacy of Barack Obama for several reasons, some general, some specific.  Here they are, in no particular order.

He’s inexperienced, not just a little bit, but greatly, not just with respect to domestic economic and other issues and international relations, but also with the process of getting things done in Washington.

His concept of governance by consensus, that he can invariably talk his way to a meaningful solution is naïve and, in some situations related to national security, perhaps dangerously so.  To a great extent, leadership requires the will and ability to take action when consensus is impossible.  I’m not confident he has what it takes.

His words are eloquent and stirring, but lack substance.  I have the sense that he’s playing with us, the consummate salesman who smooth talks his way past the fact that he really doesn’t know his product.

I find his blatant use of the race issue to bait white and black Americans into voting for him to be annoying, petty, a classic example of the old school politics which he purports to oppose.  It tends to be divisive, and not at all constructive, which is surprising for a candidate who keeps reminding us how he’s intends to bring everyone together.  America, at its very best, is, as it should be, an amalgamation of differences, not one big happy family.  I don’t care what color he is, and I’m not sure there are many Americans who do.

I’m troubled by his long standing and continuing relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and find his claims to the effect that he never heard the Pastor’s statements or was aware of the church’s publications to be incredulous.  (As a parent, I wonder how he discussed the Pastor’s sermons with his young, impressionable children who accompanied the Senator and his wife to services.)

I find his repeated claim that “I opposed this war from the start” to be true, but a case of fortunate hindsight.  If you actually read the text of his October 2, 2002, speech, you’ll perhaps understand why I believe his opposition to the use of military force in Iraq, in light of the threats to our national security which he acknowledged, to be proof positive of his naiveté and tendency to pander to his audience.

I’m concerned that he can’t win, that John McCain and the Republican Party will go after him in a way a less experienced, less vetted candidate will not handle effectively.

I’ve written on all these points over the past few months, in pieces which will explain my concerns in greater detail.  Please help yourself to my archives and recent postings.


Site Meter