Obama: Inexperienced just the way we want
Well, this log has been in hibernation for a good while, but I'm finally inspired to post again. Not because I'm in danger of writing letters to the local editor again (keep.... hands.... off...... keyboard) but because for the first time I can remember I am actually excited about the way-too-early launch of a presidential campaign. And I just have to weigh in:
Barack Obama's announcement was of course no surprise, but it still gives me a bit of spring in my step. I have no (ok few) illusions about him being anything like a perfect candidate (that is, anything close to being as far left as the right has him pegged), but there's definitely a sense that in this case, a little compromise on the part of conscientious voters (like me) would go a long way. Whereas I am quite certain that if I compromised enough to vote for Clinton, I would just get bitter about it all over again-- shades of 1992.
One thing that ought to be squashed immediately (or as soon as the lame-o madrasa story is dealt with) is the complaint that Obama has no experience. Beg pardon? What was that? It reminds me of when people were sniffing about Jessie the Body getting elected governor of Minnesota. When people said things about his being unqualified, I had a prof at Texas at the time who was like, "and our governor is exactly how qualified?" Yes, it was that governor. Now
"president."
What exactly is the experience advantage that people like Bush have over people like Obama? Experience with secret societies and blue-blood family circles in Maine and Connecticut? Listen, Obama's experiences-- having an international family, living in Indonesia as a child, working as a community activist, living in urban neighborhoods most people in the political class won't even drive through-- are way better preparation for the presidency than anything any Bush has ever done (OK, except maybe Jenna, who worked at a great school with my cousin Claire. But other than that).
Course maybe the experience card is one that Hillary will play more than um... Rudolph or whomever the GOP throws up. Granted, Hillary has hill skills. I have no qualms about her ability to work those corridors and make deals. So make her VP. Make her Chief of Staff, or anything, really. The thing is, I don't trust her priorities. She's a conservative poll-watcher, no doubt about it, and represents the same elitism that has been ammunition for Democratic self-in-the-foot-shooting since the rise of the DLC. I know Obama went to Columbia, ok, but he also went to Occidental College, as well as that public school in Indonesia, etc. etc. He knows there's a world out there off the golf course, and it's not just noblesse oblige that motivates him politically. On our marathon post-Christmas drive this year we listened to his memoir, and it sold me. Of all the candidates so far, he's the one we want setting the agenda in the white house. For the insider Washington stuff, he can get help.
As for the not-being-black enough thing? Come on, now. Nobody in this country who has ever looked at him has ever been confused. So he's not Harold Washington, but he applied to work for him once. Enough said.
So I'm starting to figure out this schematic for the Dem primary race, and basically everybody is selling themselves as one thing, but probably will turn out to be something else. Somebody should do the graphics on this:
Hillary Clinton wants to be Clinton, but she's probably actually Kerry.
Barack Obama wants to be Kennedy, but he's probably actually Clinton.
J0hn Edwards... anyone?
Barack Obama's announcement was of course no surprise, but it still gives me a bit of spring in my step. I have no (ok few) illusions about him being anything like a perfect candidate (that is, anything close to being as far left as the right has him pegged), but there's definitely a sense that in this case, a little compromise on the part of conscientious voters (like me) would go a long way. Whereas I am quite certain that if I compromised enough to vote for Clinton, I would just get bitter about it all over again-- shades of 1992.
One thing that ought to be squashed immediately (or as soon as the lame-o madrasa story is dealt with) is the complaint that Obama has no experience. Beg pardon? What was that? It reminds me of when people were sniffing about Jessie the Body getting elected governor of Minnesota. When people said things about his being unqualified, I had a prof at Texas at the time who was like, "and our governor is exactly how qualified?" Yes, it was that governor. Now
"president."
What exactly is the experience advantage that people like Bush have over people like Obama? Experience with secret societies and blue-blood family circles in Maine and Connecticut? Listen, Obama's experiences-- having an international family, living in Indonesia as a child, working as a community activist, living in urban neighborhoods most people in the political class won't even drive through-- are way better preparation for the presidency than anything any Bush has ever done (OK, except maybe Jenna, who worked at a great school with my cousin Claire. But other than that).
Course maybe the experience card is one that Hillary will play more than um... Rudolph or whomever the GOP throws up. Granted, Hillary has hill skills. I have no qualms about her ability to work those corridors and make deals. So make her VP. Make her Chief of Staff, or anything, really. The thing is, I don't trust her priorities. She's a conservative poll-watcher, no doubt about it, and represents the same elitism that has been ammunition for Democratic self-in-the-foot-shooting since the rise of the DLC. I know Obama went to Columbia, ok, but he also went to Occidental College, as well as that public school in Indonesia, etc. etc. He knows there's a world out there off the golf course, and it's not just noblesse oblige that motivates him politically. On our marathon post-Christmas drive this year we listened to his memoir, and it sold me. Of all the candidates so far, he's the one we want setting the agenda in the white house. For the insider Washington stuff, he can get help.
As for the not-being-black enough thing? Come on, now. Nobody in this country who has ever looked at him has ever been confused. So he's not Harold Washington, but he applied to work for him once. Enough said.
So I'm starting to figure out this schematic for the Dem primary race, and basically everybody is selling themselves as one thing, but probably will turn out to be something else. Somebody should do the graphics on this:
Hillary Clinton wants to be Clinton, but she's probably actually Kerry.
Barack Obama wants to be Kennedy, but he's probably actually Clinton.
J0hn Edwards... anyone?
posted by cultcrit at 11:07 AM
3 Comments:
Oh, well, someone last week (possibly Time, I didn't actually read about it because I don't CARE) said Edwards was Dean. Whatever. They're waiting for the southern version of the scream.
Thanks for posting this Ben...I know that it can be really tough to find time to post.
The southern version, I believe, is accomplished by adding a "haw! at the end of what Dean did. If only he had *finished*, maybe some spin doctor could have spun the scream as a preferable alternative to the infamous confederate-flag soundbite. But I still maintain that it's better to have someone who can let a barbaric yawp once in a while than someone who affects "nucular" to sound folksy.
hugs, Heather. Thanks for reading!
GREAT article, Ben. Should be in a magazine. Maybe you should scratch the job and write for The Nation? The Progressive? The Mennonite? Sun? Utne? Mother Earth? Mother Jones? Sojourners? Friends? (are you beginning to feel like you're in our kitchen? Sitting on the old heater???
LOVE!
Post a Comment
<< Home