Beyond Arrogant
Obama fucked up big time today in his comments on the frustrations of small town Americans left behind during the Clinton and Bush Administrations:
“You go into some of 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,” Obama said. “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.”
For someone who has run a campaign with almost perfect pitch, this is so far off the mark, it’s breathtaking. To Josh’s point, this seems to more evidence of the arrogance that seems to be emerging as a defining part of Obama’s character. Today’s extraordinary gaffe is giving more credence to a growing concern among many in the party that Obama is Michael Dukakis with charisma.
This is going to be a big deal in the coming days–even more so if Obama wins the nomination. My concern runs a little deeper. Not only is Obama’s statement arrogant and insensitive, his analysis is dead wrong. The death of small town America is real. Its causes are complex transcending party and politics. We are in the midst of an evolutionary period much akin to the Industrial Revolution and unfortunately small town America is road kill on the route to the next era. But to assert that people go to church, love their guns and are bigoted because neither Bush nor Clinton gave them a hand is a complete non sequitur. To paraphrase Jay Leno, “What the hell were you thinking?”
One of the knocks on Obama is that he can’t seal the deal. People I know who went to school and played sports with him at Occidental College say that Obama lacks the killer instinct. He gets just so far and chokes. So in the realm of character, which is where we seem to focus our attention, we have an effete multiculti intellectual from everywhere in the world, Lady MacBeth and Uncle Fester. Paging Al Gore, Al Gore, come to the aid of the country…
Posted: April 11th, 2008 under Best of the Blogs.
Comments: 20
Comments
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 6:13 am
Doesn’t seem like “big time” to me nor do I see the arrogance that you folks see. Yes it was a bit tinny but it was also taken out of context. I’m also pretty sick of judging all of the candidates on every sentence. As Jeff Fecke said over at Shakesville “Within moments, a billion righty bloggers rushed to their basements, poured themselves a Mountain Dew, inhaled a pound of Cheeto dust, and immediately began screaming that Barack Obama hates all Americans, because he’s just a namby-pamby San Francisco liberal from Massachusetts. Or something.” Time has the quote in context – the complete remarks actually – if you want to click.
There are more important things and I think we should be taking the media to task for discussing sentence structure more than the economy, health care, or the war. That said, is there any particular reason you didn’t mention his update/explanation where he made his meaning clear?
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 6:17 am
And Al Gore has no killer instinct either. If you want killer instinct, you want Joe Biden.
Comment from bdr
Time: April 12, 2008, 6:28 am
Adding, read Obama’s entire statement, in which he was trying to say that his failure to reach all small-town white Pennsylvanian voters WAS NOT because they’re racist.
Lefty, I respect you, but if you start thinking that giving long nuanced answers to complicated questions that are subsequently taken out of context by rightwing Americans and their presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, perhaps Obama is doomed, for all the wrong reasons.
Adding, sometimes old adages are true: know a man by his enemies. I may not be a true-through Obama fan, but I sure as fuck hate the people running against him.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: April 12, 2008, 7:42 am
This is not bowling-ball arrogance. I agree with the content of the above comments and I don’t see it as a “big time” fuck up, as you put it. I find this comment to be like his Ronald Reagan comments, truth burried in some jumbled sentences by a fresh set of eyes looking at old problems.
The only candidate out of touch with the middle class is McBush, and not just him but his entire potty is indifferent to the middle class, or lower middle class, since 80 percent of Americans consider themselves to be in the middle class.
I would also add that the last three administrations have aided the errosion of the lower middle class in both jobs and quality of life. In the poorer classes the indifference by all three administrations borders on a crime. That was John Edwards focus.
However, to his major point, ALL candidates for the past six or more presidential cycles have promised to restore jobs in these small towns as a matter of political rote. Witness what Romney said in Michigan where he promised that he would bring back the old jobs. To his partial credit, McCain said they would not come back. As I see it here, Obama awkwardly tried to point that out. It is interesting to me how the truth squirms.
The problem with Hillary and Bill is that they would not know what truth is. Lying comes so easily to both of them as we saw again yesterday with The Sick One. And the press, rather than calling it another lie, choose to say that he simply “recalled” events differently. Yet there were five or six factual statements that he made that were wrong. I’ll take a little arrogance over congenital lying.
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: April 12, 2008, 8:57 am
I read the entire commentary and understand nuanced answers. As much as I want to go back to the 40s where people read and discussed issues in full sentences, this is absolutely going to be sliced and diced into sound bites and added to the skewed litany of clips that prove, with Obama’s own words, that he is anti-American. You watch.
I know what Obama said and what he meant, and yes, give me a latte-toting Obama over any flavor of McCain.l Dems have no idea how the game is played an if you don’t realize how big a media gaffe this might be, you’re in some sort of cheerleader denial. And please stop comparing the Clintons at this stage and focus on Obama–they’re done, they’re a bore.
I wouldn’t run for dog catcher given the nature of the media and the technological ability to capture, reframe and distribute every utterance. But that’s the game (ask Randi Rhodes) and to play it you have to know the rules.
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 10:04 am
Randi Rhodes was taken off the air because she refused to change her contract when new owners took over Air America. She had a ‘no fire’ clause in it. They asked her to change that. When she said “no” suddenly she was off the air for something that happened off the air weeks earlier. That was all economics.
And the notion that everyone running for office should defensively tailor all of their public comments so that the Bad Actors can’t misrepresent excerpts is ridiculous. Instead we should scream and shout and insist on being allowed to tell the truth. Your way the Bad Guys win.
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: April 12, 2008, 10:11 am
And it is fair to continue to compare Obama to the Clintons since the Clintons, both of them, and John McCain represent old politics, the old rules you want Obama to play by. As long as Hillary is in the race, comparisons are valid and necessary.
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 10:35 am
Speaking of McBush, he continues to confuse Shia and Suuni but Obama’s remarks are the big news story. Why might that be?
Comment from Arnel Simpson
Time: April 12, 2008, 1:45 pm
We’ll never have the perfect candidate nor should we be so silly as to hope one comes along. This country is so out of step with reality, Jesus, Moses and Mary couldn’t put it back on track. Our bar has been lowered to the point there isn’t a decent, dependable American left and we’re in permanent denial. Stick a fork in us coach, we’re done. We should do the world a favor and just move over and let everyone go on their successful, merry way and not impose our fucked up form of “democracy (what a joke)” on those that are capable of seeing through it. Why don’t we let Bush and Cheney play with a nuclear warhead during their last few months in office, we’ve given them carte-blanche up to this point, why stop now ?
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: April 12, 2008, 3:58 pm
There is so much cheerleading on this blog for Obama that it’s obscuring the point of the post. To “Arnel’s” point, we’re so fucked up in this country, that no rational dialog is possible, no candidate can make a nuanced comment, every word is parsed within a micron of its life. I absolutely have the highest respect for my colleagues here, but the knee-jerk reaction here to what indeed, is a nuanced argument, here is absolutely no better.
I was criticizing Obama for not understanding the MSM and our asinine gotcha culture. That’s the game, folks–I didn’t make the rules and wish it weren’t so. I slammed Hillary and McCain for their inadequacies to be POTUS and by extension, and slammed our culture for setting the bar so low. But more importantly, I criticized Obama for not understanding that God, Gays, Guns and Abortion are the third, fourth, fifth and sixth rails of politics. If you’ve watched CNN today (Sat) or listened to what passes for talk radio, this IS a big deal, like it or not, old rules or not. Obama may change many things if and when he’s in office, but he’s not going to change the way people get their news or make electoral decisions. Hate to break it to you, Sasha, but understanding the game is why the bad guys win.
More than that, my beef with Obama’s statement goes beyond its insensitivities. Believe it or not, his analysis is DEAD WRONG. He’s engaged in a stupid and irrelevant syllogism that does absolutely nothing for him. The plight of small town America (something I happen know a great deal about) and the love of God and guns in America are not related (as if only people in small towns love God and their guns!). If he’d made the point that economic policy is leading to a preponderance of crystal meth abuse in small town America (a real, quantifiable concern), he’d have a much more powerful and poignant argument.
Keep cheering, guys.
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 4:31 pm
Since my analysis is so simplistic, it’s good that you can remind us of the right wing rules that you want the Democrats to live by.
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: April 12, 2008, 4:39 pm
McCain by 5 points in the general, Sasha–told you in January…
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 5:08 pm
Too bad it is against the law to wager.
Comment from Leftcoast
Time: April 12, 2008, 6:11 pm
I don’t bet against teams/candidates I support even if they’re likely to lose. Jus sayin”
Comment from suzanne
Time: April 12, 2008, 6:30 pm
n. bobamabot - (bah-bahm-a-bot) meaning: a formerly unbiased, objective and highly intelligent political pundit whom now lacks any ability to see the trees for the forest and/or forest for the trees.
Even Obama has admitted his mistake and has sorta, kinda apologized for offending a large percentage of his potential supporters in Pennsylvania (Indiana, Kentucky, etc.) As banksy says - keep it real, guys.
Comment from Sasha
Time: April 12, 2008, 8:49 pm
As John Cole says:
“I think the super-delegates should consider that Hillary may have killed Vince Foster. Additionally, I think super-delegates should look at the fact that Hillary will gut her own party in her naked pursuit for power. Also, Hillary is a rich liberal elite whose husband fucks other woman. Regular Americans won’t be able to relate to adultery, and it could be used against her in the election by “the far right wing.” By the way, I heard some Republicans talking about someone named Mark Rich. I think the super-delegates should keep that in mind when they make their choice.”
Comment from suzanne
Time: April 12, 2008, 10:06 pm
Sasha - you’re freaking me out again. Do you seriously believe that Clinton murdered Vince Foster? Un-fucking-believable - his death was a proven suicide and you have the nerve to accuse Leftcoast of using right wing BS? And Hillary’s a rich liberal elite because, duh, her husband was the President of the United States and subsequently made a few bucks from speeches and books about said presidency - can’t fault him for that, can you? And I’m pretty sure about 50% of Americans can relate to Bill’s adultery (from a recent poll on the subject) - and really, who gives a flying fuck who he fucks, it isn’t any of your business, last time I checked - and we didn’t seem to care about JFK’s infidelities so why the ridiculous double standard? And as for Mark Rich, Obama has his own shady connections to answer to (let me know if you want a list).
Comment from Josh Hammond
Time: April 13, 2008, 6:40 am
Lefty is back to his either/or thinking. Any support or comments in favor of Obama is “cheerleading” while any comments against Obama, except his, is dismissed. For example, I pointed out the “arrogance thing”, hardly cheerleading. Yet when I see some substance in what he said, admitting he said it poorly, that is cheerleading. Arnel said it best.
After all this, I’m back to what I have always liked about this blog: a variety of well-written commentary and analysis on politics and culture, an active commentary by readers (and other bloggers), fresh links to interesting material (such as Sasha’s recent opera post), quirky and fun links to a wide range of topics through bdr’s regular posts, and vigilant commentary on Iraq, the big issue of our time. The who-is-right and who-is-wrong of any of these posts, including my own, is of no interest to me.
Comment from bdr
Time: April 13, 2008, 7:27 am
The John Cole comment Sasha posted was sarcastically pointing out the audacious hypocrisy of HRC’s glee at distorting and then exploiting Obama’s ill-spoken construct.
The irony of a woman who bought a Senate seat in New York calling Obama an elitist is breathtaking.
Though he’d better kick-ass this coming Wednesday debate, or he IS meat. If he is the politician I hoped he was, he will - this is, weirdly, an opportunity to engage a necessary conversation.
Comment from Tom
Time: April 24, 2008, 12:03 pm
The truth can make people angry. Read his comment, it’s actually true.
Write a comment