For once, we can actually see the result of the word games people are playing while the contest is still on. The number-one reason I don’t fool with politics is on display right here:
When a visibly angry McCain supporter in Waukesha, Wis., on Thursday told the candidate “I’m really mad” because of “socialists taking over the country,” McCain stoked the sentiment. “I think I got the message,” he said. “The gentleman is right.” He went on to talk about Democrats in control of Congress.
On Friday, McCain rejected the bait.
“I don’t trust Obama,” a woman said. “I have read about him. He’s an Arab.”
McCain shook his head in disagreement, and said:
“No, ma’am. He’s a decent, family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues and that’s what this campaign is all about.”
He had drawn boos with his comment: “I have to tell you, he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States.”
The anti-Obama taunts and jeers are noticeably louder when McCain appears with Palin, a big draw for GOP social conservatives. She accused Obama this week of “palling around with terrorists” because of his past, loose association with a 1960s radical. If less directly, McCain, too, has sought to exploit Obama’s Chicago neighborhood ties to William Ayers, while trying simultaneously to steer voters’ attention to his plans for the financial crisis.
I actually watched the youtube video of the incident, and it’s as bad as it seemed.
Here’s the thing: I don’t ride hard for Obama like that. I don’t ride hard for any politicians, primarily because they’re politicians. They obfuscate, prevaricate, and outright lie. It’s part of their job. I don’t get mad at em for it, but I don’t fool with em either. It’s like me gettin mad at a snake for bitin me. If I know a snake bites, I should expect him to bite me, because that’s in his nature. Same thing here. So this is not comin from some position of defending Obama because I believe he’s some savior or that I’m all tryin’a get people to vote for him. It IS coming from a position of disgust with the tone the political process has taken.
Politics and policy are different. Regrettably. If elections were all about pointing out the differences in policy between two candidates, I’d probably be more engaged. But they’re not. Politics is sheer gamesmanship, and not infrequently, dirty games are played. Normally, it doesn’t bother me so much as it’s just something I suspect. I can’t even give people the benefit of the doubt any more, though. Now we’re to the point that we have jokers booing their own candidate for having the temerity to suggest that his opponent is a family man and that the country wouldn’t crash and burn if he’s elected president.
Don’t get it twisted, both parties play dirty, but in this particular cycle, Obama’s opponents have been subtly playing up his “otherness.” While, yes, it is accurate that his middle name is Hussein, nobody’s calling him that because there’s this sudden interest in calling candidates by their full names. Naw, it’s to make him seem more foreign. There can be no other purpose. For some people, that doesn’t make a difference, but everybody’s not really aware enough to make the difference. Which means that this lady and the others like her, who believe that Obama is a secret Muslim, an outright Muslim, an Arab, or whatever other cockamamie ideas are floating around out there, are the mature crops of those seeds. Worst part is that it’s not getting any better. Just yesterday, I saw where somebody tried to link whatever hand symbol the Obama supporters do with the one Hitler used. Come. On. (Personally, I thought it looked like The Roc, so I guess that connection was over my head too.) Obviously, it’s not the politicians themselves who make the most extreme statements, they just provide the carbohydrates that break down into the simple sugars.
It’s a shame two candidates couldn’t run on what John McCain said at the rally, “No, ma’am. He’s a decent, family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues and that’s what this campaign is all about,” and keep it at that level for the entire process.
Entries (RSS)
Good post.
I honestly don’t know what was worse about all those scenes, the statements or the thundering applause and boos when McCain tried to tone things down. I’ve been involved in political campaigns and I can definitely understand why someone would be disgusted with the entire process. It definitely gets ugly. But usually, there are limits (even if they aren’t readily apparent). McCain’s camp crossed the line on this one big time. Hopefully he will continue with a sincere effort to stop with this entire angle. It’s dangerous and it ain’t working.
It’s a shame two candidates couldn’t run…
I have to object to that observation. When we were growing up, we were taught not to start fights, but if somebody hits you, defend yourself. Way back when, at the beginning of this presidential cycle, Obama’s whole approach was based on change; change the way campaigns are financed, and attempt to change the negative tone of campaigning itself. But Obama also knew the deal, that if he got punched, he had to be prepared to punch back.
We all kind of know intuitively there is a difference between punching and counterpunching, but when it is reported in the media or discussed among voters, it comes off as if “both parties are being negative.” Hillaryites complained that Obama was being sexist and negative about Hillary, never acknowledging the Clinton Docrtrine that politics is a contact sport, and if you don’t want the action, keep your uniform off. I heard Paul Begala earlier this week say he likes negative campaigning, and Patrick Buchanan insists that you raise the negatives of your opponent.
Earlier this week, Cindy McCain said Obama is running the most negative campaign in history. Cognitive dissonance all around. Obama has taken the approach, “Don’t start no stuff, won’t be no stuff, and if you wanna go there, we can go there.” To me, it’s an “inner city” approach to politics.
i’m sayin that they should run like that form the get-go. it is how it is, but if i had my druthers, politics would be pretty sterile and dry. it would be a mostly-factual account of two people who had the same ultimate goal in mind, which is making america the best place it can be, but different ideas of how that’s accomplished. they would then debate — or even argue, when appropriate — whose method is better, but without all the rest of the crap which keeps karl rove and those of his ilk in business.
not that it’s ever gonna be like that, but that’s what it would take for me to get really engaged. other than that, i’d rather watch from the fringes.
I was ready to give Ave the eye2eye, but then brotherbrown chimed in and made too much sense.
Politicians wouldn’t engage in nihilistic posturing if the public didn’t buy it up like hot, buttery flapjacks @ IHOP.
But hope springs eternal.
My rule of thumb is any politician who’s ready to talk trash had better be prepared to throwdown. In fact, every politician ought to be prepared to face their share of ad hominems as part of the process. Political smack is like playing the dozens or a rap battle — anything pretty much goes and points are awarded for creativity. Since politics and policy are as much about theater as they are the business of government, there’s always going to be the inevitable drift into matters of style and imagery. And… the tactics of mass distraction are extremely effective. The blame, if any, belongs on the stooped shoulders of the American electorate for endorsing these dog-and-pony shows.
One good thing about Obama is he appears to know a little about Bruce Lee’s Art of Fighting Without Fighting.
I’m not going to defend those who insist on using his middle name, but I do think there’s a more charitable explanation than just trying to emphasize him as Other. I think a lot of people who draw attention to his middle name have some basic conviction that he’s on the side of terrorists as someone who didn’t want to continue fighting in Iraq, and they find his middle name fitting given that it’s the last name of the former dictator of Iraq. So rather than just playing up his Otherness, as if it’s because he’s black and thus can more easily be cast aside as “one of them”, it’s actually tied to his foreign policy views and used ironically. I’m not going to say that this is always what’s going on, but I do think it’s what’s behind some of this.
I don’t ride hard for Obama either, but I don’t hear media or party pols playing up Cindy McCain’s drug thefts or Todd Palin’s secessionism the way they repeated Michelle Obama’s quote about feeling proud of her country f/ the first time.
And while I’m no Obama apologist, I wonder what a poor or inner city child of 12-14 would feel like in 20016 having only known of a Black president w/ Black schoolchildren living in the White House?