You Rockin’ Loud But You Ain’t Sayin’ Nothin’
by matt at 6:00 am on July 5th, 2007 in 2008 Presidential, Obama Uber AllesObama: Change Must Be More Than Just a Slogan - Radio Iowa (7/4/07):
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says change must be more than just a campaign slogan.
During a news conference in Pella on Wednesday, Obama repeatedly said voters are “hungry” for a “shift in the political culture” and they want to look forward rather than backward.
“Change just can’t be a slogan. Change has to be something that is demonstrated day to day, on an on-going basis,” Obama told reporters. “I think that my career and my campaign has demonstrated real change.”
Just fucking shoot me. This is the continuation of an extremely irritating habit Obama has been displaying for some time: public quotes lamenting how Democrats must do this, people want that, etc. Obama doesn’t need my permission to be about anything, I wouldn’t vote for him at gunpoint. But this meta talk is absurd. He gets more ink than all the other Democratic candidates combined, how about something concrete? What exactly has his career or his campaign changed? For what issue or issues would he actually go to the mat? What would this “shift in the political culture” look like?
I’ve been asking these questions since long before Obama got in the race in the hopes that I’d eventually get some answers, even if they weren’t meant to appeal to me. And after his campaign and its lofty, but empty, rhetoric took shape, and it became clear that those answers weren’t in the offing, I did what I do from time to time, I practically begged for someone else to make the Obama case. What I’ve gotten so far is a mish-mash of accusations of racism, laundry lists of ineffectual Senate votes, hilarious “he’s experienced enough” / “give him a break, he’s only been in the Senate two years” defenses, and ad hominem attacks based on my support for John Edwards.
Frankly, it’s been pathetic. I even went as far as engaging a blogger who went way out of his way to misunderstand/misrepresent some of our criticisms of Obama, at one point offering up space on 1115 for a careful rebuttal (nullus) of said criticisms. But after accepting the offer, the strange silence has been notable. Usually in this case, I’d mock this blogger for being short on game and shorter on stones, but maybe discretion is really the better part of valor. After all, who can defend a man who makes a point of including passages in his stump speech that accentuate the emptiness of his own philosophy?
All I’m asking for here is a sketch of how Obama’s intent to “move beyond partisan politics,” “shift…the political culture,” and compromise on all the difficult issues of the day will play out in early 21st century America. This isn’t a trick question, and if you consider yourself an Obama supporter, you should already know.
sarabeth wrote:
Can’t say I found that blogger’s silence very strange. It pretty much fits my very low opinion of his honesty, intellectual and otherwise.
On June 19, I wrote:
It’s pretty clear what I’m alleging there — that Obama is about style, rather than substance.
By way of rebutting this baseless allegation, this blogger twit accuses me of having the white-woman-for-black-man hots for Obama:
What racist, sexist shit is that?
And what sense does it even make to say that I think that Obama lacks substance because I’m helplessly hypnotized by his sexiness?
Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 6:19 am ¶
dnA wrote:
That John Solomon interview with Edward’s hairstylist got ya’ll kinda mad huh?
Oh and uh, Sarabeth, I didn’t know you were white..while I don’t take anything back, I notice you chose to focus on my criticism of your “observation”(projection), rather than the point you were arguing, which is that “Everyone” in America knows there is no military solution in Iraq. Except that’s what everyone who listens to Rush Limbaugh and watches Fox news is saying and thinking. And as for racist and sexist, don’t you guys link to Byron Crawford?
And ask yourselves, if I’m so cowardly and dishonest, why are you begging for my attention? Why would you be so clearly interested in engaging me?
Look, you can’t fuck with me. Go play somewhere. I’m busy.
Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 7:53 pm ¶
matt wrote:
i’m sure in your addled mind, this is irrelevant, but this was written well before that, and has nothing to do with obama’s empty rhetoric. i’m not sure why obama supporters can’t understand that people can criticize obama independent of their support for another candidate or even another party. it’s insane.
you decided to write about things we wrote here. when engaged, you purposefully misrepresented our arguments. i broke it down for you, and offered you a chance to make a real case on my site. you accepted and told me you’d be in touch. [Its more than fair, it's quite generous. I'll be in touch.] you then went silent. i didn’t beg you for anything. i’m calling you a coward because no other word covers it. you simply can’t engage on the merits, so you hide behind peripheral arguments and misconstrue everything else. you’re a coward and you’re dishonest.
what’s really funny is that sarabeth called this one perfectly. i thought that there was no way you would be this much of a bitch. honestly, i can’t believe anyone is.
i can’t fuck with you because you’re hiding. i’m embarrassed for you. i’ve never seen someone back down from an argument like this in the 4 years i’ve been doing this. i didn’t even know it was possible.
Posted 05 Jul 2007 at 8:08 pm ¶