Different But Still More of the Same
So, Obama's declaration that he's "exploring" a presidential run included a vow to seek "a different kind of politics." He said: "Today, our leaders in Washington seem incapable of working together in a practical, common sense way. Politics has become so bitter and partisan, so gummed up by money and influence, that we can't tackle the big problems that demand solutions."
It's funny. Don't we hear the same thing every four years? We need a different or new politics, based in pragmatism, practical thinking, problem-solving . . . common sense. We need to bridge partisan divides, reduce the influence of money and . . . influence, "the special interests."
The big reason why I'm less than thrilled by Obama is not his lack of experience. It's that his spiel is so tired. If I'm right--and I'm sure I am--that we hear this every four years, then the previous common-sense-pragmatist-reformers-uniters-not-dividers have all failed, for the most part, at tackling the big problems with homespun treacly goodness--from Carter, at least, through W. Why? There are lots of reasons, from ineptitude (Carter) to insincerity (W.). But isn't that the point? We've heard it before, it never works. Either Obama doesn't realize he's spouting cliche after cliche, which I doubt, or he knows that this is pablum but continues to spoon feed us. In which case, he's a cynical operator. The political equivalent of an infomerical promising that you can lose all the weight you want to lose without exercising, or counting calories, or dieting.
Of course, I'm sure Obama will go far with this shit, because it's like crack for mainstream political pundits, like Broder and his ilk.
posted by Number Three @ 7:16 AM
3 Comments:
Good post. This idea that if someone would just try something different, just use a little 'common sense', and Washington would fix itself, is such nonsense. It's the source of stupid movies too, from Dave to Man of The Year.
OK, but if this blather is a campaign constant (as it is), how can you single out Obama for blame? Treat it like white noise.
As I've commented before, I'm skeptical of the Obamamania too. But then again, he, is, like, sooooo cool. How's the old saying go? Democrats all want to fall in love, Republicans all want to fall in line. Do you see any other lovable candidates out there?
Yeah, the "new and different" rhetorical ploy is getting real old. I myself would be surprised if Obama didn't know that he is spouting platitudinous clichés (if he doesn't know this, then he is unfit to be prez). I suspect that while Obama's hackneyed rhetoric doesn't much impress those who can see through it, there must be data showing it to still be an effective form of appeal, given that Madison Avenue continues to bankroll it in commercials. I also take the recent Republican smear operation against him to be a sure sign that some on the right considers him a serious candidate. By smearing him now they are laying the groundwork for an "Obama-the-Muslim-Sympathizer narrative that will undoubtedly rear it's ugly head later, should he get the Democratic nomination.
As for me, at this point I don't really care for the two buzz-makers, Obama and Hillary, given that both camps continue to triangulate on the question of Iraq. If they continue their wishy-washiness on the central issue of the day (and I consider Hillary’s latest troop-cap proposal to be just that), I’d even consider voting for a Chuck Hegel over either one of them.
Post a Comment
<< Home