just playing with words…

Posted on Thursday 1 May 2008


Sen. Barack Obama sought Wednesday to regain control of his campaign narrative, as he and his wife reminded voters that the Illinois Democrat is the one running for office, not Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. A day after angrily breaking from his Chicago pastor, Obama pushed an economic message, talking about jobs and gas prices, touring a metal manufacturing company and packing a university arena as he so often does…

"I think it’s offensive and outrageous," the former first lady said in a Fox News interview with Bill O’Reilly."People have to, you know, decide what they believe," she said, before alluding to one of Wright’s more controversial suggestions. "I sure don’t believe the United States government was behind AIDS." Even without Clinton’s mention, it was clear Obama would continue to be burdened by Wright, someone he said he believes is distracting the electorate from more important topics.

"You have been forced to basically turn your back on someone who had been a good friend for a long time," Marc Bilodeau, an Indianapolis economics professor and Obama supporter asked during a small-group event under a park pavilion. "I wonder if you could tell us how much a toll this takes on you." Appearing at his side, Michelle Obama emphasized that her husband should not be judged by the words or actions of others.

"If anybody looks over the course of this year, you won’t have a question about who Barack is," she said. "He has been very consistent, not just this year, but throughout his entire life." Michelle Obama, who conducted several interviews during the day, also offered her familiar refrain about wishing he was in another line of work. "I’m the cynic in the family. This is the hope guy," she said. "I’ve spent my life trying to convince him not to be a politician. It’s like teach, write, sing, dance. I don’t care what you do. Just don’t do this. These people are mean"…

"What we want to do now, though, is to make sure that this doesn’t continue to be a perpetual distraction," Obama said. "It is true that part of the job when you’re running for president is that anybody who is tangentially, you know, even remotely, associated with you is somehow fair game."

Obama said it is "unfortunate" that is the case, although he understands it is part of the process…
The wish that this will not be a perpetual "distraction" is not likely to come true, whether Reverend Wright goes quietly or goes postal. It has become a lynchpin in Obama’s political narrative, whether Obama [or I] want it to be. It seems to me that ignoring the place in the story Wright-gate now occupies is neither possible nor desirable. I think the way to regain control of his campaign narrative is to find a way to include it so that he can talk about the things he wants to talk about. Otherwise, he comes across as trying to avoid what’s on everyone else’s mind. I also think there should also be a way to include it when dealing with McCain’s relationships and gaffes.

I want to free associate about it for a minute. This as-of-yet unformed way of including the Wright story in his narrative cannot be Spin. Spin is an attempt to lead people to think about a thing in a certain way, usually by the use of logical fallacy, innuendo, or appealing to underlying prejudices. Democrats don’t do spin well. It can’t be with continued logical or moral arguments. Once is enough for that approach. All it does is give the experts something new to spin. Spin is out. Logic is out. Two speeches about exhausted the emotional turmoil part. His speech on race was strong and doesn’t need repeating. His emotional reaction was genuine. Nothing more needs to be said about it. Right now, the current Spin is that it took him 28 hours to react. He addressed that once, "I’ll be honest, I hadn’t seen it." But he might be able to say something more about that. But only once.

What I want him to find is a way to include the Wright contraversy editorially in his everyday speeches. In other words, talking about it as a part of his campaign history, something still on the table but also in the past. It has to be truthful. Integrity is what Obama has for sale. It can’t be attacking. It can’t be excuse making. But it can’t be ignoring. I’ll have a first shot at it. " One  Some things  we’ve  I’ve learned in this campaign. Race is a part of the American dialogue. Healing our continuing racial divide cannot occur if we don’t talk about it. The same thing goes for gender, something my Primary opponent has had to deal with. I think America would be best served if everyone took a look at how that effects their opinions – and found a way to make choices based on the person rather than the category." The contraversy about Reverend Wright brings up how important religion is, and probably alway has been, in American political life. For me, religion is part of my private life, and part of my moral life. I make no apology about that. But that aspect of my experience is informed by the teachings of my religion about love, tolerance, hope, and responsibility for my own behavior – not blindly following the direction of any religious leader. Religion, to me, is not about judging others. It’s about looking at myself." "Religious leaders are human beings, as we’ve seen. I would urge every American to struggle, as I have had to do, with their own conscience and beliefs." "We’ve been assaulted for the last years with a barrage of what is called spin. I’ve taken a number of hits by the spin masters, but I’m trying as hard as I can to play it straight. I don’t like to see American people manipulated. I don’t like being manipulated either. If you think I’m doing that, let me know and I’ll promise to look carefully to see if you’re right.  If I’m serious about ‘yes we can,’ I have to stay part of the ‘we.’"

I don’t know how to do what I’d like to see Obama do. But it’s interesting to think about it. I have a hunch that he does know how to do it, authentically. We are so used to being talked to from behind a mask, I think he can think out loud about these issues and conflicts effectively – not just to demonstrate his authenticity, but to increasingly find it for himself. And when his critics start talking about him being on a moral high horse, he can talk about their cynicism and what it has done to us. It’s better to talk about the cynicism than the cynics…
  1.  
    joyhollywood
    May 2, 2008 | 8:31 AM
     

    Paul Krugman of the NYTimes op-ed is in my mind one of the few people who has been on the Bush Administrations case from the beginning. When other writers were afraid to give Bush his due because of his high approval ratings right after 911, Krugman called the Bush Administration on what he considered their mistakes and political partisan on really important issues affecting the average citizen including the Iraq War. His column in todays paper is just one of several pieces that Krugman has written critcizing Obama for repeating Republican talking points. I want to know if he has a conservative Democrat advising him in the same vein as a Joe Lieberman. If you have someone who means well and he has very little Washington politics experience you will usually find the same symptoms that Senator Obama has. I realize that not all Republican talking points are 100% wrong but I’d hate to have a president repeating many of them in regards to Social Security and healthcare. I also think that he would not be as strong in getting to the bottom of all the wrongdoing of the Bush Administration for the sake of good will. I know that he has said he will but I’m not convinced he would. I think the country needs to view the corruption to clean it out and not let another administration have the power to do it again.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.