The Audacity Of Truth… Redux
It’s been a few days since I have mentioned politics in this space. But once again, someone trying to make evil from an honest voice has reared its head.
Maybe people will disagree. The Clinton and McCain campaigns certainly have. And The Huffington Post has responsibly – in spite of their “blogger,” who has now made two heavily promoted nasty posts out of one California fundraiser that press was not invited to attend, report on, or record – offered the tape recording that his quotes were pulled out of, along with a full transcript.
Here is what he said –
The truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. 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. 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.
Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.
Is that not the cold, hard truth?
I guess you could spin the mention of religion as some form of attack, but coming from a man who has spent the last six weeks being beaten up because he was “too close” to his retired pastor, it would be stunning to read this – and the guns and other “take to ground” choices – as anything other but a fair look at how people behave when they feel threatened.
The first thing I thought when reading this full transcript was that Michael Moore MUST come out for Obama now, because he just was quoted saying very much what Moore has been saying in ALL of his films. Fear creates separation. Hope must overcome cynicism and that fear to become trusted.
OF COURSE people in Pennsylvania hit by closings and unemployment are bitter… what the hell else would they be?
I was also reminded of that scene in Primary Colors, where the Clinton character speaks at a closed or closing mill, and is reminded that they can take a curse word or two there. This is yet another example of Obama playing on exactly what Bill Clinton played on when he was running for office… offering hope to people who suffered… who are angry… who are bitter… who are scared.
These comments are exactly WHY I support Obama… not why I would call him elitist. He is as honest a man as any politician I know of
The only part I would disagree with is the assessment of McCain. The words are there, but the man will do whatever it takes to get elected. (Cue Flipper music).
Obama hit on the truth of the matter. If the press wants to continue to ignore how people hold on to all of this shit as a CRUTCH — most of the time — then they can bugger off. How many movies, books, comics, plays, songs, and cave drawings have stated the very same about the human condition? While I had no intention to see the freakin MIST. Is this not the basis for what Marcia Gay Hardens’ character does in the film? Clinging to religion in a moment of fear?
WHY OH WHY DO WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY SO FUCKING BACKWARDS? Why do we live in a country where people will read these comments and take them the wrong way? Why are we so fucking backwards sometimes? Jesus f’n Christ. This is frustrating, but this is why I am for Obama. I am not only for change. I am for an executive changing this country from one based around fear to one based around HOPE. I am sick of all of this SINESTRO bullshit. Give me a HAL JORDAN — or Jon Stewart — all freakin ready.
The difference this time is that he said it. Can’t blame it on crazy uncles. Expect to see that angle played up if this story has any traction.
Yes he said it, but he’s right. He’s completely and utterly right. People crutch onto things in this country out of FEAR. Obama is essentially fighting 20+ years of indoctrination in these FORGOTTEN PEOPLE (yep… that’s what he should call them. They have been forgotten by every administration, and he wants to help bring them back to the table of national discussion) that they should be afraid of damn near everything. They should be scared of mexicans, gays, people taking their rights away, and all of this other nonsense that gets their votes, but leads to them being forgotten as soon as the votes have come in.
If they want to be forgotten again. Vote for the other guy. If they want to be remembered. Vote for the guy who wants to CHANGE things. We will see how it goes, when the Clintons get off the road, and we begin travelling down Primary Highway.
Speaking as someone who grew up in Pennsylvania, yeah, I think it’s a little offensive to characterize it as a state full of religious gun nuts to a group of Californians who may harbor a built-in disdain for flyover country.
Talk like this is exactly why people decide to vote Republican under the delusional belief that it will keep government less involved in our lives. Does anyone vote for a Presidential candidate because they want him or her to change their way of looking at the world?
Speeches like this are catnip to the Obama choir, but will certainly turn off fence-sitters and undecideds.
IO, personally, I don’t see what the big deal is. But then, I’m not being paid to take umbrage at these things. This seems to me like a gaffe in the Michael Kinsley vein–i.e., when someone tells the truth. I think Obama expressed it rather clumsily. But he was on to something. I think it’s the supposed attitude that is perceived behind the words that is found more objectionable than the words themselves. That could be a problem for him.
I actually respect both McCain and Obama. I know that’s as taboo as admitting you like both Star Trek and Star Wars on the AICN message boards. I haven’t been as interested in the gotcha politics this time around, because having two decent candidates reveals how perfunctory the whole process has become. “McCain is Bush 3”, “Obama is the most liberal senator”. I bought into the liberal bit in 2004 when the exact same thing was said about Kerry, but I’m not biting this time around. He hasn’t even been in the senate that long. If McCain is Bush 3 what would Huckabee or Romney have been branded as, Bush 2.5? It’s so transparent and people that are parroting these overly simplistic messages need to be conscious that are in danger of impacting their own credibility. It would be nice and easy if things were that simple, but it’s not good vs evil. I wish it was, I’d have a lot less homework to do.
Similar thread up at HE (though posted 6 hours after Dave’s?) My comment there applies well here…
Why is Obama the candidate of hope? Where is his audacity? In his follow up speech in Terre Haut, Indiana, Obama “clarifies” his San Fran comments–he didn’t mean to belittle, he was just trying to make a point, and his point is “Nobody is looking out for you, nobody is thinking about you.” (‘You’ meaning the huddling poor masses, I assume, not the poor taxpayer being put on the rack and stretched until their joints crack.)
Here’s the cut and paste…
Despite all the damn drum beating about money spent in Iraq, in 2007 ALONE the US government spent double the defense budget on social programs. Approx. 1.7 trillion dollars were taken from taxpayers and spent on “Health and Human Services” and “Social Security” (in quotes because I see neither as a service or secure). This is one fiscal year, mind you (and it doesn’t include education spending, agriculture, labor, HUD, etc.).
If virtually every single Democrat campaigns on the “America has never done nothin’ for the struggling and poor” theme, we should expect some angry and frustrated people. And what’s worse, these people will continue to be angry and frustrated throughout their whole lives because–news flash!–though we’re spending billions of dollars a WEEK on the sick, needy and poor, the government solution of throwing money at the problem has never, ever worked.
End cut and paste…
Anyway, I don’t see the hope in Obama’s message. His campaign is about convincing folks that the economy is hovering on the second great depression, they can’t get a leg up, the man has been holding them down, stepping on their necks–NOBODY CARES. Yeah, great.
What’s Obama’s plan? Instead of spending 1.7 trillion a year on social programs (under the tightwad, oil baron, warmongering) G.W. Bush)…we’ll freakin’ double that. That should do the trick.
So what are you saying, kid? 80% think the country is on the wrong track….which way do you want to head?
“to characterize it as a state full of religious gun nuts to a group of Californians who may harbor a built-in disdain for flyover country.”
Uh… could you bend what he actually said into any more of a pretzel?
I’m sure someone else in here will remind us that McCain will try to do just that. But I actually believe that the American Public – all of it – is smarter than that. There may be some effect in PA, but not on the general election… especially against a Republican. And if The $100 Million Woman manages to spin it short term, shame on any sucker who bites.
Even in this private speech, Obama didn’t call anyone a nut. And really, he could be saying to Pennsylvanians that California’s obsession with the environment and people trying to ban smoking and trans-fats is all a distraction that allows those who feel out of control to try to control at least one thing. (Leave it to us on the left to try to control nature when we are out of control of the White House.)
And KidCosmic… I suggest you get off your virtual ass and look at Obama’s plans and not just rely on news clips to tell you who he is.
Do you really believe that American’s aren’t already angry??? About Iraq? About $4 gas? About a political base that won’t even talk about what the economic image of our future in this country should look like?
So you see anything positive in ANYONE’S message?
And P.S. Don’t be bringing that Wells shit in here. I have happilly gone 15 months without reading his bile or talking to the man and whether it/he agrees with me or not, it has nothing to do with me.
The above — political beliefs aside — is why I spent years reading Poland’s articles and visiting this blog.
If you like Obama, don’t root for Michael Moore to endorse him.
I like Moore, but his track record is one of endorsing candidates who lose. He opposed Bill Clinton in the Dem primaries, backed Nader in 2000, backed Wesley Clark in ’04 before coming around to Kerry…if he backs Obama now, Clinton gets the nom. Not to mention Obama will promptly be forced to disown every controversial thing Moore has ever said.
One of the right-wing docs on Moore has a pretty hilarious montage of him endorsing losing candidates in various years.
My problem with his message is the typical, “Ask what your country can do for you” message. These pitiful people in Pennsylvania have been waiting for 25 years for jobs to magically reappear. The answer? Bleed the rich. We must take a piece of their pie so that others can have more.
And that’s Obama in a nutshell. He makes salient points about problems that need to be addressed. But his solutions can almost always be boiled down to enormous government beaurocracy and regulation, paid for by the wealthy.
That’s a mischaracterization of his rhetoric and his policies.
No one’s denying that Americans are angry about a lot of things, and don’t feel that their government has made things any easier on then. And no one would deny that Obama seeks to change that.
I’m just saying that in this case, he was clearly exploiting middle America stereotypes to flatter the egos of rich West Coasters. I think this gets at the heart of why the lower income, less educated Dems favor Clinton. For all her missteps, I’ve never heard her condescend like this.
I say this as someone who voted for Clinton in the primary and will be glad to vote for Obama in the general. But these moments – and he’ll have more – will cost him crucial swing states.
“That’s a mischaracterization of his rhetoric and his policies.
No, its not. Have YOU read his policy statements? I have, from his own website. He’s offering massive entitlements and bureaocracy. Those things costs money. He and his wife have repeatedly stated, in so many words, that the rich will have to pay for it.
As for his rhetoric, there’s a lot of populism in it; that “we” can do it. But he really means is, “we” can vote for him, and then HE can it.
But thanks for your analysis.
Mystery, that’s your interpretation and I don’t think it’s completely accurate, especially regarding ‘bureaucracy’, and honestly, I’m fine with putting more of the costs of our government on the people who are best able to handle the burdens.
I am fine with any of you arguing that in the end, Obama is a “tax and spend” Democrat.
To me, that is a lot better than a “tax break and spend” Republican.
To say that his tax projections are ALL he is… very US Magazine. And last night, very CNN, where they kept describing his comment with adjectives in the chyron on Lou Dobbs and running only the sentence that has made this teapot nothing into a tempest.
And if you hold that as an objection to Obama, so be it.
But all this other shite is using one set of issues falsely to argue your real issues.
We ARE going to have to change the world. A president cannot. He or she can only lead the way and offer valuable guideposts.
The anger that this is all some trick is, to my eye, silly.
And as I often have to say when debating whether the US politcal system works, whose plan is better?
On paper, there is very little difference between Clinton and Obama and their approach to the big issues. At that point, I pick the leader who pulled himself up from nothing over the liar who can’t seem to stick to any story for more than a single state’s primary cycle. That hysterical laughter about Bill and Columbia is about the scariest thing I have seen from any candidate in my life. It makes Dean’s “yaa-hoo!” pale in comparison.
And McCain? I like the man. I like the fact that he is open to the left in many ways. I don’t have a huge problem with his Iraq position, because even though it is a little too strident to match the reality for me, I don’t think that pulling out completely in 18 months or less is terribly realistic either.
BUT I don’t want 8 more years of a Republican in office. It’s that simple.
And if Clinton stole the nomination, I would have to consider voting for him long and hard… before biting my lower lip and voting for the Democrat in her losing cause.
Finally… who do ANY of us think is spotless and flawless in this or any election? Can’t people even remember Wright just a month ago… the end of Obama… and his poll numbers went up. Haven’t we noticed that Clinton was caught in repeated lies… and has still gone on?
I can’t wait to see Obama standing next to McCain in a debate. There are plenty of people who will vote for the past and/or against the future. There are plenty of people who will just be for McCain because they agree with his politics. But who looks like the future? Who do you want representing you in the world?
And ironically, which man will look you in the eye and tell you the truth?
I think, in the end, they will be pretty equal in that analysis… Clinton’s achille’s. And if it is a tie for the two men, the other issues become more important.
The thing that most reminds me that Obama is the right choice is that both Clinton and The Right are so anxious to kill him politically. When both machines want you gone, you HAVE to be doing something right, by definition.
Only in the US could people be so backwards about TAXES! Also… only in the US… could someone defend the rich and their right to continue to prosper at a rate greater then during the great depression. Read that again if you believe the RICH should hold onto their money. It’s time to pay in, and realize TAXES are essential. If you need a taxcut so damn bad. Go back to 2005 and see how that worked out for the US. Taxes are not evil. Why many in the US believe so… continues to confuse the shit out of me.
‘money… get back! i’m alright jack keep your hands off my stack.’ – pink floyd says it best
i was home sick one morning languishing on the couch, and i happened to catch obama on ‘the view’ (not sure if it was a re-run or recent) but he said, when asked about his tax plan, that he was going to ‘redistribute’ the burden by rolling back the tax cuts bush gave to the rich and cutting taxes for low-to-middle income earners up to $75,000 who are really struggling, resulting in a nil tax gain but a rebalance… sounded pretty fucking fair to me. has he abandoned that plan?
mccain is that close to being a cadavre; i’d pay pretty careful attention to who ends up as his running mate, if it’s huckabee a dumb-ass who doesn’t believe in evolution could end up as the president…downright comical.
Poland, you didn’t refute my main point, which is, American citizens spend a lot of their hard EARNED dollars (more than ANYTHING else in the US budget) on health, welfare and social programs; Obama panders to poorer Americans by telling them that their government has forgotten them: LIE. You lose.
It’s not a LIE. You would have to be daft to believe that America has a good social contract. What we pay in… does hardly ANYTHING to take care of people. Hell. It hardly does anything to take care of our infastructure.
Once again: TAXES ARE NOT EVIL! TAXES ARE GOOD! It’s not my fault people bought that bullshit Reagan was pushing, but it’s time to put Ronnie’s ideas to bead. If we tax, use the money wisely, and do it for the betterment of the POPULACE of the United States. It’s possible some folks may wake up from this dreams that TAXES are bad. Only in America could people become so angry at what they pay in to educate their kids, provide infastructure, and keep everything running that needs to keep running.
Kidkosmic, if you combine ‘health, welfare and social programs’ you’re distorting the budget and what money is spent on to make your case – ultimately, isn’t _everything_ in the budget a social program of one kind or another?
And we all know the department that actually spends the greatest share of the budget is Defense.
Sorry Jeff, but the numbers say otherwise. More will be spent on Social Security this year than on the Dept. of Defense. And that’s not taking into account the massive increase that’s fixing to hit once the Boomers start collecting checks.
Taxing the rich will only get you so much. At SOME point, you’re gonna have to start cutting. And Mr. “as Honest a Politician I’ve ever known” refuses to acknowledge that.
I wouldn’t say that what Obama asserts here is accurate, but I do think its what he believes.
What he’s saying is that there are a bunch of rudderless hoi polloi out there, who have been waiting for 25 years for big government to ferry them to shallow waters. But because this hasn’t happened, they instead cling to the buoys of guns, religion, and prejudices. In other words, typical liberal elitism.
If only Obama pandered more like a Republican politician, getting poor and working class whites all worked up about guns & gays & abortion & terrorists in order to get their votes while completely ignoring the issues that truly impact their lives on a daily basis (health care, the economy, education). Typical conservative strategy.
Wow, mystery… what complete and utter projected wish-it-were-so bullshit.
Really… what is your problem?
“hoi polloi” “waiting for big government to ferry them to shalow waters”
YOU are the one selling hate here. YOU are the one thinking that way. YOU are the one telling us what you believe.
I don’t blame the right or the left for this kind of crap. I blame desperate political figures who know they are about to lose the primary election, then the general to a mixed race Hawaiian who has the intellect of Stevenson, the charm of Clinton, and the boot straps self-motivation of FDR… you know, those fucking liberals.
Time to wake up and start considering how to make this opportunity work for the entire US… to move towards agreement instead of either party’s bad habit of telling everyone else how to lead their lives.
Obama is not The Solution. But he is, by quite a distance, the best road for this country to ambrace its own people and the world’s people in a way that is not just about the beltway bubble.
SaveFarris, you’re right…but Defense spending is still absurdly high. And Social Security, being a redistributive entitlements program, is in a different territory.
“YOU are the one selling hate here. YOU are the one thinking that way. YOU are the one telling us what you believe.”
How? I believe the opposite. Your assertion makes no sense.
What Obama said is condescending. Even more condescending is that while Obama later criticized his statements as poorly worded, people here are defending the words as originally stated. How can you not see this?
Obama says– People aren’t seeing progress in their own lives. They need government to intervene, and government hasn’t. TWENTY-FIVE YEARS of waiting for jobs to come back. What’s the result of this? Bitterness and anger. These feelings, directed at the government, are justified. But, not surpisingly, this anger and bitterness gets directed at “people who aren’t like them” (irrational racism) and immigrants (irrational xenophobia) and their bitterness and anger leads to guns (in a good way?) and God (where their views are reaffirmed?). Thank you, San Francisco, and good night!
The cold, hard truth, David? If so, I certainly wouldn’t want to be like or associate with people like that. Why don’t you give me a peek into the insight that leads you to believe this is truth?
mystery, what about the working class people in Pennsylvania (and other states) who agree with Obama? The comment has not hurt him in the polls. Plenty of people either agree with what he said or were not offended by it. What about all of them? You do not speak for everyone on this matter. In recent a USA Today story about it, one Pennsylvanian stated that a friend commented to them, “Can you believe that a woman and a nigger are running for president at the same time now?” Do you honestly believe that there are not a lot of people with similar feelings all over the country? I have plenty of relatives in rural Wisconsin who drop racial slurs and homophobic remarks in every other sentence. They are ridiculously anti-immigrant, as are my brother-in-law and father-in-law. I am constantly going at it with them about their xenophobia.
Sorry. A recent, not recent a.
Sorry, I haven’t been around these parts in a while. I have been feeling very bitter lately. My thoughts have been turning to things like religion, guns, antipathy…that sort of thing. Heh, heh.
I have to tell you…Obama may very well be next president. But I laughed long and hard when I heard that quote.
Context…
The context is whatever the religious person in flyover country feels whenever they encounter someone with views like Obama.
The context is that the secular left feels they (midwesterners) are dumb, racist, fanatical hicks who only take to God because they are too stupid to know any better and if only they would have faith in liberal governments they wouldn’t need anything else.
I know this is Obama’s view because the majority of people who support this view support Obama. If Obama did not have this view he would – not – have the support of academia and the arts…and the majority of posters on this blog who have repeatedly had these views for as long as I have posted here.
Is Obama and eltist? Hell, yeah. I do not even have a problem with that. But let’s cut the lie that he is for the common person. He is not. He is for a hard left, ideologically based liberalism rooted in academia that knows about as much about how the real world works as GHW Bush did in the supermarket.
The difference is, at least Bush Sr. knew he could not sit down for an afternoon tea with people whose starting place for negotiation is your death.
The more he talks the more he proves himself to be a vapid tool of the elite intelligensia set.
If he is only beating McCain in the nationals within the margin of error now, this thing will be much closer than his supporters like to admit.
Remember…you can’t say you are for the common person if the common person isn’t voting for you. Obama, far from being for the common person is finally the candidate that is so far out of touch with the common person thathe is helping to realign the demographics of modern politics.
mysteryperfecta,
You broke it down perfectly.
Wow. Winner of the Least Shocking Post Ever award. And Nicol agrees with mystery. The shocks just don’t stop. I’m sure John McCain is really in touch with the common man. He’s just your average John. I’m sure you are really in touch with the common person as well Nicol. You’re not an elitist at all. Oh, wait, yes you are. Pot meet kettle.
Stella,
And the fact that you disagree with me and love Obama is somehow “shocking”, “unpredictable” and “done on a whim”?
Sheesh, P.E.R.S.P.E.C.T.I.V.E.
How about we agree that everybody’s responding in a knee-jerk way, and pretend like the next twenty posts of name calling and smugness already happened?
C.O.N.D.E.S.C.E.N.D.I.N.G. Way to prove my point Nicol. You labeling anyone else elitist is fucking hysterical, because no one around here is more elitist than you. By the way, I don’t love Obama, I just like him a lot more than McCain and Clinton. There is a difference, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.
Actually Jeff, I think the only people who are being knee-jerk are those in control of Obama’s spin machine.
Most of us have been saying this is what the far left (not the moderate left) thinks about this demo for years. It is certainly not the first time you have heard it from me.
Obama did not say anything new. He just got caught.
Nicol, of course you think that and we all know you’ve been saying it for a long time. It’s one of the themes of your life.
I think the more interesting discussion is: was he wrong? And I know that this is inevitably going to turn into the same old same old, but I personally don’t think he was. Looking at Mysteryperfecta’s post up above, my reaction is ‘yeah, that’s right, so?’
I would love to have a genuine conversation about the subjects…I hope that’s possible.
Saying that there is no truth whatsoever to what Obama said is just wrong. Maybe his words were not chosen as well as they could have been, but many voters in Pennsylvania and elsewhere agree with the gist of what he stated. I already mentioned the USA Today article that touched upon that. It is easy to just label him elitist and move on, as plenty of people are doing.