Here's a great article by my favorite political columnist Joe Klein from Time Magazine. He points out an issue that is beginning to bug me, Obama's lack of substance. Indeed, "Where's the beef?"
Barry
Inspiration vs. Substance
Thursday, Feb. 07, 2008 By JOE KLEIN (https://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29)
We are the ones we've been waiting for," Barack Obama said in yet another memorable election-night speech on Super-Confusing Tuesday. "We are the change that we seek." Waiting to hear what Obama has to say — win, lose or tie — has become the most anticipated event of any given primary night. The man's use of pronouns (never I), of inspirational language and of poetic meter — "WE are the CHANGE that we SEEK" — is unprecedented in recent memory. Yes, Ronald Reagan could give great set-piece speeches on grand occasions, and so could John F. Kennedy, but Obama's ability to toss one off, different each week, is simply breathtaking. His New Hampshire concession speech, with the refrain "Yes, We Can," was turned into a brilliant music video featuring an array of young, hip, talented and beautiful celebrities. The video, stark in black-and-white, raised an existential question for Democrats: How can you not be moved by this? How can you vote against the future?
And yet there was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism — "We are the ones we've been waiting for" — of the Super Tuesday speech and the recent turn of the Obama campaign. "This time can be different because this campaign for the presidency of the United States of America is different. It's different not because of me. It's different because of you." That is not just maddeningly vague but also disingenuous: the campaign is entirely about Obama and his ability to inspire. Rather than focusing on any specific issue or cause — other than an amorphous desire for change — the message is becoming dangerously self-referential. The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is.
{snip}
- - - - -
Check out the rest of the article here (https://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1710721,00.html) and come on back and let us know what you think!
oliviathunderkitty
02-14-2008, 11:17 AM
As I began looking more closely at Obama, I, too, noticed the vagueness, the arrogance and an unsettling sense of entitlement. And I have to say I don't see the charisma everyone talks about. I don't find him to be an inspiring speaker--vague oratory with a poetic meter doesn't make a great speaker. There must be a mix of inspiration and down-to-earth real-life practicality; it's the combination of the two that can be so very powerful. Mario Cuomo and Ron Dellums are two of the most gifted orators or our time yet no one mentions either of them. If you listen to any of their speeches Obama suddenly sounds like so much vapor.
The multitude of Obama supporters who claim they will not vote in November or they will vote for McCain if Obama does not get the nomination trouble me, too. If he is supposed so healing, if he is the candidate who will bring us together and beyond partisan politics and all that--a claim I doubt, but still, it should be addressed--why are so many of his supporters of the "my way or the highway" type? It's troubling. Check out Paul Krugman's February 11 column, "Hate Springs Eternal," in the New York Times. He nails this attitude.
Neshamah
02-23-2008, 05:28 PM
Barack Obama seems to be gaining broad support by avoiding specifics. His is the ultimate, inoffensive candidacy. He is inspiring to everyone because he avoids substance. Given Clinton's initial advantages, it was probably a necessity, but it is beginning to catch up with him.
As for Democrats saying they'll vote for McCain if Obama does not get the nomination, I give them about as much credence as Ann Coulter. Based on their congressional records, Obama and Clinton are 95% in agreement. About the only thing Obama and McCain agree on is global warming. People say a lot of emotional things eight months away from an election, but they get more pragmatic as the day approaches.
People seem drawn to his candidacy because he at least talks about working with everyone. That is encouraging. Actually doing it will require compromises that he may not be willing to make, and that many of his supporters certainly will not approve.
~ Neshamah
Hummingbear
02-24-2008, 12:14 AM
Barack Obama seems to be gaining broad support by avoiding specifics. His is the ultimate, inoffensive candidacy. He is inspiring to everyone because he avoids substance. Given Clinton's initial advantages, it was probably a necessity, but it is beginning to catch up with him.
That was my first impression--he started his campaign with a focus on consensus-building, which is a good place to start. Must be the Taoist influence. But I hear a trend toward developing specifics now, as the issues get better defined. I don't think anyone has been elected president because of positions they espoused a year or more before the election--because campaigns have never started so early before.
People seem drawn to his candidacy because he at least talks about working with everyone. That is encouraging. Actually doing it will require compromises that he may not be willing to make, and that many of his supporters certainly will not approve.
The "everyone" he's willing to work toward consensus with include not only Republicans, but Iran and Cuba as well. This suggests a fundamental shift in America's identity in the world community, and certainly in a healthy direction. Of course any change stirs up controversy. But I don't him as having a particular class of "followers" who would demand ideological purity. His entire style of approaching issues seems to be designed to avoid the need for dividing "followers" from "opponents", or "approval" from "disapproval".
I'm liking him more and more, not so much for his policies or even his style, but because he seems to appeal my (and many others') best sense of how to be a good citizen in a world filled with disagreements about even basic values. I can't remember when any politician has done that before.
Hummingbear
Sun Presence
02-24-2008, 09:17 AM
Hi,
It could be a case of 'we see what we are looking for or what we want to see'. I have talked with many people here and in different states about the democratic campaigns, and have not found even one to espouse an Obama or nothing attitude. Or Clinton or nothing. Almost everyone I have spoken with has given it at least some thought and so often I have heard musings about and Obama-Clinton ticket or a Clinton-Obama ticket, depending on which candidate they are currently supporting. And the feeling I get is that generally people are grateful, relieved and inspired to have two really decent candidates left in the running.
I have found that several things Obama is calling for include a reference to a feasible plan, enough to take a leap of faith that the details of the plans would be feasible. (addressing universal health care, withdrawing troops from Iraq etc.) I don't hear him saying these things will be easy or quick...or making rash promises as is so common in campaigns. Bill and Hillary took a shot at universal health care, and had to capitulate very early on largely because of control by interest groups. I was disappointed at the time, both by the utter failure of the plan and 'promise' and by the seemingly too-quick acquiescence to the powers that be. That does not make me feel that Hillary would not try again, perhaps wiser this time. (we can only hope)
What concerns me is when I hear sheep like consensus forming amongst us; the easy shots and divisiveness in our opinions about our two quite decent democratic candidates. I invite us all to look more closely and open mindedly both at our candidates and at our own 'come froms'. I speak both as a seasoned knee jerk reactionary (been there, do that...) and as a practicing even keeled, open minded thinker.
As I began looking more closely at Obama, I, too, noticed the vagueness, the arrogance and an unsettling sense of entitlement. And I have to say I don't see the charisma everyone talks about. I don't find him to be an inspiring speaker--vague oratory with a poetic meter doesn't make a great speaker. There must be a mix of inspiration and down-to-earth real-life practicality; it's the combination of the two that can be so very powerful. Mario Cuomo and Ron Dellums are two of the most gifted orators or our time yet no one mentions either of them. If you listen to any of their speeches Obama suddenly sounds like so much vapor.
The multitude of Obama supporters who claim they will not vote in November or they will vote for McCain if Obama does not get the nomination trouble me, too. If he is supposed so healing, if he is the candidate who will bring us together and beyond partisan politics and all that--a claim I doubt, but still, it should be addressed--why are so many of his supporters of the "my way or the highway" type? It's troubling. Check out Paul Krugman's February 11 column, "Hate Springs Eternal," in the New York Times. He nails this attitude.