Barack Obama: Great Marketing, Shoddy Product
William Munroe, Associate Editor
Issue date: 3/7/08 Section: Commentary
|
underwear, the marketing of Barack Obama is providing a happy distraction from the candidate's lack of substance. Obamamania dependent upon itself cannot long endure.
Consider this hollow applause line, "We are the change we have been waiting for." What does that even mean? Also consider, "I am accused of being a hope pope, I plead guilty." Huh? This vacant rhetoric is characteristic of Barack Obama's intellect and political life - articulate, but empty. The ambiguity of his campaign is one of Obama's most endearing qualities. He stands for nothing, which allows him to be all things to all people. In fact, his campaign staffers are trained to talk about how they "came" to Obama, not to where he stands on issues. That sounds eerily close to evangelists testifying about how they have come to accept Jesus.
The campaign's substance gap was recently exemplified during a MSNBC interview. Obama representative Kirk Watson was asked by Chris Matthews to name a single legislative accomplishment of Barack Obama. In five minutes he could not produce a single one. Now that the hype is deflating, it is becoming increasingly clear that Obama is little more than a traveling motivational speaker: an empty suit.
Obama's status as the presumptive Democratic nominee will force his campaign to shift gears. Even the most ardent Obama follower must eventually come to terms with the fact that hope itself does not put food on the table. Americans cannot hope themselves into a better world. Thus, when it comes down to brass tacks, what would an Obama presidency really look like? In a word, liberal.
The National Journal lists Barack Obama as the most liberal and partisan member of the Senate, putting him to the left of Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and Ted Kennedy. At no point during his tenure was Obama a member of a bipartisan or even moderate agreement. Many times, in fact, he has counted himself among the opposition to largely bipartisan bills. His campaign's policy proposals do not offer anything new or unique either. They could have easily been lifted from the plans of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004. With former Edwards campaign manager David Axelrod running Obama's campaign, they probably are.


Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 12
Elizabeth Nelson
posted 3/07/08 @ 10:01 PM NA
For an 'empty suit' that lacks substance, you found enough specific ideas to challenge in terms of his policies and positions. Hmmm... you might say that all this information is actually available to dissect because Obama DOES present bold new ideas for the country. (Continued…)
concerned american
posted 3/07/08 @ 10:44 PM NA
Hi!
Great article, as someone who has friends who bought this "shoddy product", they all WANT A REFUND NOW!!!, AND WILL NOT BE BUYING THIS SHODDY PRODUCT AGAIN IN THE GENERAL ELECTION. (Continued…)
Adam
posted 3/11/08 @ 11:43 PM NA
This article is a shoddy product. Next time, before you run to the presses I suggest you do your research. Here, I'll even help you out: http://thomas. (Continued…)
Craig Harrington
posted 3/27/08 @ 11:01 PM NA
I found this article to be equal parts entertaining and informative, and I honestly believe that people should SERIOUSLY calm their collective beards when berating the author of an article in a newspaper which is clearly slanted towards satire and "feather-ruffling" (I just trademarked that phrase by the way). (Continued…)
Ann
posted 3/28/08 @ 1:01 AM NA
I couldn't help but comment that this article contains a grammatical inaccuracy: as 'media' is considered a plural noun (the plural of 'medium'), the article's first sentence should read, "Despite their tendency to fawn over him, the national media are beginning. (Continued…)
Pussy Control
posted 4/04/08 @ 1:33 AM NA
Somehow Obama is too far left but you plead ignorance on where he stands on the issues. it sounds like you just have shit for brains and are too lazy to do any actual reporting like the rest of this paper. (Continued…)
Roddenberry
posted 5/15/08 @ 9:21 AM NA
THe question is to know which candidate is the most abilitate to lead the USA in the XXIst century, in a post racial and post-industrial era. A vote for Hillary Clinton or John Mac Cain would be a fatal regression to the XX century. (Continued…)
Post a Comment