OBAMA RASA
or, why barack reminds me of
bush.
Ten years before he actually and unfortunately did
so, Karl Rove said of then-gubernatorial candidate George W. Bush, I can make
him president of the United States. Because he did not say He would make
a great president or He would make a good president or His
approval ratings would at least be higher than Nixon's, that statement is
often submitted by Democrats and other critics of the President as prime
evidence of everything that is wrong with Rove and the Republicans in particular
and of almost everything that is wrong with modern American politics in general.
And they're right. If picking a President or a Senator or even a City Council
member has been reduced simply to electability, to the promise of a person's
candidacy rather than the prospect of his leadership, then it is no wonder we
get movie star governors who can't get a bond
proposal on a ballot and mug-shot-smiling
representatives who can't keep their hands off lobbying money and intemperate
presidents who can't accept criticism for waging wars they didn't have to start
and don't know how to finish.
But if those critics are right, and if merely choosing the most charming, affable, charismatic candidate is wrong, then why is everyone to the left of Arlen Specter so madly in love with Barack Obama? How has he ascended from great unknown to great (non-)white hope in a little less than two years? Why is he the Next Big Thing in Democratic and presidential politics when he has not, aside from speechmaking and fundraising, done One Important Thing? The answer to all three questions is as simple as it is depressing: because he's just as much of a big-state, blank-slate golden boy as Bush was fifteen years ago, a buzz-generating media magnet with an interesting backstory (both men experiment with drugs and alcohol, then find God and a good wife), an Ivy League education (Columbia and Harvard for Obama, Yale and Harvard for Bush), and a pedigree (conservative Bush had the name, liberal Obama has the race) guaranteed to rally the base. Never mind the lack of experience, the unexceptional private careers, or the so-far undistinguished political careers; when you can score a demographic hit straight out of soccer mom central casting, it's time to roll those focus groups, get some ink on the front page of USA Today, and keep that guy's name in the national lights.
Yes, Obama is handsome and articulate and a big hit with the ladies. But so is Brad Pitt; anyone ready to vote for him for President? And, yes, I know that Obama is a sharp intellect and a popular guy and a Grammy winner and a best-selling author to boot. But so is Al Franken; should the Democrats draft him? And I realize that Obama is appealing, to some extent, because he's not named Bush or Clinton, because he's not related to anyone named Bush or Clinton, and because he's never served in the administrations of anyone named Bush or Clinton. But then neither have Evan Bayh or Russ Feingold, both of whom have honest-to-goodness political accomplishments on which to stand and to run; they have not, however, been named the Hottest U.S. Senator.
If Obama is Bush with better syntax, he is also, in many ways, Bill Clinton with lesser sexcapades: the great speaker, the deep carer, the quasi-philosophical thinker; the big eyes and warm smiles and dulcet tones of a guy his party really wants you to like, even as it crosses its fingers and hopes you'll overlook his lack of elected-office success stories. Of course, unlike Bush and so far unlike Obama, Clinton had to claw and fight and hard-scrabble his way to national prominence; he talked and stumped, then worked and wonked, himself into the political consciousness. He did not, like Bush and Obama, come pre-fabbed and pre-ordained, buffed and buzzed and party-packaged to be president. If the 90s gave us Hard Workin' Slick Willie, the 00s have given us the reign of Straight Shootin' King George II and the rise of young, Smooth Talkin' Prince Barack, the Obama Rasa of Democratic political contenders. Don't worry about what these guys haven't done; just like 'em and feel good about 'em and think about what they could do. It's funny -- and now sadly, suddenly true -- to think of Bill Clinton as a relic of a bygone age when presidential candidates were made of sterner, more substantive stuff.
It's so far unlikely -- if not unthinkable -- that the lightweight, delightfully light-skinned Obama will run in '08, more likely that he will run in 2012 or 2016. Perhaps by then he will have done more for his party than smile and speak and raise some big bucks. Perhaps he will have more accomplishments to his name than a few town hall appearances, a regular workout schedule, and a three-book publishing deal. Perhaps, before he gets around to running for the office toward which his wayward party and his fawning fans are already pointing and anointing him, he'll actually get down to the business of earning and working and legislating his way into his reputation. Along the way, he might even become a distinguished and accomplished member of the United States Senate. Of course, in the Neverland of 21st Century presidential politics, that could only hurt his chances.
But if those critics are right, and if merely choosing the most charming, affable, charismatic candidate is wrong, then why is everyone to the left of Arlen Specter so madly in love with Barack Obama? How has he ascended from great unknown to great (non-)white hope in a little less than two years? Why is he the Next Big Thing in Democratic and presidential politics when he has not, aside from speechmaking and fundraising, done One Important Thing? The answer to all three questions is as simple as it is depressing: because he's just as much of a big-state, blank-slate golden boy as Bush was fifteen years ago, a buzz-generating media magnet with an interesting backstory (both men experiment with drugs and alcohol, then find God and a good wife), an Ivy League education (Columbia and Harvard for Obama, Yale and Harvard for Bush), and a pedigree (conservative Bush had the name, liberal Obama has the race) guaranteed to rally the base. Never mind the lack of experience, the unexceptional private careers, or the so-far undistinguished political careers; when you can score a demographic hit straight out of soccer mom central casting, it's time to roll those focus groups, get some ink on the front page of USA Today, and keep that guy's name in the national lights.
Yes, Obama is handsome and articulate and a big hit with the ladies. But so is Brad Pitt; anyone ready to vote for him for President? And, yes, I know that Obama is a sharp intellect and a popular guy and a Grammy winner and a best-selling author to boot. But so is Al Franken; should the Democrats draft him? And I realize that Obama is appealing, to some extent, because he's not named Bush or Clinton, because he's not related to anyone named Bush or Clinton, and because he's never served in the administrations of anyone named Bush or Clinton. But then neither have Evan Bayh or Russ Feingold, both of whom have honest-to-goodness political accomplishments on which to stand and to run; they have not, however, been named the Hottest U.S. Senator.
If Obama is Bush with better syntax, he is also, in many ways, Bill Clinton with lesser sexcapades: the great speaker, the deep carer, the quasi-philosophical thinker; the big eyes and warm smiles and dulcet tones of a guy his party really wants you to like, even as it crosses its fingers and hopes you'll overlook his lack of elected-office success stories. Of course, unlike Bush and so far unlike Obama, Clinton had to claw and fight and hard-scrabble his way to national prominence; he talked and stumped, then worked and wonked, himself into the political consciousness. He did not, like Bush and Obama, come pre-fabbed and pre-ordained, buffed and buzzed and party-packaged to be president. If the 90s gave us Hard Workin' Slick Willie, the 00s have given us the reign of Straight Shootin' King George II and the rise of young, Smooth Talkin' Prince Barack, the Obama Rasa of Democratic political contenders. Don't worry about what these guys haven't done; just like 'em and feel good about 'em and think about what they could do. It's funny -- and now sadly, suddenly true -- to think of Bill Clinton as a relic of a bygone age when presidential candidates were made of sterner, more substantive stuff.
It's so far unlikely -- if not unthinkable -- that the lightweight, delightfully light-skinned Obama will run in '08, more likely that he will run in 2012 or 2016. Perhaps by then he will have done more for his party than smile and speak and raise some big bucks. Perhaps he will have more accomplishments to his name than a few town hall appearances, a regular workout schedule, and a three-book publishing deal. Perhaps, before he gets around to running for the office toward which his wayward party and his fawning fans are already pointing and anointing him, he'll actually get down to the business of earning and working and legislating his way into his reputation. Along the way, he might even become a distinguished and accomplished member of the United States Senate. Of course, in the Neverland of 21st Century presidential politics, that could only hurt his chances.
Posted: Thu - March 23, 2006 at 10:21 PM
Quick Links
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
Archives
Terror Alert
Brilliant Satire
Required Reading
Traffic Count
Official Muse
Syndication
Carbolic Wear
Y Chromosomes
Some Perspective
On Tour
XML/RSS Feed
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Jan 16, 2009 04:50 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Jan 16, 2009 04:50 PM