Hov-bama

To quote Attackerman:

Starting at 2:20, bear witness to perhaps the coolest subliminal cultural reference in the history of American politics.

If you need a reminder of the signified, here. [Warning: Naughty language].

On the politics of it (Sullivan):

This is a central plank of Obama’s campaign. If he gets it, he’ll realize that ABC News and Clinton have given him a gift. He has an entire worldview to fight against, and they have helped crystallize what it is. Let it rip.

He does infinitely better when it is him and the people against the powers that be, the Boomer political way–the transformational language, and the combining Clinton and McCain, the media, the Washington insider groupthink, all into one and then easily getting that dirt off his shoulder.

He is going to eviscerate her in North Carolina. Come on Indiana, poppa needs a new Democratic nominee.

Next watch for the inevitable Clinton supporter knock off retort–I’m thinking a cheese ball version of Wash That Man Right Outta My Hair, like so.

Advertisements
Published in: on April 17, 2008 at 3:05 pm  Comments (6)  
Tags: ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://indistinctunion.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/hov-bama/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

6 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. You probably don’t realize, but every single word spoken by Obama in that youtube is complete b.s. Why? Because all Obama is doing is Chicago politics 101 — claim the political high ground using populist, religious-based incantation to stir the crowd while playing artfully in the political dirt without seeming to. Every Chicago politician elected does this, and Obama, trained in the art of Chicago politics by Chicago politicians and their helpers, does it, too.

    Americans do care about the things talked about in the first “45 minutes” of last night; maybe not most Democrats, but most Democrats are not all of the American people. I for one care about his associations with Wright, the symbolism of the lapel thing, and the rest. They are marks of character.

    And Obama engaged in last night, and all nights since he has started running, dirty politics that attacks character, in some way or another. Using artful language to do so doesn’t change the fundamental character of his actions — to attack Hillary Clinton’s character. It is just what politicians do, and will always do. There is no way not to.

    Telling, but expected, how much of it you swallow whole.

    The “coolest blah blah blah in the history of American politics”?

    Sure, whatever.

  2. Well no doubt he has learned a great deal from Chicago politics. He might also believe some of it which it seems you don’t consider a possibility.

    I didn’t care for the first 45 minutes of last night’s debate (and I’m not a Democrat) whatever that is worth.

    I think the guy has a point. I’d actually like them to answer questions about oh I don’t know US foreign policy, strategy, over who you used to hang out with or have some 3 degree political connection with and what they think about the world. I’m not voting for them, what the hell do I care what some other yahoo thinks, they’re not running for office.

    I think it’s interesting he gets asked about a flap lapel when neither of his other two opponents wear one btw, nor are they ever asked about it. Nor should they; nor should anyone. You can disagree with John McCain’s or Hillary’s or Obama’s policies til the cows come home, disagree with their political philosophy, say they aren’t fit to be president, fair enough.

    But question their patriotism (oops sorry “character”) with the evidence consisting of not wearing a pin is why we still have a bunch of people facing 21st century issues through the lens of the 1960s and 70s. Please. Just another trumped up non-controversy to pin somebody a liberal elitist who hates America, which is all the Republicans have at this point, empty incompetent shells that they have sadly become.

    Bonus point bc no Republican is ever going to be asked about his patriotism mind you. But never mind that.

    It is the same mindset, btw, that continues to see the security threats faced in this century through the lens of the Cold War–both Clinton and McCain’s foreign policy is deeply embedded in the Cold War outlook. Not to mention the entire Bush Doctrine, Iraq War, and foreign policy (lack of) strategy since 9/11: i.e. a ludicrous application of a version of a Cold War theory to a non-Cold War world.

    Excellent results as you can see.

    I’m not suggesting some day prior to all this when political discussion was rational and civil or some nostalgic nonsense. I’m just describing the actual state we are currently in and how I think it is debilitating and corrosive to the body politic. We live in this age and have to deal with our problems. Those seem sufficient to me. Is it better is it worse than the past, how would I know, how would anybody really know. I can tell you whatever your or my historical judgment on that, what actually is occurring currently is I think very bad.

    When the question about the flag was fed by a right-wing shock jock posing as a journalist (who is no such thing) and forced out of the moderator because he’s been bullied and scared into fearing a backlash from those quarters, then yes I think that is pathetic and is a sad day for the fourth estate.

    In that I think Obama is correct. He doesn’t begrudge anybody, he doesn’t say any one person is responsible. He just says this is what people think ought to be done (conventional wisdom) and he thinks it’s wrong. I happen to agree.

    Now of course anybody with a functioning brain realizes that he can’t win in a conventional political race, so he’s not just making this argument from pure disinterested motives but so what? I still think the criticism has validity.

    I didn’t make any reference to lack of dirty politics on Obama’s part. So your comments on the subject are apt I suppose, but irrelevant in my view.

    peace. cj

  3. I’m a big believer in the theory that the people get the president they deserve. Bush being a quintessential incarnation of that principle.

    So if the majority of folk want to vote based on flag pins and such, they will get the person they deserve. I think that will bode ill for who gets elected and how that person will perform. But hey it’s a free country.

  4. Obama brought the lapel thing on himself, with his comments how about wearing it relates to patriotism, and false patriotism. That you don’t understand its deeper implications is either willful on your part, or directly obtuse.

    It is not 3 degrees; it is 1 in every case. If you don’t care about who Obama chooses to associate with, fine. But to dismiss the criticism wholesale is very strange. Character and judgment count.

    I mean, do you hang out with former domestic terrorists? No — well, why not?

    Republicans not asked? Hmm, maybe because they are smart enough not to say stupid things that give opponents openings in that regard.

    “Forced out of the moderator”. Riiiiiiight.

    Oy. You are a lost case, enmeshed as hell, I’m afraid.

  5. Here is an example of the complete B.S. that is Obama’s call for “change” blahblah. It is the definition of dirty pool.

    Which I don’t care about — play dirty pool, fine. Just don’t try to claim credit as some kind of “new sort” of candidate with a “new” politics.

  6. […] not entirely sure what the “it” refers to here because in a recent comment he also stated that Obama brought the issue on himself not simply by saying that patriotism is in […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: