2008 Woodie Awards
Letter to the editor: Don't get caught up in 'Obama-Mania'
Issue date: 3/3/08 Section: Opinion
Dear Editor:
There's no missing the advent of Obama, but are we missing something here?
All this euphoria will end. The "fighting like hell for votes" will result in a winner.
The days are coming soon when all that we — Americans — will have left to feel good or bad about is how well or poorly our country's being run. No more rock star rallies, no more glamour, just the dull grind of work, guided by the next president.
Have we as a country riding the giddy ride of mass spectacle, press coverage and our own passionate buzz forgotten? There's Iraq. Afghanistan. An excruciating mess right here. And the quality of presidential performance will be the only decisive new factor in what happens next. Zoom in:
The emotional rush of Obama-Mania. It's as if there is no other contender. Fact is: There is. An equally historic first: a woman. Weird — she's been practically wished away. Weirder. She's a world class public servant, proven senator — accomplished, brilliant, serious. Not long ago, that was widely recognized.
The peculiar spin of our opinion-leaders has turned the 2008 presidential race into one giant People magazine. The Barack Obama campaign machine has turned it into a high-stakes game of snagging voters, securing votes. It's as if Sen. Hillary Clinton's platform and rock-solid qualifications have become irrelevant to the discussion — if you could call it a discussion.
What credentials, what skills are needful for the crucial role of president? How ludicrous is it that we're not discussing the daunting importance of a good match between that office and the person we select to do its work?
How unnerving is it that we've forgotten already what all can go wrong with a leader on a roll? You'd think we were cheering our favorite team. Betting on horses. Buying a future where we're all better off if the guy we like the best wins.
Is there a "blind spot?" Has this become a contest of identity? Personality? Didn't George Bush ride into the White House on a potent cocktail of triggered demographics, stirred-up emotions, the construction of a persona for that moment?
Should a presidential election come down to wow?
Granted, no politician can afford to ignore campaigning season. Else, they disappear. But, that said, can we afford to pretend that campaigning season is real? America's future will have almost everything to do with the real skills of our president.
Barack Obama has made a point to distance himself again and again from "the Washington Insiders." "I'm the upstart. I'm the insurgent — she's (Hillary), she's the champ," he says.
Well, isn't a champ sometimes precisely what we want?
What's the young upstart's plan? Will he deliver a rousing message to the whole world? Will he raise funds to pay for the enactment of his promises? Can we hit the "pause button" for an important second?
We — as a country — are in crisis. In any other context, it would be a no-brainer. Go with the most experienced, proven leader. Go with a record that speaks louder than words. Why is it taboo to say, Barack Obama "kinda" jumped the gun? He's 46 — hasn't proved himself. His PR machine runs on charisma, powers to enthuse and inspire and make his presence felt, his promises seem true.
Campaign season 2008 has careened outside a realm of reason. Charged feelings are tipping every balance. What will our votes represent? Not each voter's own reasoned, careful, private consideration, 'who can really do this job?', but group-bonding. A thrill ride on the tide of what's in?
We wouldn't even hire a dog sitter like that.
Suzanne L. Holt
Women's studies professor
There's no missing the advent of Obama, but are we missing something here?
All this euphoria will end. The "fighting like hell for votes" will result in a winner.
The days are coming soon when all that we — Americans — will have left to feel good or bad about is how well or poorly our country's being run. No more rock star rallies, no more glamour, just the dull grind of work, guided by the next president.
Have we as a country riding the giddy ride of mass spectacle, press coverage and our own passionate buzz forgotten? There's Iraq. Afghanistan. An excruciating mess right here. And the quality of presidential performance will be the only decisive new factor in what happens next. Zoom in:
The emotional rush of Obama-Mania. It's as if there is no other contender. Fact is: There is. An equally historic first: a woman. Weird — she's been practically wished away. Weirder. She's a world class public servant, proven senator — accomplished, brilliant, serious. Not long ago, that was widely recognized.
The peculiar spin of our opinion-leaders has turned the 2008 presidential race into one giant People magazine. The Barack Obama campaign machine has turned it into a high-stakes game of snagging voters, securing votes. It's as if Sen. Hillary Clinton's platform and rock-solid qualifications have become irrelevant to the discussion — if you could call it a discussion.
What credentials, what skills are needful for the crucial role of president? How ludicrous is it that we're not discussing the daunting importance of a good match between that office and the person we select to do its work?
How unnerving is it that we've forgotten already what all can go wrong with a leader on a roll? You'd think we were cheering our favorite team. Betting on horses. Buying a future where we're all better off if the guy we like the best wins.
Is there a "blind spot?" Has this become a contest of identity? Personality? Didn't George Bush ride into the White House on a potent cocktail of triggered demographics, stirred-up emotions, the construction of a persona for that moment?
Should a presidential election come down to wow?
Granted, no politician can afford to ignore campaigning season. Else, they disappear. But, that said, can we afford to pretend that campaigning season is real? America's future will have almost everything to do with the real skills of our president.
Barack Obama has made a point to distance himself again and again from "the Washington Insiders." "I'm the upstart. I'm the insurgent — she's (Hillary), she's the champ," he says.
Well, isn't a champ sometimes precisely what we want?
What's the young upstart's plan? Will he deliver a rousing message to the whole world? Will he raise funds to pay for the enactment of his promises? Can we hit the "pause button" for an important second?
We — as a country — are in crisis. In any other context, it would be a no-brainer. Go with the most experienced, proven leader. Go with a record that speaks louder than words. Why is it taboo to say, Barack Obama "kinda" jumped the gun? He's 46 — hasn't proved himself. His PR machine runs on charisma, powers to enthuse and inspire and make his presence felt, his promises seem true.
Campaign season 2008 has careened outside a realm of reason. Charged feelings are tipping every balance. What will our votes represent? Not each voter's own reasoned, careful, private consideration, 'who can really do this job?', but group-bonding. A thrill ride on the tide of what's in?
We wouldn't even hire a dog sitter like that.
Suzanne L. Holt
Women's studies professor
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 772
Robin Anderson
posted 3/03/08 @ 7:58 AM EST
Excuse me?
Senator Clintons "qualifications" are anything but "rock solid"! She's backed a lop-sided NAFTA Treaty and Kyoto accord! As Senator Obama has asked, "Just what are her qualifications as far as foreingn policy are concerned. (Continued…)
Shouldn't past associations with radical leftists cost something?
posted 3/03/08 @ 10:49 AM EST
"Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon."
This excerpt from William Ayers' memoir appeared in the New York Times on Sept. (Continued…)
Trisha
posted 3/03/08 @ 1:00 PM EST
I have to say that there is also quite a bit of 'Clinton-Mania' going on. Obama certainly isn't the only one blowing sunshine up our hooies, either.
Peter Scarpira
posted 3/03/08 @ 2:42 PM EST
"She's backed a lop-sided NAFTA Treaty and Kyoto accord!"
Yes- But she has also spoken out against it.
This was a wonderful letter!
Trisha: A reporter on MSNBC stated. (Continued…)
Peter Scarpira
posted 3/03/08 @ 3:22 PM EST
Senator Clinton never voted for or against NAFTA (point blank). She has said NAFTA has done good things for certain area's of this country, but says it needs revised. (Continued…)
M. A.
posted 3/03/08 @ 6:47 PM EST
Suzanne L. Holt: I totally agree with your analysis of what has been going on in this election. I have been hoping that Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania can put a "pause" to this Obamania, but I know that is a pipe dream. (Continued…)
M. A.
posted 3/03/08 @ 7:27 PM EST
Obama is campaigning on CHANGE, but will HE be able to change his voting and decision-making habits?
Since day one, Obama has been pounding on Hillary by saying, "I have always been against the war and Hillary voted for it. (Continued…)
M. A.
posted 3/03/08 @ 7:35 PM EST
This is my last post...
Even though Ted Kennedy, Jay Rockefeller, John Kerry and Joe Lieberman voted for the Iraq resolution, Obama happily accepted their endorsements, and he continues to attack Hillary who voted the same way they did. (Continued…)
suzanne holt
posted 3/03/08 @ 8:48 PM EST
M.A.,
thank you for your very cogent installments.
it is especially worth noting how it's become
a liability to be a hard-working senator who
actually HAD the courage to take stands and
acquire a voting record . (Continued…)
Jules Lee Andrews
posted 3/03/08 @ 11:54 PM EST
Even if a child was asked to describe the campaign, I think they'd see a difference between the media treatment of Ms. Hillary Clinton and Mr. Barack Obama. (Continued…)
Post a Comment