Entries
left, right, or wrong: the self-destructive progressive media attack on obama
2:46 am on December 26th, 2007 by Ariel Werner
Ari Berman asks in The Nation, “
Is Obama a Shrewd Progressive or a Sellout?” and the question reverberates throughout the progressive blogosphere.
Paul Krugman has essentially devoted his blog and column to an anti-Obama crusade. Just as those more moderate within the Democratic party begin to accept Obama as a viable candidate and, even, a potentially great president, he faces blasts of criticism from within his own progressive circle.
I understand the impulse to keep left of the mainstream; the impulse to criticize anything and anyone who hasn’t seen the light and right of our ways; the impulse to fear a progressive candidate who seemingly betrays our trust by reaching out to our enemies. Obama is straddling a dangerous line. He’s progressive, no doubt, but he is courting support from those more centrist, moderate, or even right-wing than those of us who fly the banner of progressivism.
But what is a progressive? Is a progressive one who obstinately pursues so-called liberal beliefs without moderation, consideration, or reflection? Or is a progressive one who seeks positive reform with an open mind to the variety of visions and opinions held by the diverse population that is America? I strive to embody the latter model. If Obama were only courting the middle and the right, he would NOT be our good ol’ progressive candidate. But if he were only progressive, he wouldn’t be our good ol’ electable candidate and, as far as I’m concerned, he would not be fit to lead this country. Last time I checked, we lived in a country where lots of people have and continue to cast ballots for candidates far, far, far more conservative than Barack Obama. I don’t agree with those people, but as Salt-n-Pepa once said, “There’s only one true judge and that’s God, so chill and let my father do his jawb.”
Introducing Senator Obama at Harlem’s famed Apollo Theater, Chris Rock told the audience, “I don’t want you to say, ‘I backed that white lady. What was I thinking?’” In keeping with Rock’s warning, I don’t want the progressive media to wake up after this election and say, “Oh, shit. I contributed to the ruination of a potentially great president.”
So what if Ari Berman, Paul Krugman, Ezra Klein, Joe Conason, and all them other cats can’t see a good thing when it smacks ‘em in the face. Jim Lehrer believes firmly in the importance of fair, honest, and optimistic journalism. Speaking at the 2002 University of Pennsylvania Commencement, he said:
Journalism is in trouble with the public for reasons that are out there for all to see. […] A touch of arrogance–that seems to have afflicted some of my colleagues–it can be seen in their words, sneers and body language. The message being that only the journalists of America are pure enough to judge all others. A new and growing confusion about the need to be entertaining, a tendency to see news as an entertainment commodity, rather than as information, and the list goes on and on.
In laymens’ terms, sensationalizing the serious and corrupting the positive are not traits to be emulated. And if you’re fed up with coverage of Shitshow ‘08 in the American news media, check out what Ha’aretz has to say. And, in line with the flurry of posts on how we Jews spent Christmas, check out the Jews for Obama blog. No shit. Obama yarmulkes and everything.
Sphere: Related Content
Related Posts
- Open house at Dunk tomorrow - September 5th, 08
- Just discovered: Paleo-Future - September 5th, 08
- Phoenix has dilly on this weekend's big musical happenings - September 5th, 08
- My Brain Just Peed Its Pants - September 5th, 08
- Palin's Speech Raised More Money For Obama - September 5th, 08
December 26th, 2007 at 10:35 am
A better question would be by your definition who’s not a progressive? For instance, was Nixon a progressive for passing landmark environmental legislation and liberalizing relations with China? You strip the term of all meaning by trying to make it fit to establishment candidates like Senator Obama.
How exactly is Obama courting the so-called “center” by not agreeing to withdraw American troops from Iraq? Only a small portion of this country supports the continuation of the occupation, and yet Obama can’t bring himself to stke out a clear progressive position on the issue. How many Americans support invading Pakistan? Or how many support violating international law by using nuclear weapons against a nonnuclear state? All options are on the table for Senator Obama, but if that’s progressive, count me out.
The question is not about liberal versus conservative voters; the question is about deference to corporate power. That this is the same policy that has failed the Democratic part for decades seems not to matter for some, content to repeat the same electoral mistakes over and over.
How progressive is Obama? A picture is worth a thousand words. Support who you like, but me, I’m voting for Kucinich.
December 26th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
looking back, why don’t more people use “obama” and “yarmulke” in rhymes?
December 26th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Last night on CSPAN there was a roundtable with Frank Luntz, George Lakoff and Drew Weston. They talked about why the GOP always wins the hearts and minds using the power of language and emotion, whereas the Dems continue to try to beat people over the head with facts and figures, preferably using wodden stiffs like Gore, Kerry, and Hillary to do so. The electorate doesn’t want a lecture. They want a leader that makes them feel good about themselves, and America. What does this have to do with your post here? EVERYTHING. Obama is the only Dem that can reach out to all of America. He pulled himself up by his bootstraps, has a normal family, is non-threatening, is a genuine Christian, and cares more about leading this country in positive direction than telling voters how dumb they are because they dont understand why liberals are so much smarter than everyone else. Example : SCHIP. You think the Republicans would name something SCHIP? Not a chance. Anyway… I’m very lefty, very progressive. Kucinich’s views actually are more in line with what I believe. But I wouldn’t vote for him over Obama in a zillion years. We need a leader right now that is simultaneously calm, and strong. A leader that will be capable of delivering bad news to us on TV, as well as good news, and make us feel OK, and not like the world is ending. Obama is that leader. Are southern white red state Christians going to vote for Hillary with her baggage? No. Edwards with his lawyer/used car salesman schtick? No. Mitt with his Mormon weirdness? No. Rudy with his NYC secular fascism? No. They are going to vote for the alpha personality, regardless of party, who makes them feel like there is an adult in the room who can lead them through bad times and good times. They are going to vote for the guy who is a combination of Michael Jordan and Tom Brady. That is Obama. The guy with a genuine smile who projects real optimism. They are not going to vote for Nurse Ratchett. The lefty Dems and progressives who are on the Obama attack need to get their heads out of their asses and realize that Bobby Kennedy is standing in front of them. What is so freaking hard to understand about that? This is what we’ve been waiting 40 years for.
December 26th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
I’m with Bill. I took the same test, Russ, and I landed firmly, squat in the Kucinich quadrant. With pride. I admire DK to no end–he is one of few in this race who speaks his mind. Unlike those “fringe” candidates like Joe Biden, who waste taxpayer $$$ in fed. matching funds while campaigning to be Secretary of State, DK is really, truly using this primary to bring important issues into light. Kind of like Al Sharpton and C.M. Braun in ‘04. BUT, as much as I hate the “electability” argument, it makes sense. There is no way DK could win a general election (except in France). I hate it that candidates like Obama have to moderate their beliefs, or at least explain them in more moderate terms, in order to be taken seriously, but I tell myself that if he wins he will enact the vision of this country that he and I share. If he wins and fails to do so, I’ll buy you a soda.
But I stick to my original point. Even as Obama might be a little to the right of where I’d like him to be, I can’t pretend that everyone in this country shares my politics. We need a candidate who will work towards the progressive goals that you and I share, Russ, while NOT alienating the other half of this country. When I saw Obama speak in DC in 2006, he said that when he was running for US Senate, he traveled to Southern Illinois. Learning about the concerns of the voters down there changed his stance on some issues, not because he was losing his values to cater to them or ‘flip-flopping’, but because he wanted to represent the diverse views of the people of Illinois. We need a president like that. We aren’t the only people in this country, and we need to work together towards a stable and progressive future.