Politics By Ordeal
What is this foolishness? Obama is pure and not a politician and Hillary is "tainted"?
Does anyone get to be a presidential candidate in our country without being a politician?
Does anyone run for political office -- a humiliating and exhilarating marathon -- without wanting power more than sleep?
Come on. Get real. You and I could never endure the punishment of debates, of columnists who don't fact-check, of swift-boaters, of dumb pundits and corrupt colleagues, without the lust for power being the overriding emotion in your life.
I do a book tour of six cities and come down with the flu -- and I'm pretty strong and healthy. I can hardly imagine what candidates go through. Yes, they fly on private jets. Yes, they don't take their shoes off at the airport, but they don't sleep either. I'm amazed they can even croak a coherent sentence.
I once did a lecture tour of Australia and New Zealand with bronchitis and laryngitis. I caught it in Hong Kong, I think, and it lingered for three weeks. My voice barely functioned. But I spoke anyway. And I signed hundreds of books after every appearance. Once I got home, I took to my bed for two weeks. The jet lag was awful and the bronchitis turned into a resistant infection. No antibiotic worked. I was silenced for six weeks and my vocal chords still have their off days.
How do these candidates do it? I still can't understand. They must be bionic. By the end of a book tour, I'm so sick of answering questions about myself that I start to interview the journalists about what they like to do in their spare time -- skiing, sailing, snowboarding, golf? The intensity of being interviewed by hostile reporters is absolutely exhausting. No wonder people misspeak. It's amazing they don't throttle the press. And the public. By the time they get in office they must hate the public. Why do we put them through this torture? Shouldn't they be thinking about governance, coming up with new ideas for the commonweal rather than being flogged by the press?
This is no way to audition for "the most powerful job on earth." I doubt that the ordeal helps anyone -- neither the candidates nor the public.
And is it really the most powerful job on earth? The way our country is going -- with our deficit, our plunging dollar, our $100 oil, we are becoming a banana republic, ruled by corporations that deceive us and buy our politicians.
Where is this pure politician? In your dreams, folks, in your dreams.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I am so ready for all of it to be over. If Obama is our nominee, I will reluctantly vote for McCain. I refuse to be a part of this mass hysteria. Media wanted BO - the got him. Good for the, I suppose.
its amazing how many people forget when she was the media's inevitable candidate. the media didn't ruin HILLARY'S CAMPAIGN mark penn did.
I agree. Hillary is not Erik Prince and should not be handled as such.
ps--She got a decently high ranking with the league of conservation voters (slightly higher than Obama). McCain got a zero. I hope we can stop the in-fighting and focus on the issues.
Exactly. Hillary Clinton, a highly accomplished person and great candidate for we moderates and liberals, did as well as she did DESPITE her terrible campaign strategy.
Obama's people have run a much smarter campaign, much more in tune with the populace.
And in the general election, Clinton or Obama would be the only choice. All of the candidates offered up by the conservatives would be complete disasters, McCain included. McCain would be a continuation of the Bush/neocon train wreck.
So, you rather have our abortion rights overturned? You rather have us staying in Iraq for 100 more years? You also rather have us maintain our isolationist foreign policy? You rather have children without health care? You rather have Bush's conservation agenda be maintained for additional 4 years...as long as Obama does not become President?
ABOUT abortion rights: if you are a DEAD woman, your abortion rights are not really priority. AND if you live in Iraq, or if you are the wife of a soldier, or a soldier, then it is entirely possible you look at Hillary's hawkishness and her vote for the war as a vote that surpasses your other rights.
Hillary is GOP lite; she has a record to prove it. Lay off the faux fem stuff and look at men, women and children and their rights in totality.
Both candidates should be lauded for their endurance--with all the hand shaking and such, I'd think they'd both have a million flavors of flu.
But who's saying he's pure and she's not. He's just a man--and he's the first to admit it. And let's stick with how he comports himself, not what others say about him. Here's a guy who actually has--say it with me: HUMILITY. He admits mistakes. He knows he doesn't have all the answers and has said so on many occasions.
One thing he does have is an idea that backroom politics should end. And it's not just "words." He was instrumental in the search engine that shows where are tax dollars are going. That's a good start, but it's just the beginning. To get the backroom out of politics, people need to see that they have to be involved and educated.
A fellow blogger said very recently, to paraphrase, that public officials shouldn't inspire. They, like a plumber or pilot, should just go about the business of "fixing" things. Well, that's not Barack's way at all: He wants a) for Americans to get involved in what DC is doing and why (does Hillary? If so, I haven't heard it) and b) to reduce the backroom deal-making through more transparent government (does Hillary? If so...).
Does he have all the answers? No. But he admits that he doesn't. Does Hillary?
Humility, thy name is NOT Barack Obama!
I'm a woman and theres alot of women I wouldn't want as president.
End the Drama, Vote Obama and get the Republicans out of town.
Obama is not so new here in Illinois where he helped kill real health care reform by changing the word "shall" to "may" in the Senate after the Health Care Justice Act passed the House. I was so hopeful but obviously SO naive when Democrats gained full control here (I think it's now seven) years ago. All they've proven is that they can rule just as corruptly as Republicans.
"What is this foolishness? Obama is pure and not a politician and Hillary is "tainted"?"
The tactic of the extremist: posit assertions that were never made to support a candidate that's flounderin
Hillary is "tainted" because, like her, we also have "experienc
I've never heard anyone claim Obama was "pure" before. What I've heard is that, unlike the Great Divider the author evidently supports, he has a way of connecting with people that may just motivate enough of them to get personally involved in politics over a long enough period of time that may just deliver our country from the gaping maw of fascist totalitarianism.
So, in closing, in your eye, Jong, in your eye. Hillary Clinton is poking a big stick in your eye. Maybe that's OK with you, but frankly, I'm sick of it. And evidently so are a lot of others.
Yes, we're dreaming, Ms. Jong, but it's not the delusional dream that Clinton supporters so reflexively attribute to anyone who dare oppose the Clinton political machine. It's a positive dream of change. You should come on board -- it'll do you a world of good.
Hey trippen:
Read the whole sentence you're commenting on. Stopping at the word 'pure' and then going on a rant against Hillary doesn't address what was said. So here it is again:
Obama is not so new here in Illinois where he helped kill real health care reform by changing the word "shall" to "may" in the Senate after the Health Care Justice Act passed the House. I was so hopeful but obviously SO naive when Democrats gained full control here (I think it's now seven) years ago. All they've proven is that they can rule just as corruptly as Republicans.
Where is this pure politician? In your dreams, folks, in your dreams.
There lies the fallacy; for politics has and never will produce the "pure" soul who wishes to assume a political role amongst those that reside on or near the "swampland
While it's okay to "dream for change," it's also rational to gauge how voters view each and every presidential candidate. Jong merely points out the realism aspects behind the concept of the "pure" politician; that, obviously taps into the emotional core of Obama supporters.
Thank you E. Jong for an inspiring thought.
Explain this to the civic group meeting in New Orleans who is disappointed that Obama cannot attend because he is busy campaigning, while Hillary is the only candidate who will. Dream of change? Obama's "buddy", Deval Patrick, his national co-chair, the guy he plagiarized his comments from, oh, "borrowed" - with permission - sorry, well one of his buddy's first acts upon becoming governor was to appoint his wife to an unprecedented Chief of Staff position and buy her, at taxpayer's expense, a brand new Cadillac. Public protest was so immediate and intense he had to rescind the position and return the car. Your group is the one that is star struck, sorry, but I can see already that many of the college youth are distancing themselves both from the candidate and his rhetoric.
shades of the mayor of detroit and his affair with his chief of staff and the lincoln navigator he said was for police but his wife customarily drove. not to mention the lawsuit settlement that provided secrecy for the city documents that may prove to be connected with kilpatrick's perjury and other crimes.
my reference is to detroit politics in response to massachusetts politics. if obama is not guilty of buying a mansion he couldn't afford with a little help from a known crook, let him say so. that is illinois politics. BARACK OBAMA IS A POLITICIAN.
trippin -- great comments!
Great post trippin.
So let's see... First it's racisms, then it's that anyone who dare think for themselves and exercise the feminist mantra of "choice" is a Hillary-hating misogynist, then the other side's supporters are a "cult" (see Pot vs. Kettle), then it's some vapid claim of plagiarism, and when none of those absurdities achieves any traction, folks like Long Jong Silver and Taylor Swamp are reduced to... to what, really? To the insightful observation that Obama is ALSO a politician? Shocking, truly shocking revelation there. Thanks ever so much for opening my eyes to THAT one, cuz, you know, I would never have figured it out all on my own.
And how about this for a way to audition for the most powerful job on earth: Run a successful campaign for your party's nomination. Let candidates be judged by the people they gather to execute and advise that campaign, by the way those advisers conduct themselves and the advice they give the candidate. Anyone can run a successful campaign when unopposed and it's simply a waltz to a coronation, in much the same way that, say, someone could claim "mission accomplished" for the invasion of a country with no WMDs until there is unexpected opposition. It's not in set-piece victories that we discover their true character and nature, but rather in the face of unexpected adversity.
So let the candidate's audition be how they deal with the unexpected trials of the campaign trail and how well prepared they are when their best-laid plans implode in their face. By that standard, Hillary blew it from Day One.
Yet again, another down to earth comment. Frankly Erica, although I am becoming more and more disenchanted with the media, for taking sides than reporting, I still come back for people like yourself.
Yes, I am amazed also, yes, I voted for Hillary, and I would do the same, for second time around. During the last debate I was looking at her and thought, yet again , How does she do it ?
No one has been more scrutinised under the microscope than her but always maintained her dignity, and always rose above it. Obama has been riding with the tide, and can not do any wrong to his loyal fans, that itself is a trementous boost to give him plenty of energy.
But for Hillary, it is damn if you do damn if you don`t.
For Hillary, no matter what it is still a win win situation. If she is not the chosen one she would be a powerful Senetor for years to come !
Amazing indeed, Erica. I thought both candidates looked a bit too tired to think about mounting a hostile debate the other night. Obama's weariness isn't showing yet. That's an advantage. But I could hear it.
I wish some of you Hillary haters and Obama fans would add some evidence for your assertions. Just stating your dreams and wishes makes you sound a lot like him.
For example, why do you think Hillary is a power seeker and Obama wants to do good and only good? Any one who runs for president wants the power. Whether it is to do good things or just fumble remains to be seen. This is even more obvious for the un vetted and inexperienced.
Does "vetting" translate into 24/7 "bimbo watching?"
Is experience in creating flag-burning amendments the same as governance?
Does failure to read Intel memos equate to smart management?
Does a thousand dollars for Dunkin Donuts and 4 mil for Mark Penn sound like sound financial administration?
If so, vote Billary.
OK, “lusting for power” is one thing. But it’s what you want to do with the power once you get it that’s important. And there are those who, based on her past, believe that maybe Hillary wants power for its own sake and Obama might actually want to do something constructive with it. Fair or unfair, that’s the perception. Why don't you read these posts....t
Erica Jong. Gee...I knew there was a reason that I'm glad the 60's are over.
There are many, many examples of Hillary's not-stop work for children, health care and education.
What little we know about Obama is only about his not voting in Illinois, lying about voting against the war, and when he actually entered the Senate, he voted for every request from the shrub for money, escalation, whatever.
Yes, it's what you do with power once you get it! Weighing on an 8:1 ratio of pro-Obama posts means nil!
Reach beyond that concept and elaborate more so versus attacking Jong the messenger. Some due diligence will reveal that Obama is just as much "hawkish" as the rest of the politicians when it comes to preserving militarism in this country while addressing international conflicts. Question where, why, and how our intelligence agencies operate in conjunction with the branches of our government and whether or not you honestly believe Obama can improve on the performance level of any prior president/
Don't kid yourself -- the media along with other bodies of government have historically played a key role in how elections avail in this country.
Whether you choose to believe it or not, lessons learned from the 60's have impact (negative/positive) on how government chooses to operate in the future. Current times parallel with the 60's, so open your eyes a tadbit wider and learn.
Erica is very angry. The people dont like Hillary. Erica is very angry. Erica's anger only helps Obama. Erica is very angry.
jofr:
Erica is angry for good reason. Too bad you're too young to understand why. You will one day, trust me.
Huff jfor is very simplistic, intelligent people do not like simpletons, especially when they try to destroy one of their own. You do not have to vote for Hilary for president, and you will NEVER have Obama as president.
You have no idea what the repubs can do to an un-vetted, all-talk slick candidate. Get ready for President McCain. So if your hate makes you forget how much Democrats need to win this election, so be it.
I often wonder too - how do they do it? And how would you ever control yourself - just like you described, with the public and press.
I really think it is power for Obama and compassion for Hillary. And I think that is a difference we can take to the bank.
Hillary has already been humiliated, sabotaged, stoned - and then a fellow democrat runs solely on stoning her more. I don't get how Obama can even be allowed to run as a democrat.
What?
vsign:
I feel really sorry for America. Duped by the press big time!
What was it that the kid in "Sixth Sense" said about the ghosts? Something like, "They see what they want to see and they hear what they want to hear".
That definitely applies to this post.
Interesting. Clinton is a marrow-deep corporatist, witness her membership in the now dying Democratic Leadership council (self-named), which was established for one purpose only: to promote corporate interests and take down everything done under Democratic principles. As you must know by now, capitalism is not--as the rightist propaganda has told us for years and does so now--democracy. When Bush claims to be pushing democracy around the world, he means corporate rule, i.e., fascism. Clinton is actually a Republican, as is hubby Bill, and the Clinton history includes doing what Bush Sr. tried and failed to do: push NAFTA through, paving the way for corporations to move operations overseas, along with their headquarters, thus avoiding even paying taxes. Clintons, both of them, see nothing wrong with this, since it makes corporations so strong.
Also, Hillary has said repeatedly that with her, nothing will be "taken off the table" including bombing Iran or the use of nuclear weapons on any (weak) country in the world that disagrees with or somehow interferes US "interests", aka exploitation of others' resources and citizens. Both actions being international war crimes.
Clinton "bravely" sponsored a bill banning flag-burning! Oooh, experience! Clinton recently voted AGAINST the ban on cluster bombs, which mostly maim children. Guess those children aren't white enough or don't have a vote, or aren't in her particular "village." In case you haven't noticed, Clinton has voted with Bush all but a couple of times. Why does she call herself a Democrat? No, she would campaign Left and govern Right, as did Slick Willy (whom I voted for twice before understanding the depth and breadth of his betrayal of the middle class and devastation of the poor).
The problem is that by now Hillary Clinton has no center; she seems to have triangulated it away. They say she's a wonderful person in private life. Good, be wonderful, then. I am a lifelong "radical" feminist, and what Clinton has done and not done speaks far more strongly than her campaign words--I am so disgusted and disappointed. Even as an advocate for women, supposedly a strong point, she can't be trusted; witness her cozying up to neo-cons with a suggestion that we "revisit" Roe v. Wade.
If you want Republican rule forever, vote Clinton and keep it on a roll.
Obama has stated that he was against the Iraq war,
but not against all wars, if the cause is a good
one. Would he stop Israel from bombing Iran?
You have dared to speak the truth.
We look for saintly leaders, but the truth is that there are few good politicians. Choosing a good one is a little like choosing a good spouse - no matter how hard one tries to weed out the losers, sometimes we get fooled. This is not to say that either Hillary or Barack is either a good leader, or a bad one. Rather, try as hard as we might ahead of time, we won't know for sure until after one of them has proven themself under pressure.
Thanks for an intelligent, wise post.
Watch out Erica, here come the anti-Hillarys screaming another feminist conspiracy without paying attention to your article. Of course Obama is power-hungry like any politician, even more so based on the fact that he was too antsy to squeak out a full Senate term before deciding he was best suited to rule the world. I am one of those people who doesn't care if my government is run by politicians, as long as they are democrats. What we need is not a new political philosophy (which Obama is not bringing us, he is very rank-and-file democrat and on a side note, if a socialist ran for prez I WOULD say that was change but that is yet to happen). We need an FDR New Deal for 2008 kind of overhaul that restructures the tax system, the social system and changes foreign policy. It will require organization and yes, working within the political system we have had for over 200 years. The next prez will not be changing the landscape of Washington but rather cleaning up after Bush. For that job we need a proven workhorse, someone committed to their principles and yes, someone who knows how to get things done in Washington because you can't change things overnight, or even really within one term. We need Hillary Clinton so desperately and the only was the people will realize this now (most sadly) is with after four years of McCain doing horrible things or four years of Obama running a stagnant broken promises white house because he can't seem to locate the memo left on his desk or get himself organized.
Sorry, but Obama is running on a socialist platform. FDR's New Deal was socialism, and all it has done is lead to a big bloated Federal Government that is corrupt, doesn't matter which party is in power, the corruption stays the same.
Photofarm,
Do you advocate a Capitalistic country in the
mode of Milton Freidman? (We need to tear down and
re-do our social programs.) When you go for the
Friedman philosophy you de-regulate banks and
privatize them, along with every other business
that might have government oversight. You have no
unions, no pensions, set low wages, open all
trade and borders and effectivily make the middle
income class disappear. The capitalists make money
the rest live in police state poverty. Do some
reasearch.
Another lame rant from a tired old feminist. Hillary's gender is the least of her problems - she has no moral compass and people don't trust her.
Defend Hillary all you want but if you examine her so called "35 years of experience" and her ridiculously inept campaign, there's nothing to recommend that she is a good executive, can appoint the right people, and has the people skills to get things done.
Hillary and Obama's policy differences are few so people are judging them by their character. Face it, Hillary is divisive (not because she's a woman) and she has no integrity.
Listen to you. Who is the divisive one? It's the Obamamaniacs who fill these boards with nasty attacks.
newgal --
Brilliant analysis!
Lady Macbeth's problems have little to do with her sex, and everything to do with her mental disorder -- narcissism -- which she, unfortunately, shares with her husband, Bill.
Once you acknowledge the fact that these two, talented scam artists, are nothing more than a pair of tired old egomaniacs who don't know when to stop feeding their out-sized political ambitions, everything they do and say makes perfect sense.
It's time for an adult to take over. It's time for Obama.
I hesitate to go into this, but, if you want to throw Shakespeare around, I'm sure that you will recall that MacBeth's downfall and death gave us the royal family of Scotland (through Banquo's son, Fleance,) which produced the fine family occupying the throne of Britain today. Remember the three weird sisters? "Though shalt get kings, though thou be none." As crazy as the MacBeths were, with the exception of Queen Elizabeth I, Banquo's line hasn't produced much to admire. They certainly were historical, but so is venereal disease, another feature of many of the fruits of the loins of Banquo.
Besides, it's hard not to like a woman who could say,
"I have given suck and know how 'tis to love the babe that milks me. I would, whilst it were smiling in my face, Have pluck'd my nipple from its boneless gums and dashed the brains out, had I sworn to it as you have to this."
I don't think, even in your wildest fantasies, that Hillary could rise to that level of nastiness. Give her that, at least.
I read to "get real" and recognized the flavor. Excuse me while I go back to mindlessly following Deval Patrick through his surrogate, Barack Obama ... me and an overwhelming majority of Americans.
an overwhelming number of Americans? That remains to be seen, the 8 month's out polls notwithstanding.
Another lame sexist/ageist know it all.
Yea, you got yours and you didn't need any old feminist. We got it. Women like you are pathetic losers bowing to the powers that be....stil
Grow up and get over yourself.
Who said anything about gender. The point was ALL POLITICIANS want power that's why they go in to politics. You Obamabots need to get a grip. He ain't Jesus and he's HALF WHITE.
"The point was ALL POLITICIANS want power that's why they go in to politics."
Doesn't matter which party, that statement is true, especially of presidential candidates. Looking at the what was it 20 or so of both parties that ran, that statement is true for all of them.
During the 250 years of slavery in this country, rape of slave women was so common that today African-Americans are all a mixture of several races. Culturally and ethnically, and until recently, in the eyes of the law, they were seen as very different, whatever the degree of color in their skin. So, to say that Barack is "half-whit
Ms. Jong,
Has no one told you that insulting bunches of folks do not bring them to your point of view. Hillary has been out there 35 years building her experience. WE get to choose whether it is experience that we value.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
