Barack Obama's Not Frustrated...I Am!

For an undecided Super Tuesday voter like myself, watching the South Carolina debate last night was an exercise in frustration made far worse by the spin that has spun off today, especially after hearing Hillary Clinton refer to Barack Obama as "frustrated."

He's not frustrated. I am.

I'm frustrated that, Hillary Clinton, the first viable woman candidate, is turning me off -- when I WANT to support a woman -- by telling me what to think and believe (rehearsed? Please...your distinguished proxy has been tearing up the carpet on the guy), when I have two eyes and one (somewhat intact) brain.

I'm frustrated that John Edwards, who I like, but now see more as splitting the vote than getting the nomination, was the one only one I can remember mentioning Katrina last night.

I'm frustrated that Barack Obama, who I am starting to lean toward (more on that below), missed an opportunity last night when he eloquently and correctly spoke of the need to address racial discrimination without making race the issue of the campaign, but missed the opportunity to include gender discrimination in his laundry list, leaving Senator Clinton to bring up ~.79 cents on the dollar. HELLOOOOOOOO.

I'm frustrated (I'm not done yet) that Hillary Clinton has a surrogate in an ex-president (and, yes, I do miss you and the prosperity of the '90's, Bill Clinton) who can attack with impunity, while Barack Obama does not have equivalent proxies doing the same (hat tip to my sister for pointing that one out). Obama campaign, take note, find someone of stature to respond. Your guy is best when he's above the fray.

I'm frustrated because I want to like all the Democratic candidates. I want to be able to say, look at our embarrassment of riches! Look at the depth of OUR field! Look at the rat's-ass-chance-in-hell the Republicans will have to continue pushing this country toward [multiple choice: Recession, Depression, War, Theocracy...]. Look at how enthusiastically I will embrace whichever of these great Democratic demographically diverse candidates gets the nomination, as opposed to: I'll support whichever Democrat gets the nomination (which I will) -- yawn.

I'm frustrated because there are things I'm drawn to about each candidate:

I like Barack Obama. I really like him. I like his authenticity. I like his point about being as careful in how we get out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. I like his ability to pull people together. I like his intelligence, his ability to write (unparalled), his critical thinking skills, his rhetorical skills, how nice it would be to have someone like that to listen to for the next 4 to 8 years. I like seeing how much he's learned and adapted during these last few months on the campaign, and how well he thinks on his feet. I like the feeling that he's telling me the truth (we'll see). And I really like how an Obama win would look to the rest of the world.

I like Hillary Clinton. I like her experience. I like her warnings about making premature strategic decisions on exiting Iraq when we don't know what the situation will be on 1/9/2009. I like her toughness. I like how the Clinton partnership of the '90's made my life better after the Bush, Sr. downturn. I really like her husband (when he's not being a proxy). I like her intelligence. I like her critical thinking skills. I like the machine (when it's directed at the other guy, not our guys). I like the idea that she would know first-hand what it's like to be a woman in our way-still-too chauvinist society and increasingly misogynistic world (I don't fancy a burka, sorry, but I just don't).

I like John Edwards. I like his passion. I like his understanding about the two Americas. I like his willingness to take on corporate interests. I like the way he thinks about those who have no other advocates. I like that he is, by nature, an advocate.

What I don't like: I don't like being talked down to and told how to think (Hillary Clinton). I don't like being told that a primary/caucus win column is more important than the number of delegates won (media, will you just.stop.that already). I don't like Obama missing the opportunity to speak to gender discrimination as well as racial discrimination, when his win will depend on pulling away women voters (not just because I'm a woman, but because I want to know that he's strategically ready to take on the Republican machine). And I REALLY don't like the upcoming spin the media is already spinning out of a South Carolina result (if Clinton wins, they'll tout their win, if she does not, well, that's just a majority black voting state, so it doesn't count).

GIVE ME A BREAK.

Here's what I would like: Talk about the issues, the policies, the plans. Set proxies against proxies, if you must, but, candidates, TAKE THE HIGH ROAD. Talk about what's important to me, not what you want me to think. Talk up, not down, to me. Think outside your box, whichever box society has assigned you (gender, race, geography). Don't expect someone like me, if you, or your proxies, smear your opponent, not to do due diligence and find out if you're spinning or telling the truth. And if you're spinning, don't expect me to be excited about it.

So, Barack Obama's not frustrated, though, in my opinion, he has a right to be (just chill, Bill Clinton, please, and stop the "rehearsed" meme, Senator Clinton - I want to know my candidate is prepared for anything, thank you), as does John Edwards (were there three people at the start of that debate?) and Hillary Clinton (Obama did get in the first shot with the Walmart comment, but responding with slumlords and sex shops? Please leave the character assassination/corruption spin to the proxies and stay out of the mud wrestling pit, thank you very much).

Here's a legitimate reason all three have to be frustrated: When will the media start asking substantive questions? Where were the queries about climate change, Katrina, how we'll get our historical allies back, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN, STAN, STAN, STAN...

Maybe part of it is the level of competition that Obama has presented to Clinton, the cult of personality that seems to be building about him, the all-but-media-blackout on Edwards, the media focus on race and gender, as opposed to the very real strategic and economic danger in which we find ourselves.

Oh, and then there are those voting machines.

So, maybe they have reasons to be frustrated, after all. But, not as frustrated as me.

Comments

[bacaangel]

I can tell you that myself, some friends and family have gotten turned off by the Clinton's behaviour to do anything to win and we will not vote for her if she gets the Democratic nomimnee. Their behavior and distortions like at Meet the Press in which Hilalry said: "Sen. Obama's chief strategist accuses me of playing a role in Benazir Bhutto's assassination.'' When in actuality David Axelrod never made such an accusation. He said former Prime Minister Bhutto's death will ''call into issue the judgment'' of ''taking the eye off the ball and making the wrong judgment in going into Iraq.'' and their recent attempt in voter suppresion in Nevada has shown a lot of people another side to them we did not know existed and it does not look pretty. They have divided the paty and it is a deep division. They seem more like Karl-Rove Republicans than Democrats and it is a shame to see their moral demise!



In the future, there will have to be some kind of Campaign Reform: Rules and Regulations from the Perspective Partiese in the way politicians run their campaigns to keep them truthful and from distorting one another's records.

[jonnie66]

Obama's spiritual adviser, J Wright gave Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness. Louis Farrakhan. maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For Americans, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies. Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the prestige of the leader of the Nation of Islam. His anti-Semitism and particularly his false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African Americans.
Farrakhan's dream has vilified whites and singled out Jews to blame for crimes large and small, either committed by others as well or not at all. (A dominant role in the slave trade, for instance.) He has talked of Jewish conspiracies to set a media line for the whole nation. He has reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind. And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced his run for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?
The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.

[jonnie66]

Mrs. & Mrs. Obama have tried to use race as a defensive mechanism to deflect any criticism of Obama on any issue during the campaign. This strategy has begun to backfire both with demorcrates ordinary Americans. Is why you have obama crying foul last few days.
Why does Michele Obama constantly draw distinctions between white and black voters? I thought her husband's campaign was supposed to be color-blind. Thanks to educated researching voters. We are seeing that Michelle Obama is dragging her husband by the nose using RACE. Michelle Obama said that "as a black man, you know, Barack can get shot by "a white racist going to the gas station."black America needs to wake up, According to Mrs. Obama, her husband isn't polling better among African-Americans because blacks think "others" are better. I wonder: what would the reaction would be if a white Republican suggested that African-Americans didn't support black candidates because they doubted that blacks could do it and they believed that someone else "was better"? It gives [blacks] very little credit to suggest that the decision [not to support Obama] is based solely on a psychic lack of faith. No seems to recall Mrs. Obama campaigning for Michael Steele. I don"t recall her saying blacks must vote for Kenneth Blackwell because he"s black. I don"t recall her calling for support of Justice Clarence Thomas." She is optimistic about his chances in South Carolina primary because black will be first factor in that election. South Carolina has become a must-win state for Obama who has lost the essence of his candidacy as the first black man to run as himself. Even a win in hotly contested South Carolina on Saturday is seen as actually hurting Obama because watching blacks block vote for Obama and his wifes insistant racist remarks is triggering a white/minority backlash.

[Rickey]

Obama MUST get himself back on the Hope bandwagon. Everyone talks Change now, but the word Hope belongs to him only! Every speech, and more importantly, every rebuttal needs to spoken in the context of Hope. Let the blogs trash the Clinton machine as many are doing after the NH lies about Choice and Bill's baiting. Let we small folks in the trenches convince people one by one to join Obama. Obama"s campaign needs to believe that we will get him elected and we will help him turn the country around. He took Clinton"s bait Monday night and now it looks like Politics as Usual. Yes, of course he needs to respond to the lies but he could have risen above her baiting by saying he learns from his mistake as he makes his own journey through life based on trying to better himself. This is the modeling we need to see from him, not another nasty politico. He needs to get back to the human being we love and support " it will make the Clintons look more like the devil they embody.

[Lis]

Just months ago, when no one except his supporters felt that Obama had a chance, everyone at least knew him to be a candidate who wanted unity, change and an end to the partisanship in Washington.

Just months ago, when everyone felt Hillary Clinton was the front-runner, people worried that perhaps Hillary's high negatives would be a factor, because she wasn't a candidate who represented unity, change and an end to the partisanship in Washington.

What has changed, except for the fact that everyone now feels that Obama has a chance?

[altohone]

Janet-

I'm with you in frustration.

However, you fail to distinguish between policies supported by Hillary and the DLC and those of Obama. No need to wait for the media since the record is clear.

There is a real difference when Hillary's ideology allows her to vote for the war and the bankruptcy bill, while Obama opposed the war and voted against the Bankruptcy bill.

Considering war and financial issues ARE womens issues too, I don't see how you can ignore that Hillary voted the wrong way while praising her attention to gender inequality.

I also take issue when you equate lies with spin. One shouldn't be tolerated while the other is to be expected.

I hope my emphasis on known policy differences doesn't come off as nit-picking, but since you called for the emphasis, pointing out what we already know makes sense.

In 2002, half the Democrats stuck to our principles and values, and half voted with Bush. Both Hillary and Edwards were in the wrong half.

[CitizenE]

I am frustrated that when people call Obama a Muslim, instead of speaking to the sanctity of the First Amendment, he pulls out a cross and exclaims Jesus Christ Almighty!

I am frustrated that the two leading candidates waste their time and ours playing the dozens --heck they're all lawyers; the Constitution gives slum lords and Wal Mart both the right to counsel.

I am frustrated that Obama can insult Clinton, but when a woman does the dozens with a man even when he starts it, she gets booed while he gets cheered. Your mama to the both of them.

I am frustrated that Bill Clinton is turning into a senile old fart rather than the effective campaigner he once used to be. Shut up Bill, and let the lady speak for herself.

I am frustrated about the Justice Department and the Supreme Court and how not one of them is talking about the one branch of government that should be our failsafe against our nation turning into a Kafka novel.

I am frustrated that the Dems are wasting time by not calling the whole conservative agenda--foreign policy, fiscal policy, environmental policy, out for what it is--voodoo, mirrors, and disaster--and hammering away at it.

I am frustrated by pundits who want some sort of political daydream and turn the whole thing into an election for Most Likely to Succeed on campus.

I am frustrated as a Democrat from the west of the United States that not a one of them are asking the Governor of New Mexico why he doesn't have an immigration hysteria on his hands.

I am frustrated because the one with backbone sounds bitchy, the one with charisma is charisma lite, the one with passion often sounds like a complete narcissist.

I am frustrated that none of them even though they all claim to be doing so is really levelling with the people about the fix we're in as a nation and a planet.

I am really frustrated when I think what would happen if, whomever the candidate is, he or she loses.

[DoninJoisey]

Good analysis, but for God's sake, don't repeat Hillary's bogus claim of experience! Where in Hell does she come up with that 35 years crap? Why isn't she called on it? WHAT experience? (other than the Senate, Laura Bush is wife of a governor and president).

I'm 60, and I'm tired of the same old, same old. There isn't 1 republican that has any credibility for change - except Ron Paul, and some of his ideas are scary - and WHY, WHY, isn't Kucinich allowed to be heard?

Edwards, Kucinich, and most of all, Obama, represent a chance for change - the others - including Hillary - are business as usual. Why would I want to go backward when we can move forward?

Memory is funny - you remember economics about Clinton's terms, I remember innuendo, parsing, spin, and being embarrassed. I admit, being embarrassed by Clinton is far preferable to being disgusted by Bush, but we have more choices than that - I am convinced we can do better than either of those.

[benjaminblue]

Senator Obama's self-destructive, evasive, defensive squirming last night seemed close to a Dean Scream moment. Hillary seemed informed but unPresidential.

Senator Edwards was focused, engaging and Presidential.

And Senator Edwards is the "cleanest" of the three potential nominees; the other two have too much dirt to be thrown by Republicans; they have too many negatives to be viable candidates.

[tkunz]

That sentiment and analysis is spot on.
Especially the part about staying above the fray. He does need a counter to Bill Clinton. John Kerry is trying to fill that position - I believe fighting for the very soul of the Democratic Party.
I have to believe that Edward Kennedy's silence would disgust his two courageous older brothers, who at least don't have to witness it.
And where is Al Gore when he could do some actual good?
By failing to come out against the Clinton's, these icons are showing their true colors.

[MPeter]

How could Obama even try to speak to anything substantive when he was constantly under attack by the Clinton Machine and Edwards who, ironically, once claimed to believe in change. It is now public info. that he met with the Clintons and has now turned into a Clinton hatchetman, not just an equal opportunity spoiler he has been since. Obama has tried to clean up the tone of the campaign and the political process but he has had to endure the fire from grumpy old men and women who are so accomplished in divisive politics, they have found away of evicerating his record as an anti-war, clean-cut politician who does not take money from lobbyists the way the Clintons do. The Clintons are pushing race and Republican/Democratic divides by distorting his words because they cannot stand to see a united America. HRC will even fake tears to play bthe gender card yet she has never shed a tear for the young Americans she sent to die in a foolish war, nearly sent more into Iran with the vote for Kyl-Libberman and now claims to be for change. America is a democracy, not a dynasty or a monarchy. Anyone who can't see what is happening needs an eye examination.

[Billie]

I'm past frustration, and heading into despair. I'm a woman and a feminist and am so disappointed Hillary is going in this god-awful direction of distort, smear and project onto her opponents. Maybe dirty is the only way to win these days, but I still can't get on board with that. And I think Bill Clinton's behavior is unseemly for a former president. He should stay clear, it's the principled, dignified and dare I say it, fair thing to do. I think Hillary is a smart, accomplished woman, I think Obama is a smart, accomplished man and the same goes for Edwards. What I'd like to see is a campaign that doesn't make me want to stay home instead of vote. I'm for Obama at this point. I think he's handling all the double teaming against him with an air of nobility.

[SamanthaJaneSalem]

I'm frustrated too.

I'm not an African American and yet I'd love to see our country elect Barack Obama as the first African American president.

I don't see how being a woman, or being Hispanic, would change this. Yet Hillary is beating Obama by a huge margin among women and Hispanics. If this trend continues, the nomination is hers.

My theory-- if you're not paying much attention to the election, and you see the name "Clinton" on the ballot, you'll choose that one immediately (especially over that funny "Obama" name). So Hillary is winning what I call (in a somewhat politically incorrect fashion) "The ADD Vote"-- voters who are easily distracted. If you're following politics, you've heard of Hillary's Iraq War vote, and about this new guy who has so much appeal.

Hillary is also getting the "over 45" vote. They see Obama as an upstart who should wait his turn. He makes nice speeches but isn't experienced or tough enough.

I have one question-- could it be that Hillary has been through so many wars and battles with Republicans and the press not just because she has approached issues which we liberals deem noble (health care) but because she is of a confrontational nature and is too quick to pick a fight?

For instance-- all the Dems have good plans for stimulating the economy or fixing health care, but when Hillary talks about these, she sounds like only she has a good plan for each. That won't go ever well in Washington-- thinking only you have all the good ideas while being dismissive of everyone else's input (which she already has done regarding health care).

[trevor01]

I like the positive approach you've taken. Any of the three would be preferable by far to what we've suffered the past seven years but I have no doubt that Hillary is the golden opportunity we should all be embracing and I feel good about that!

[urbanrevolt]

They used to talk about a rural urban split. Now, even though it's getting worse, we can disguise it in all different colors and all different stereotypes, but the places that were bad haven't changed their street addresses nearly as frequently as the transient residents passing through them.