Reading The Pictures: With All Due Respect To Cesca ... Make Love, Not War

Bob,

I mostly love your take, especially when you've got Bush in your sights, but I have to disagree with you on the necessity for bloggers to publicly choose between Hillary and Obama. Like Atrios, and Digby, and others, I say: Make Love, Not War. So for me, I'm holding my fire until exactly thirty seconds after the convention is over.

Yeah, I know that Democrats need adversity almost as much as oxygen. I also know this "kumbaya" phrase is code for a disgust for compromise -- especially in the face of a compromise with the devil, and the loss of a monumental "what might have been."

Yes, I understand, and I'm suffering a lot of the same pain. But man, why must there always be a wedge? I mean, at the extreme risk of going all kumbaya on you, just look above at that closing moment last night. I don't care if both warriors were just faking it, with plenty of slugging to come (as long as they can keep faking it, the same way, after September). With this country pulled apart, on purpose, by those freaks in the White House, this shot, married to all their platitudes offered to unity, has a lot to offer.

I mean, I don't think we can afford to tear ourselves apart, or leave ourselves vulnerable to what that callous shmuck, Howard Fineman, smugly prognosticated after New Hampshire would become "a civil war." (I also, by the way, don't think that liberal bloggers should be elevated to a new ruling class ... and I know Markos doesn't either.)

If the time is right for the transformation you're yearning for, let Obama take it to the people and let the people respond. Otherwise, at least for the moment (and yes, against my nature), I really do want to celebrate that the Democratic nominee will look like no nominee before. I do want to believe that we can take out McCain either way. I do want to appreciate how truly unique this photo is -- how much it is fraternal, interracial, intergenerational, and bridges the gender divide.

And more than anything else -- and I say this from as far left as anyone around here -- I want to win.

(image: Chris Carlson/AP. Los Angeles, Thursday, Jan. 31, 2008. Via YahooNews)

For more of the visual -- including more thoughts on the Kodak moment -- visit BAGnewsNotes.com.

Comments

[research]

Folks, the corporations have "allowed" Obama and Clinton to proceed because neither is threatening their profits. Since all Honest candidates have already been excluded, everything from now on will be game fluff to win the election.

Obama and Clinton, cannot propose eliminating the health insurance companies for fear of what all that health insurance money could do to them. That goes for any and all other, perceived anti-corporatist proposals.

Don't expect to get what you vote for.

I'm going to vote democratic and hope for the best.

[sky2evan]

Mr. Shaw:

I agree with your attitude, but I disagree with your conclusion.

Take a stand. Fight for what you think is right. Support the candidate that you believe in. If necessary, criticize the other candidate if you think that candidate deserves that criticism. Any real progressive would.

The future of the country depends on airing everything out & knowing what people really think, feel, and believe - not hiding behind political correctness.

If you support both candidates equally, then also explain specifically why - because otherwise, it will simply sound like a triangulating cop-out.

[deminmo]

Change is what it's all about. And with either
Obama or Clinton there will be a big change.
Yea, I know there was already a Clinton as
President, but as far as I know there has never
been a woman President (not counting Nancy
Reagan in the later years) and certainly never
a black President.
If Clinton should win, she would be very foolish
not to have Obama as a Vice President. And it
would help Obama to have Clinton there with
him for a little direction.

[JMEB]

Their platforms are almost the same.

There are differences, but not enough to merit hate-filled attacks against one of them.

Vote yor preference on Tuesday, and then pledge to support the victor afterwards.

Let the Republicans cut off their nose to spite their face.

[iluvsam]

I just wish Bob Cesca would learn to hate the Republican agenda more than he hates the Clintons. Put your hate in the RIGHT place. Anytime anyone wants to spew out hate toward either Clinton, go the RNC website and read the Republican agenda. If someone can read that agenda and HONESTLY say that voting for Hillary is WORSE than voting for someone who supports that agenda, then that person needs to check themselves at the door, because they are NOT a progressive.

[strangelet]

Just a comment for Michael Shaw: Thank you. It is extremely important that all people (including progressives) cshould vigorously support their preferred candidate -- that is what primaries are for. But it is utterly crucial that everyone of a liberal or progressive (or, for that matter, centrist)slant unite behind the eventual Democratic nominee, and not fall victim to the "No difference" meme. You know: "there was no difference between Gore and Bush, so why vote for Gore?"

My problem with Bob Cesca's article was not that he endorsed Obama; it was that he used language to portray the choice as between "conventional and outdated, if not actually evil, Hillary" and "fresh, inspiring, transformative Barack". This despite the fact that, from a progressive's viewpoint, their policy differences are almost indistinguishable. This emphasis on personality, rather than policy, is what brought us Reagan and Bush II, among other things.

In terms of the Democratic nominee's chances, it is counterproductive (as you point out) because it exacerbates the emotional schism between the supporters of the two candidates.

Bob has every right to express his fallback preference (absent JE), and it's almost a tautology to say "progressives should choose their candidate", but I wish he had not been so divisive in his language.

Cheers. And thanks again for your post.

[DonRoberto]

Progressives by definition welcome change. To win the Presidency, the Democratic candidate --- whoever it turns out to be --- will need to not only reassure the majority of the voting populace who do *NOT* consider themselves "progressives", but communicate a compelling reason for those same people to vote outside their comfort zone.
Calls for universal health care, ending the Iraq war, and so on play very well to the predominately Democratic primary audiences. But how will Democrats tailor their message for those who aren't already "true believers"?
Ordinarily I agree with Mr. Cesca's posted opinions, but on this issue I cannot. Obama and Clinton supporters must immediately quit vilifying and demonizing each others' candidates; some of that mud is bound to stick come November. Anything else, and we end up doing the Republicans' work for them.

[JakeEasy]

Great article.

It's a shame that it dropped to the bottom of the page in less than a day. Could that be because it is a call for solidarity rather than a war cry for Barack? Cesca's article hung around at the top for a week. It wasn't better written, and it didn't do anything but create divisiveness when solidarity is what is needed.

Your take is a breath of fresh air. I like both candidates and dislike the way the media feeds the fight frenzy. And I am continually amazed at the progressives, including HuffPo, who buy into that kind of negative sensationalism when they have to know it doesn't help anything.

[rextrek]

Well one thing I can say...MLK Jr and Alice Paul would be Proud!

[davidly]

When are you guys gonna learn? They'd both sell your grandmother for whale bait if they thought it'd pad their political portfolio.

[THP]

Thankyou for the fresh air Michael.
Additionally, why is it that everyone fancies themselves a psychoanalyst, reading body language, intuiting what they meant by those words. Let's all just try and listen to the words themselves and not read so much in to them. There is a very good chance Hillary will be the nominee and all of this biting, much vicious, will have greatly damaged her as she goes against McCain. Get worried, very worried, when you read the national polls that show Obama or Hillary losing to McCain by 6-7 points.

[OhComeOnNow]

People, People, PEOPLE!!!!! Do you not watch Obama's body language?!!???!?!?! He despises her with every fiber of his being. It is total and utter CONTEMPT. Screw the chair pulling - THAT was for the cameras. Ever since the Kennedy endorsement, he has entered hubris-land... he now has a 'tude with a capital "T"...

[libran38]

Although I prefer HRC, I will be happy with either of these two of as our nominee.

I think that the Teddy and MoveOn endorsements may help BO in the primaries but will hurt him in the general. Remember, any time the Repubs want to raise money, they send out fliers with Teddy's picture on it. And the first question BO will be asked is "Did you agree with the General Betray US ad"?

[TheWesternBreed]

It looks like a delightful still from a romantic movie. What a power couple Hillary and Barack could have been together, if they hadn't been born 15 years apart or so. He has so much charisma and intelligence, like the man she did marry, but largely free of that man's dismaying faults--the elevated narcissism, the too-great economy with the truth, and the womanizing.

[piezoid]

Hear! Hear! One reasonable voice in the cacaphony of hate in HuffLand!

C'mon you Clinton-bashing Obama supporters, your guy did terrific last night. If you believe in his message then start living it.

Stomping on Hil to elevate him is seriously wrong shit and hurts your guy's cause.