I Wish There Were More Mayhill Fowlers
Not just because she did us bloggers proud by presenting the unexpected scoop of the campaign, but because she is that rare Barack Obama admirer who can admit he's not perfect.
Obama himself is very good about admitting when he's wrong or when he's made a mistake. Quickly and convincingly. In his second book, he actually reads as humble.
Yet some of his most ardent supporters possess a total inability to admit he is human with flaws and foibles. Defensive isn't even the word for them. Thin-skinned doesn't begin to describe them. They're abjectly terrified and enraged by every single thing a Clinton (or anyone) says about their darling.
To hear many of his supporters talk, it is as though we have all been banished from a political Eden, a paradise where Obama's winning was to be just a formality. He would just go to the post office and fill out a change-of-address form and move gloriously in to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. right away while the whole country (even Republicans!) swoons and applauds.
But then this wicked creature named Hillary came along with her normal, earthbound, in fact rather ham-fisted political campaign. Obama could've easily beaten McCain and the vicious right-wing smear machine had it not been for this horrible woman who has spoiled everything by daring to throw some elbows. And now the perfect fantasy is shattered.
It shattered that easily.
And now along comes Mayhill Fowler. "Bittergate" shows clearly how the most cultish Obama fans can't conceive of a supporter taking an objective look at something their candidate does and finding fault, or questioning anything about him.
When I first heard about Bittergate (could this be the best "-gate" name since the original?) on Saturday afternoon and then found out where it started, I was immediately very proud of my fellow HuffPoster. She has more than put Off The Bus on the map!
I've been enjoying her posts all along. They feature on-the-ground and "off-the-bus" (i.e., non-insider) reportage, mixed with her own thoughts and opinions. (OffTheBus cofounder Jay Rosen puts the concept of the citizen journalist in context in this thoroughly enlightening post about Bittergate.) Fowler is open and curious: Sometimes the net positive in one of her posts seems to shake out for Hillary, sometimes for Barack.
I really feel for Mayhill right now because: 1) She has toiled in relative obscurity, for free, here at HuffPost, then through her amazing post she has influenced the course of this campaign as directly as anything else has, period, and she gets almost zero credit by name, at least in the MSM -- it's all "as first reported on the Huffington Post..." and increasingly not even that; and 2) It can't be comfortable for her as someone who gave the maximum donation to Obama to now be seen as a traitoress to his "movement." And to do so of all places at the site some claim should be renamed the Obamington Post (actually I just made that up) because of its rather noticeable pro-Obama slant in coverage.
Conspiracy theories are flying fast online in the effort to smear the messenger. She's not a "citizen journalist," she's got an agenda! She's actually a paid Hillary shill in disguise! McCain paid her to go to this fundraiser and tape Barack! And, uh, to make Barack say something "inartful"! And my favorite: Hillary gave Fowler the money she donated to Obama! (Months ago? Knowing what Barack would say last week?)
This is the kind of paranoid garbage that is making this primary so ugly.
Obama said what he said regardless of the presence of Mayhill Fowler. Nothing's off the record when you're facing the public (which he was, even if it was in a private home).
I stand with Mayhill and encourage others to consider the example of integrity she has given us. She explained that as much as she likes and supports Obama, his comment gave her pause, and she thought others should know about it.
It's called antiseptic sunlight, kids. And Barack has shown that he can take it, by addressing the controversy head on over the last few days. See, I admire that.
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 think the cliche "whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger" and the old lemons-lemonaid connection apply here. By Obama taking on the "he is an elitist" epithet now rather than in the fall, he can recover and be that much tougher an opponent to McCain. I think the fact that he fought back right away was good. I don't think the voters in Pa. and elsewhere are going to hold the remarks against him. The important thing to voters was "can he take a punch". Mayhill Fowler is a wondrful lady who is entitled to all her opinions whether you agree with them or not. And people who disparage her (or worse) should be ashamed of themselves. It takes a lot of courage to be out there and not hiding behind an anonymous commenter "nom-de-guerre". And express contraversial opinions.
First time I've encountered anyone refer to Senator Clinton's campaign as "normal" and "earthbound".
There are a few problems many have with Fowler's post:
1. It appears that she snuck in her recorder
2. She didn't report the entire story and others who were there are offering differing assessments.
3. In her follow-up, where she decided to post the entire audio, she identified Rep. Barbara Lee as Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, a woman who is not only a Clinton supporter, but one of her national co-chairs.
These things make one wonder about her 'journalism' techniques.
As an Obama supporter, when I hear a story about him (or McCain or Clinton) I would like to hear more than one side, not just the side that makes a candidate look bad, and have it be accurate.
Exactly...much more thoughtful than shrake's take. What a lot of people don't understand, I think, is that most voters are thoroughly disgusted with this kind of politics. Dem voters are especially disgusted when they spent the 90s defending The Clintons against the right wing accusations and here The Clintons are using those same tactics - as said elsewhere in huffpo today, the McCain/Clinton echo chamber.
I am an Obama supporter, and I also hold a grad degree in journalism.
So, I think that what Mayhill Fowler did was just fine, and I would have been troubled had she done any less. I also think that Obama's comments were candid if imprecise, not at all elitist or demeaning. Fowler is under no obligation to think likewise, and I find her take on them to be curious if understandable. Politicians don't talk like that. It is too dangerous to speak truth about segments of the electorate on such a personal and specific level. When has calling someone "bitter" become an epithet? In the face of disappointment and disillusionment, don't we all "cling" to what we know and what has comforted and reassured us?
I was astounded at the surprise of many white Americans to learn from Barack that many middle-class African-Americans were still angry about historical and current-day racism in this country. I am not surprised that rural and small town Americans are or might be bitter about their economic circumstances. Why would these mainly white citizens not be incensed to see their aspirations frustrated while others seem to be getting a free pass through illegal immigration and affirmative action? I am more than wiling to support affirmative action in education, employment and whatever else for the struggling Americans in Appalachia, rural areas, small towns, and in our rust-belts across the nation.
Mayhill Fowler is not a Obama supporter, and just because she gave him money doesn't mean she supports him..she also says she supported Fred Thompson, and Hillary..she should be honest..and she needs tp applogize
That's an unfair assumption. I supported Biden initially, but switched over to Obama after he dropped out. Does that somehow diminish my support for Obama now?
All of this is truly a problem with the media. I have watch how the media tears down each candidate at every opportunity it has. By the time we elect a President we don't really have any respect for that person because the media has pointed out every bad point they possibly could. That's why we hear "I'm voting for the lesser of the evils" all the time. I'm ready for some positive press. We can speak the truth and be positive at the same time. We don't have to put a negative slant on everything. All of these candidates are human. Does our presidential election have to be based on gossip magazine information from the press? Ms. Fowler knew what she was doing. If she didn't, then she should not be a reporting on anything.
I have really noticed it in this campaign more so than any other.
It is almost Machiavellian. First they buuild them up and up and up and then all of a sudden, whamo, they start picking them apart.
They have never liked HRC so I was very surprised in the beginning, when it was just the 3 of them left on Dem side how kind and praising they were of her.
Matthews couldn't stop building her up, you know all that drooling breathlessness he does. Oh , her campaign is flawless, she's this, she's that, on and on. I was getting so annoyed! and then one day, just like that, no build up, no situation, nothing BAM he started his campaign of destruction and the rest of MSNBC followed.
He has been quoted as saying he hates her/them so one has to wonder if he did it on purpose. He started the narrative of her inevitability and as soon as everybody was talking about it he turned it around and hit her with it as if it came from her.
I don't know, something hinky there.
Now its Barack's turn.
If Fowler admires Obama, I'd hate to read what she has to say about him if she hated him.
Obama can take a punch! His new ad proves that, as does his explanation and word to explain his statement! This was a stupid thing Hillary went at him with! she grasping at straws as she dies in this election. but her true colors is showing , and the DNC are as fed up with it as we are! We can only hope pennsylvania will put a end to it the 22nd. she keeps giveing the Republs ammunition against her own party. It just makes me sick at heart to see the one chance in years go down the drain, because hillary is so vendictive that if she can't win, Obama can't either! Never thought I'd live to see this day! As hard as this young man tries to be possitive-------he has to go negative to fight back against the Clintons. Of course as he goes around this country and see the damage we've truely sustained these last years , it has to be dishearting. but at least he gets it that we are not happy or optimistic right now!
Please Scott - go back and reread Mayhill's posts and her other blog listed under her profile. Then maybe you will understand why people tend to disagree with your assessment that she is a real Obama supporter.
I am not proud of Fowler, unlike the remarks of Obama's former pastor, which really needed to be addressed, this was a non-story from the start.
How about reporting on the absolute incomprehensibility of the $110 million dollar candidate who was born into privilege calling anyone elitist? How about reporting on her response to being asked about millions of dollars from corporations, then lending her own campaign money? When asked if it was a conflict, she laughed and deemed the question comparable to asking how many angels dance on the head of a pin.
The only thing Fowler did was provide Hillary with the threads to pull attention from her Bosnia lies and the Mark Penn debacle, which really needs to be addressed - like reports he is still working for the campaign.
But, I guess the important thing is that Fowler got her "scoop".
Well, think about this: The Clintons have been subjected to scrutiny the likes of which the world has never seen (probably because the Clinton Administration "tracked" time-wise with the growth of the Internet itself?) and yet despite the MANY-THOUSAND-FOLD difference in the amount of smearing between that of Obama and that of Clinton, here she is today, roughly equal with him. In spite of it all.
What does that say about the role of controversy/negative coverage in a politician's fortunes? What does that say about Obama's future?
Stop treating Obama like a glass baby doll. He'll be okay.
First of all, I was an adamant supporter of Bill and Hillary while they were being smeared by the vast right-wing conspiracy all through the 90s and during her Senate career. But now I can barely stomach her. And I'm not the only one out here who feels that way (white woman, supposedly Hillary's base - except I'm not old). It seems that we have been making it abudantly clear by virtue of the fact that we have given Obama a lead that is insurmountable that he is our choice for the nominee of the Democratic Party. But Hillary can't seem to step outside of her own ambitions and accept that we do not want her. And if we don't want her, she is going to see to it that our chosen nominee is as bloodied as she can make him come the fall. She is a narcissist, pure and simple.
Lastly, she may be roughly equal with him - in spite of it all - but she didn't rise to that point, she fell to it. Think about that long and hard. With all the political machinery behind her, all of the money, all of the inevitability talk, 99 percent name recognition, and her husband's coattails, she is losing to this man. And I firmly believe that part of the reason is that people don't like a Democrat who will stab another Democrat in the back and run a poisonous, Rove-inspired campaign against one of our own.
Now that I read your profile and your other posts - I completely understand your defense of Mayhill Fowler! Here's my favorite from "From Hussein to Herschel: How Obama Can Court the One-Issue Jews"
Here's an excellent recommendation for Obama: Drop out. Please. You are like a chicken whose head has been cut off but it keeps running around.
I for one am aghast watching your whole organization whistling past the graveyard as though nothing is wrong.
EVERYTHING IS WRONG. Rev. Wright sunk you. It's over. posted 03/16/2008 at 23:50:52
...oh, and:
I support Hillary, but I would've voted for Barack if he got the nomination. Until I saw his spiritual mentor in action. Not sure what I'd do now.
posted 03/15/2008 at 15:05:27
It is those of us who drink the kool-aid most deeply who should be the most critical of Barack Obama. He is the hope we have been waiting for, and dream we dare not dream. He is either the next Martin Luther, the next Martin Luther King, or the greatest con-artist in the history of the world, ever. EVER.
If he truly is some sort of secret Muslim, the final culmination in a centuries-old conspiracy to take over the infidel world, then we have already lost, for he has hidden his true self from the critical gaze of the entire world. If he truly is the secret figurehead of the New World Order, the final culmination in a centuries-old conspiracy to enslave the world, then we may have already lost, because that would imply such ridiculous amounts of "deep shit" that most people might just go to sleep. I have heard many explanations of who he is, and they all reek of stupidity.
Glenn Beck wondered if Obama was the Antichrist. Stupid.
People think he is a secret Muslim. Stupid.
All that shit is stupid. It's too complicated. There is a much simpler answer; Obama is just one of us. He knows that he is smart, well-spoken, and driven. Plus, he has giant balls. He thinks the same thing most people do, that something is going very wrong with our country. He is bitter, angry, frustrated, and tired just like everyone else. On both sides of the self-perpetuating Congressional divide, people are frustrated. Obama simply has powers we do not: He went to Columbia, then Harvard Law. That means he is very smart, which is a good thing. Though I got a 1480 on the SAT, I could not make any of those schools. Since the SAT is, ostensibly,the national smartness judge, he must be very smart. That also may mean that he is a bit of an elitist. Smart people tend to be.
He is doing his best; a politician he is not. He is going to keep talking, and we are going to have to keep explaining his big, complicated words and ideas to those who have spent too much of their lives struggling to get by. It's not completely their fault.
Obama has given us, the people of the U.S.A., a challenge; it is twofold.
We must reach out to those who disagree with us and, rather than demean them for their faith in Bush, Hillary, or McCain, just talk to them. Hear their points of view. Engage in empathy, compassion, and compromise.
We must be critical of Barack Obama when he errs. We must do it in a constructive and honest way, so that others with more virulent disagreements may follow our example. Obama purports to be the hope of the planet, and we who believe in him must constantly push him to live up to all of our expectations. He will not, but that is no excuse not to push.
That is the difference between a movement and a cult. We are not a cult; we are a movement. Every single one of us is just as responsible for it as is Barack Obama. If he becomes president, we must push him to fulfill all his promises. If he does not, and instead settles comfortably into power's embrace, we must be the ones to toss him out on his ass. That is our responsibility.
Vote Obama
good post - nice context, and way to stick up for Fowler.
thank you
If Ms. Fowler felt she had to report this, fine. But don't dress it up as "reporting" when there was considerable editorializing in the piece by the author. With friends like her...who needs enemies?
I don't have any problem with anything a candidate says being a part of the dialogue. But I think it's pretty silly that those remarks give anyone pause. People do get bitter when the government fails them and vote based on things like religion and guns. That's a fact. Anyone who has truly worked an industrial job in an industrial town (like me, not the pundits) understands the simple fact that people start holding onto things the government hasn't yet taken from them and become overly concerned with those things. If people are not willing to admit this, then the country is in serious denial.
If not pandering and being truthful results in him being condescending, then we need to step back and ask ourselves what we want in a president. Do you want someone that actually sees our problems and are ready to take them head on, or do we want someone who lies and tells us they got shot at and loves to shoot and tried to joing the army just to appease us as her husband and other lobbyist buddies trade our jobs away? Stop and ask yourself if what Obama said was wrong. People are hurting. If you want someone to stroke your back and tell you that everything is going to be okay, maybe you should question their elitiism. Obama's statements show him to be the STRONGER CANDIDATE! He understands the destitute situation our country is in and that there is no time to coax people who are losing their ground in the US with lies.
He was pandering. He was speaking to people at a fundraiser in San Francisco when he insulted the people of PA. When he insulted NASA, he didn't do it in Texas or Florida but in the North and Midwest. He counts on these things not getting reported to the people who would feel slighted and/or to those who would lose their jobs if his plans are enacted.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
