- BIG NEWS:
- Barack Obama
- |
- Mitt Romney
- |
- GOP
- |
- Health Care
- |
I Wish There Were More Mayhill Fowlers
Read More:
Barack Obama, Bittergate, Hillary Clinton, Jay Rosen, John McCain, Mayhill Fowler, Off The Bus,
Home News
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
NEW POLL: CLINTON ONLY AHEAD BY 6 IN PENNSYLVANIA: For all of the media hype in recent days, there was no change in the newest primary poll in Pennsylvania released today.
Check out the poll here: http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1327.xml?ReleaseID=1168&loc=interstitialskip
VOTE FOR BARACK OBAMA AND LETS GET A DEMOCRAT WIN IN NOVEMBER!
Reporting Senator Obama's comment accurately was actually as boon to his campaign. It initiated discussions regarding the current state of the American electorate, their resentment regarding the economy, their anger over the way they have been treated and their lack of hope in traditional politicians. as this discussion matured, the real meaning of the words has become more clear as well as the historic perspective of them. Senator Obama was not the first to identify both the malaise and the fact that substantial portions of the population search for some hope in various ways, some not acceptable, some very acceptable. I laud both Mayhill Fowlers and Mr. Shrake for bringing this discussion out in the open and letting the light of open discussion be shined upon it.
I agree with MaggieB; Mayhill is a hero. And Scott Shrake is to be commended for standing by her.
I heard Obama's condescension before Mayhill did, but in a similar way. When I first heard Obama would run for president, I was thrilled. He seemed like a cool, smart guy who could retake the White House for the Democrats. But right before the Texas primary, he insulted the people of NASA the same way he's insulted the blue-collar folks of PA. To insult people you want to vote for you right before an election not only shows poor judgement but demonstrates that Obama will not bring unity, only division. What famous person insisted that he was a "uniter, not a divider?" Obama is like George Bush in so many ways, it's incredible to me that more people don't see it. Let's keep the young father-obsessed dividers out of the Executive Branch.
PS There was a great article on Mayhill's story in the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/14/us/politics/14web-seelye.html?scp=1&sq=mayhill&st=nyt
Mayhill Fowler is NOT AN OBMA SUPPORTER. She has made it her mission to destroy him and her "scoop" was decontextualized and created more confusion than it resolved.
Obama admirer? Have you read any of her post besides the last one?
I was actually baffled when I saw Mayhill Fowler described at an "Obama supporter". You don't have to be a genius or a political detective to know she's a Hillary hitwoman. Besides, if you're not bitter than your not PAYING ATTENTION!
Actually there are more Mayhill Fowlers. There's Taylor Marsh and Kathleen Reardon and, oh, a whole host of Hillary shills! Open your eyes, Mr. Shrake!
Oh wait, I think I see the problem: There don't seem to be enough Mayhill Fowlers to actually win Clinton the nomination.
Well, that is a pity, isn't it?
She's a very special variety "Obama admirer", alright: one who donates hundreds of dollars to Fred Thompson's presidential campaign.
I know, I think that's weird, too http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-shrake/this-fred-thompson-thing-_b_54490.htmll), but she explained to Jay Rosen that she wanted to give Fred some $$$ because he's a fellow Tennessean.
And you buy that?
Take a shower mate.
Touche!
Obama is right. People do get blinded when they are bitter.
And that is why the cult of Obama exists.
Here is an excellent article on the propaganda analysis of Obama's Mar. 18 speech.
http://allenweber.com/propaganda-analysis-of-obamas-march-18-speech/
And PA voted Democrat in the 2004 election so I think we are smart enough to see through all the crap on both sides.
Well, Scott, I do appreciate you sharing your point of view, though I dare say I simply can't and don't agree with it for the reasons I explain below.
Ms. Fowler did not merely report Obama's comments, she has interpreted them through her own filters and judged his description of economically depressed citizens in Pennsylvania as potentially negative in the eyes of Californians. Ms. Fowler then states that she is not sure that his description is what Californians need to hear.
She accuses Obama as making a "problematic judgement call" in his explanation. in his attempt to explain working class culture. Further on in her commentary she talks about reinforcement of negative stereo types and plainly disses Californians. This only serves to illustrate her biases.
The problem isn't in what Obama said. Many others besides myself have commented that he spoke truth. Even folks in Pennsylvania. I listened to the audio of his talk, what he said made perfect sense within the context of the question he was asked.
Ms. Fowler put her spin on Obama's comments and made a "mountain out of a molehill".
Clinton then used the situation as a political red herring to pull attention off of her own more serious blunders.
This election is getting to be more and more like "Blazing Saddles" every single day.
You know the movie where the sheriff has the "audacity" to serve a Mayor of Rock Ridge, and the townspeople don't like or trust him because he's black. And Mungo is convinced to pulverize him by his bosses.
Well Pennsylvania, you're Mungo in this scenario. And Hillary and Co, who claim proprietary right over Rock Ridge is telling you this smoothtalking black man, this elitist is talking down to you, calling you stupid when he says you're bitter, and the gun in your holster is a result of governmental apathy about your livelihood.
He's your friend Mungo, understand. Sheriff Obama - friend to Mungo.
Hillary really bad guy. Don't be fooled by shiny objects, and turncoat pundits.
Candygram?
Ah hell why not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28khv-BydeY&feature=related
"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."
You can say the same about Hillary supporters.
Obama is not perfect. Far from it. But I do find him to be more open and honest than either McCain or Hillary. Do I think he's the savior to the universe? No, but I do think he'll make more of a difference than Hillary or McCain will in the office of the President of the United States.
It's funny reading people's comments on this board. The one universal feeling I get from everyone is that they want things changed. It's unfortunate as adults and democrats we can't even be civil enough to each other to have discussion without accusing one side or the other of being delusional. My feelings on this is if we keep this up McCain won't have to do anything to get the presidency. We'll hand it to him on a plate due to our ego's and misplaced loyalties.
I agree that we should all grow up and be civil. I do think Obama's supporters are slightly more "emotional" than Clinton's, but it's a generational thing. Clinton's supporters tend to be older and therefore more emotionally mature, and also they're used to Mrs. Clinton being smeared for the last 15 years, so ad hominem attacks on her just elicit a bit of a yawn. Unlike the perfect, newly born golden child whose supporters act like he needs to be kept in an oxygen tank.
You almost pulled it off shrake. Right up until the last sentence you almost pulled the wool over our eyes, then your true feelings came out. So I shall respond.
First, I'm not one of the youngsters you allude to. Hell I'm probably older than you are. Second, I have been called deluded, a cultist, a "kool-aid drinker" (meaning equating to Jonestown Guyana) and a whole host of things by supporters of Hillary Clinton. To the point I got somewhat tired of attempting intelligent prose with them and will now respond in kind.
Ad hominem attacks against Hillary do elicit yawns now, because people have learned a long time ago that for the most part they are true! To have her and her husband explain a blatent lie, with I/she misspoke, doesn't raise eyebrows anymore because we are used to it. It being their propensity to look America in the eye and tell untruths. I am tired of having a liar in the White House, that's why I do not support Hillary Clinton. I'm tired of the politics as usual.
OBAMA IS GOING TO WIN THE GENERAL ELECTION AND BEAT McCAIN AND BECOME THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA JAN 21 ,2009 .RIGHT NOW YOU ARE SEEING ALL OF THE RACISTS AND HATERS SHOWING THEIR TRUE FEELS WHICH IS A GOOD THING .WE ALREADY KNEW ABOUT THE CLINTONS AND WHAT THEY ARE ABOUT NO SURPRIZE WITH THEM. BARACK IS ON A RIDE I FIND IT WILD THAT ALL THE CABLES AND THE REPORTERS ON THESE CABLECHANNELS WHO ARE NOW ATTACKING HIM LIKE HE MURDER SOMEONE ALL I CAN SAY IS STAY STRONG OBAMA.WE ARE WITH YOU AND WE ARE WATCHING AND WE WILL GET YOU ELECTED.
Hillary made a critical error when she used the word "elitist" to describe Barack Obama. I think she had a small opening, but misused it. Remember how the "plagiarism" attack backfired? Get ready for another recoil, folks. The word "elitist" is not a word a normal-thinking person would use to describe a black man that spent years as a community organizer and civil rights attorney. It is particularly embarassing when the remark comes from a former corporate lawyer turned WalMart shill who just raked in $109 million, and has spent the past 25 years in the most elite sphere of humankind. Clinton can go to all the lengths she wants to try to Kerry-ize Obama, but it will inevitably backfire and tear a massive hole in her already sinking campaign. She should be very careful not to overplay this one.
I totally agree with you on this. Hence, I admit above that her campaign has mostly been "ham-handed." It's kind of a stab in the back to her supporters, really. So, what can I say, she's FAR from perfect!
Since when was Mayhill Fowler a supporter of Obama? I never got that from her blog offerings.
She struck me as more in the Taylor Marsh catagory of Obama supporters ... albeit stealthier.
That's my take too. Is she related to Dan Fowler of the Cinton campaign?
Well face it , Obama supporters accept no critique, so by those standards , perhaps she didn't fill the bill.
If "critique" to you translates as "bullshit" to the rest of us, I'd have to agree.
Golly the title promises a tribute to amateur journalism and immediately turns to Obama supporter bashing. It seems the MSM is not the only body willing to take advantage of the guts of Mayhill Fowler.
But did Fowler do a service? To report what was said is one thing, to cast it as demeaning to a segment of the public is another, without so much as any citation of offense, a self fulfilling prophecy. Had Clinton not been so willing to manufacture an outrage, this would never have gotten past go.
Take a step back. Look at what is at stake. To start, this is NOT the most important election of our lifetimes. The most important election of our lifetimes has already happened, depending on your age, in 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000 and 2004. During these elections, failing to realize what was at stake, Americans did not show up. Leading us to what might be one last chance short of going to the streets, to prevent the capitulation of Democracy to the aristocracy of money.
When it would have been easy to turn back the destructive power of the Right, you were not there in sufficient numbers to alter the outcomes from which we now suffer as a nation. Now that the goals and process have been revealed, its easy to see, but not so easy to undo. To that end, the undoing, we must attend.
Continued
Elitism is a Republican meme. All the best known and most effective progressive Democrats were well heeled. All the landmark progressive policies are products of elite thinking that is motivated by empathy with the plight of the public.
Elitism was manufactured as an issue by the Republican party discredit progressive thinking. No Democrat can run for office anywhere without being labeled an elitist. It is the single most effective Pavlovian response available to the Republicans.
Instead of wondering who will be tarred with the label of elitist, because any Democrat will be, you need to worry about who can deal with it most effectively.
As objective as I can be, and that is damn objective, as a man that turned away from privilege and made his own way, I suggest that Obama is the best candidate to deal with the elitist label. The next few days will tell. The story is compelling and the appellation of privilege cannot be applied to a black man by anyone other than a liar, and everyone knows it. And intelligence is not the core objection to elitism, using that intelligence to do harm is the core issue.
Very Well Said!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
