Barack Obama, John Kerry and Access Hollywood

I've just read Erica Jong's excellent piece on Hillary Clinton in the Huffington Post and though I agree with much of what she writes, I don't think it goes far enough in making some fundamental points about the Democratic race. I see far more than sexism in the denegration of Hillary Clinton; I see ageism at its most malevolent. Thanks to the Hollywoodization (ugly word, forgive me for it) of the news, exemplified in the Obama candidacy, candidates are put on a red carpet to be examined much as film stars on the way to the Oscars. There is a voracious lust for the new, voters are now viewed as a fan base rather than an informed citizenry, and experience is regarded as a negative. We lust after the fresh faced fast talking candidate as we do the new big-screen star, the thinnest, largest TV, and the latest Apple gadget, spitting out those who have demonstrated probity, pragmatism, and wisdom, as indigestible old virtues in today's world.

Of course people who have been around the block have made mistakes - serious mistakes - the vote on the war being a perfect example of a serious Hillary blunder, one that gives me pause, but such mistakes cannot be blown up to such a size that they rob the candidates of the valuable experienced garnered, the decency of past acts, and the possibility of future greatness. The disposal of Dodd, Richardson, and Biden, the most informed, most experienced of the Democratic candidates, is telling to me. It says that America has now become a huge supermarket fan magazine where the photogenic are the only viable candidates. Pluck out that gray hair or cover it with bleach and for God's sake go for an eye-job if you want to run a race in America today, or better yet, speak in such obfuscating generalities that you are everything to everyone, and thus nothing to anyone.

If you think this is an attack on Barack Obama, it's not. Yes, I am suspicious of the schoolgirl/schoolboy crush that so many otherwise bright and caring people have upon this candidate - it appears to me to be more high school than real life - unless one regards high school as real life - and even I can see his many virtues. Idealism has its charms, aiming high can get you to the moon, but still...but still...I worry about his approach to political life which has too much of the grandiose about it, too much the acceptance speech and too little of the practical. I may well choose to vote for him when all is said and done, when I hear more about what his plans are for this country's daunting problems (not the talking points he puts out on his web page, but the talking points he actually speaks in a debate) but for the moment I am reserving judgment, something that John Kerry might well have done, if he was not so eager to attach himself to a rising star, and slap down his older Senate colleagues. Incidentally, I thought his endorsement of Obama was a travesty - it was so full of gas and cliches it was more like an ad for Tums than the considered evaluation of the candidates. Maybe life with Theresa, a smart, plain speaking woman, is rough enough to make him turn against the Clinton candidacy, but as one who has been married forever to a smart, plain speaking woman, I find the wisdom of such women something to treasure, and not to be dismissed by the glamour of the current Hollywood political star. Can someone please tell me what is wrong with waiting and seeing, with reading, watching and evaluating the candidates carefully? Why this rush to judgment? Of course I know the answer, or at least a part of it. The political press has become just another form of star chasing paparazzi, and that is part of my deep concern about this coming election.

Comments

[neworleanslady68]

Also, electronic media may be exaggerating star power in our politics, but only a fool with no knowledge of American history fails to understand that star power has ALWAYS been a part of our democratic poliitcs. It goes back to the days of the Founders - John Adams, to choose just one example, was always bitter about Thomas Jefferson's greater fame and recognition. And, no, it wasn't because Jefferson looked younger and thinner on television either (although he was younger and thinner).

[neworleanslady68]

What utter garbage. It's not that experience is being viewed as a negative. It's that Clinton's record shows us militarism, corporatism, and a cynical politics that employs smear tactics, insinuation, and outright lies (example: the "Obama isn't pro-choice" flyers mailed out in New Hampshire).

In fact, I have a lot of respect for experience, particularly the RIGHT experience. I respect John Kerry's experience (Kerry, incidentally, has clearly said that his vote on the war was a mistake, while Senator Clinton has not; your calling Clinton's vote a "blunder" is dismissive of and disrespectful to those who have lost loved ones in this illegal and immoral venture in empire). I respect John Kerry enough to know that he didn't endorse Obama because he thought it would be politically expedient but rather because he has looked closely at Obama's policy positions and decided Obama is the best presidential choice among the remaining candidates. I don't see how anyone can claim Kerry is anything but thoughtful and careful. Clearly, he has managed to get himself informed. Perhaps he's read Obama's two books and his many position papers. The author of this blog would do well to try the same, especially before accusing Obama supporters of having high school crushes rather than informed political opinions.

Kerry's speech in support of Obama was wonderful. Consider the fact that Kerry, twenty years older than Obama, had the guts to stand up there and talk about passing on the torch, even though Kerry too has had presidental ambitions! It was extremely generous and selfless.

Also, if you want to comment on someone and be taken seriously, you really should take the time to at least learn to spell that person's name correctly, yes? The wife of Senator Kerry is Teresa, not "Theresa."

And as if your ignorance of the woman's name didn't tell us all we need to know, this does:

"Maybe life with Theresa, a smart, plain speaking woman, is rough enough to make him turn against the Clinton candidacy...."

Nothing further. That says plenty enough about where you're coming from.

[whimsicalpig]

After 7 years of hell waiting for america to come to its senses and banish the ilk of bush and company from our political lives, I am forlorn and desperate about what has recently transpired in the democratic party.

We are left without ANY viable candidate to run against John McCain.

And believe me, the powers that be in the republican party realise he is their best hope of securing a victory in 2008.

I can't quite decide if it was pre-ordained by the democratic leaders that only the most corporately sponsored candidates would make it past NH or just a function of so much special interest money that enabled a media blackout on those not supping at the corporate teet.

Either way, we have been hamstrung by the loss of Biden, Dodd and Richardson so early in the contest.

Any hopes of substantive dicussion of truely important issues has been sidelined by the dog and pony show we will have to endure as the remaining 3 flawed candidates claw at each other until the least mortally wounded is left to go against McCain.

It's bad enough that reid and pelosi have gutted what was to be a democratic resurrection in 2006 by their inability to find their spines.

Now we have bet the farm on 3 unelectable egomaniacs.

[OckhamsElectricRazor]

Of all places for Kerry to make an endorsement! The South. The very place that his campaign not only abandoned, but the place that he actually overtly launched insults. If Bush had run in the South unopposed, he would have lost!!

[guru75]

It suprises me how venemous some of the Obama supporters are. Is this how you show the politics of hope? A sober, considered piece which tries to point out some of the weakness in the Obama candidacy is reviled because the author refuses to fall into line immediately behind your candidate. Let's all of us show more civility in discussing the candidates and the issues in what may be the most important election of our lifetimes.

[hallste7]

Sherman Yellen, you suck. I started out for Hillary. When I watched EVERY ONE of the debates. I watched that her answer was a cover for an answer. I saw Obama handle the questions with directness and honesty even when it didn't seem to sparkle. I decided to support the candidate with actual substance as opposed to pretend substance (Hillary's resume). Resumes are not substance. Intelligently engaging the voters do require substance.

So, don't you tell me it's sex appeal that has me interested in Barack Obama. The way in which you and your ilk are emasculating Obama and his supporters by making him out to be an anemic, meatless candidate sucks. The only reason you need to talk so much about how much more substance Hillary has than Obama is because somewhere in your mind you know that her resume doesn't seem to add up to a great leader and you wish it did.

So, you need to overcompensate by saying that those of us who support a substantive candidate are engaged in a school-child crush. You insult yourself with this trash dude.

[TheKiddy]

Great post! Fan-tastic.

[MsObvious]

Dear Mr. Obama,
Unfortunately, I suppose I've inadvertently become a cynic.
I'm somewhat suspicious of the motives of the Democratic Party in the guise of John Kerry, Pelosi's BFF George Miller and others throwing their support to you so early in the Primary season. Suspicious and highly offended that they attempt to steal the party memberships' right to participate in the selection of a Democratic presidential candidate. I don't need the Democratic party to anoint a prince for me, I would prefer they just avoid interfering with the democratic process. Gives the perception that you are more of an insider to the status quo of the Democratic party then I initially perceived, hence Mrs. Clinton the so-called Washington insider appears less so. Eight years ago the Republican party propped up a puppet the party leaders could easily control. I question whether the Democratic party is now rallying round a wunderkind for the same purpose.
Now the DNCC, instead of going to OZ - to get a clue, a spine and some courage is sitting behind the old curtain giving us the old Razzle Dazzle. After a term of empty promises (ending the war for one) and pointless posturing (threats to cut war funding despite the lack of a veto-proof majority) the DNCC comes knocking on my door yet again like a neglectful lover hoping to woo me back with a bright and shiny sparkly "new" candidate. Well, I'm not rolling over this time... show me some substance. I'm glad we share a dream, but we need a plan too.

[Kreskytim]

Great post. It gave me pause the other day when a press person discribed an Obama supporter as a "fan". News has become infotainment. Be leary of it.

[MarjorieG]

Having been an admirer of Kerry's for years, I know he would not take this endorsement lightly. His words were impassioned, reminding me of his own campaign of hope, solutions, and "making friends on this planet." Feels full circle to me.

For many months, he would remind there are more candidates than the top tier the media selected. He's worked closely with Biden and Dodd for years, and probably waited until the field naturally winnowed and the Barack campaign sensed it time. Whatever anyone feels about this match, it's sincere and comes from knowing the country needs dramatic and "transformational" change to accomplish what it needs to.

If Bill Clinton had spoken of the need for change in 04, not just how he couldn't fault Bush, maybe place sitting for Hillary, we might have had a different result. We didn't need to wait these last years for Bill and Hill to return to the stage. I like Hillary, just not the team surrounding her. They can't accomplish what we need.

[BUSHsurvivor]

Oh the obamaniacs can spin just like Karl and Georgie and Dickie.

Once again Obama gives no specifics in his economic recovery plan...just more pretty talk...

[teahead]

Where are the tears shed for the thousands of Iraqi children killed thanks to her vote for the Iraq War???

[teahead]

OH please, if you can't take the heat...


Agism...now that's a new one. Wasn't it Bill who said: "I can't make her any taller, younger, etc."?

Quit whining. She polarizing b/c she will not show any regrets for voting for the Iraq War. She's overly cautious and won't take a position until she evaluates polls.

She's no Barbara Boxer.

She's no Nancy Pelosi.

She's no Patty Murray.

She's the biggest war hawk in the Democratic Party. She felt she needed to be hawkish to not look weak.

You look weak when all you do is follow opinion polls!

SHe'll also be known by the black community for being the roadblock that prevented the best chance in the next 100 years of a black man ever being President.

[patrice37]

Ageism? Say what? I am an old woman who likes Obama because (1) he chose to be a community organizer when he could have signed on with Goldman Sachs, (2) his wonkishness led him to become a constitutional law prof and state legislator instead of a law-firm bonus baby, and (3) his judgment on the war, among other things, has been dead on. (Mrs. Clinton may have learned from her mistakes, but so did Robert MacNamara. There is such a thing as too late.) Believe me, I couldn't care less what Senator Obama looks like or whether he has cool friends on Face Book or MySpace or whatever it is. I only care about who will lead my grandchildren's country.

[secondedition]

I disagree with you on Senator Kerry's motives and agree in regards to the press making our presidential race into something superficial and fluffy.
As for Senator Kerry, as a long term Kerry supporter, I believe his endorsement of Senator Obama is genuine. It had more to do with moving the Democrat Party into the future and the promise of progress and nothing at all to do with the fact that Senator Clinton happens to be a female. You can not argue the fact the Clinton machine has had its grips on the party for years now. Nothing gets accomplished if that wing of the party is opposed to it. As is evident, this tug of war within our party had not been good for us. We have lost our identity and some unity. Senator Obama offers a fresh start. His message is positive; he is energetic, smart and well spoken. He is an appealing candidate. Yes, he has a lot to learn, but if he surrounds himself with good people and he listens to them, he could be possibly being a good president. Senator Kerry has worked side by side with Mr. Obama. They have worked on bills together. Mr. Kerry gave Mr. Obama national recognition during his 2004 campaign. Maybe, Senator Kerry knows a little more than we do about what Senator Obama can deliver and what he can't.
I still remain undecided on my candidate of choice, but Senator Kerry's endorsement of Mr. Obama has given me a lot more to consider as I attempt to choose that candidate.