I am usually not one to pay much attention to the news media manufactured controversies over a remark made by a politician and exploited by opponents. But I feel compelled to comment on the latest episode because the issue at the center of the controversial remarks can be construed, in some ways, as the most important issue in the entire campaign (as unbelievable as that sounds.)
Last week when Barack Obama said that people who have come up against hard times in their communities "get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Hillary Clinton, still pursuing the Democratic nomination against Obama, pounced on this remark to claim that Obama is elitist, out-of-touch and unelectable in small town America. In response, Obama delivered a terrific rebuttal explaining what he meant. (Click here to read a concise summary of the entire affair.)
Elitist, condescending, out of touch - who cares? That's all the dumb rhetorical part of the controversy. Much more importantly, Obama is RIGHT. In 2004 many Americans voted to continue a senseless war in Iraq that is killing people for no reason and draining our country of resources. They voted for policies that have brought America to the brink of economic and fiscal crisis. They voted to allow unsafe mines to operate and lead-contaminated children's' toys to reach market. The voted to torture innocent people, to spy on Americans, and to ignore environmental destruction. Why did Americans vote for these policies? Three reasons: 1) because "the other guy was godless, 2) so that no Democrat would take away their guns, and 3) to insure that gay people could not get married.
We need to get people to direct their focus away from the wedge issues that do not affect our health, happiness and well-being and get the voters to consider the important, substantive issues of the day. And not just the voters of course, the major news outlets also need to emphasize important issues and get away from the red meat. Obama may have been a little off target by seeming to put the blame entirely on the people rather than on the politicians who exploit them (what I really mean is the Republican campaign apparatus), but on the core of the issue, he's right. And as important as the economy, Iraq, health care, education and the environment are, the US will not move forward in addressing these problems until more voters make their choices based on them instead of God, guns and gays.
Watch The Young Turks tackle the important issues here.
Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...
Mo's Blog Roll
Resources
Putting the Controversy Aside, Obama was Right
Posted Apr 13th 2008 10:37AM by David Koller
Filed under: Politics, Young Turks, Barack Obama, Controversy
Mo's Video
The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...
Most Popular Stories
- Don't Like Goodbyes...
- Pittsburgh Steelers: Is it Time to get some Cheerleaders?
- How NOT to give an Oscar Acceptance Speech
- Could Jim Belushi Win the Nobel Peace Prize?
- Spring Break Sexy T-Shirt Removal Training!
- Quest for the Crown 5: Plastic Wrap to Make you Less Fat!
- Quest for the Crown 4: Work Those Heels!
Most Commented On
-
Coming Soon
Recent Comments
- Ryan Anderson on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Botts on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- not-pboyfloyd on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Ryan Anderson on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Roert Dean on General Clark is Absolutely Right!
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Saint Brian the Godless on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
Mo's Bio
Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.
Top News Headlines
Political Machine Blog
- Jimmy Carter's Grandson Runs for Office in Georgia
- Of Babies and Boners: Boxer Compares Access to Abortion to Access to Viagra
- Chaos Theory - Joe Lieberman's Killin' 'em in Vegas
- Federal Panel Says Bailouts Worked, Problems Remain
- Dodd Falls Below 40 Percent Mark in Matchups Against GOP Contenders
- In a Political Popularity Contest, Hillary Clinton Wins
- Public Rates the Economy Over Health Reform as Top Issue by More than 2-to-1
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 6)
61. Could I run for President as a Republican if it were known that I published the following Bombastic Racist Rant?
["I ceased to advertise my mother's race when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to BLACKS."
"It was my father's image, the WHITE MAN, Conqueror of Africa, that I'd package all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Hitler, Attila, Mussolini and Caesar."
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. David Duke, the more politically active WHITE students, the EUROPEAN BLUE BLOOD students. The Vanderbilt's, Carnegie's and Astor's. The ANGLO-SAXON Professors, PATRIOTIC CONFEDERATE Feminists and SOUTHERN REBEL Poets."
"There were enough of us on campus to constitute a PHYLE, and when it came to hanging out, many of us chose to function like a CLAN, staying close together, traveling in packs."
"(I)t remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the PURE masses, to strike out and name names."
I wrote frankly about how to blame "BLACK people – the criminals, the ignorant, the faceless image of a Wealth Transfer System claiming power over our FINANCES."]
Paul Sparcello at 12:34PM on Apr 14th 2008
62. Could I run for President as a Republican if it were known that I published the following Bombastic Racist Rant?
["I ceased to advertise my mother's race when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to BLACKS."
"It was my father's image, the WHITE MAN, Conqueror of Africa, that I'd package all the attributes I sought in myself, the attributes of Hitler, Attila, Mussolini and Caesar."
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. David Duke, the more politically active WHITE students, the EUROPEAN BLUE BLOOD students. The Vanderbilt's, Carnegie's and Astor's. The ANGLO-SAXON Professors, PATRIOTIC CONFEDERATE Feminists and SOUTHERN REBEL Poets."
"There were enough of us on campus to constitute a PHYLE, and when it came to hanging out, many of us chose to function like a CLAN, staying close together, traveling in packs."
"(I)t remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the PURE masses, to strike out and name names."
I wrote frankly about how to blame "BLACK people – the criminals, the ignorant, the faceless image of a Wealth Transfer System claiming power over our FINANCES."]
Paul Sparcello at 12:34PM on Apr 14th 2008
63. gunless...the first comment and the best!
Sums it all up perfectly.
Thank you.
Davidg at 12:35PM on Apr 14th 2008
64. Barack,
Are regular Americans to be considered stupid because we do not hear what you are saying correctly?
Paul Sparcello at 12:37PM on Apr 14th 2008
65. Should Senator Obama have used different words to convey what he was trying to address regarding the state of our nation today in small town America? Due to the quick response from the other two candidates who wasted no time in ridiculing the Senator for speaking the truth, unfortunately the answer is yes, Senator Obama should have used different words to convey exactly what he did say.
However, in my opinion the reason he should have expressed himself differently is not that he was “demining” the people of “small town America”, or that the Senator is out of touch with the issues facing our nation today.
Furthermore, if anyone chooses to take time to listen or read the speech he gave two weeks ago, it is very easy to recognize that there was nothing demining or racist or “elitist” about the message he delivered. On the contrary, it was a message of understanding the frustration people are feeling after years of neglect and empty promises from their very own government.
Alternatively, I wish to use an analogy regarding the intelligence of the “regular” Americans, I find it very sad that advertisers have to make ridiculous disclaimers after advertising a particular medicine. For example, birth control patches, these patches do not protect you from STD or AIDS this is just one of many examples.
In my personal opinion, I find it both ridiculous and extremely convenient to find Senator Obama’s speech “Offensive” I also find it hypocritical. A speech that discusses the reality of what is happening in our wonderful country is perceived as out-of-touch or offensive while invading a sovereign nation based on lies is excused and even supported by many.
While we continue to argue our points regarding who is or who is not out of touch in America today, the citizens of small town America are still loosing jobs that may never come back, and American soldiers continue to die over lies.
Patty at 2:09PM on Apr 14th 2008
66. BLACK POWER church sermons on Christmas day?!?!
Is this how our society has evolved? Will power hungry minorities take over & run their own concentration camps?
Fear causes RACISM. Obama's fear-mongering pastor is bigotry in it's worst form. He is spewing his hate in person, on video, etc. for the world to hear & emulate.
And then I hear on one of Michelle Obama's campaign stops that those words are NO BIG DEAL & make them feel better. Is this a joke??
As a first generation American, I am shocked that anyone is still mentally living in a time of pure hate between the races that all of us thought was a thing of the past or at least going that way.
How many kids heard this message of "hope"? What are the next generation of black children being taught? To be terrorists?
All whites deserve an apology. Many whites support black communities & have even died for the civil rights movement. It starts with the Obamas...
If they are truly different, cut from the same cloth as King...then let's see it!
FLLady at 2:20PM on Apr 14th 2008
67. Obama -- empty shirt.
Angry black man
Ungrateful to his mother and grandparents (white) who were THERE to take care of him his whole life.
Senate accomplishments -- 0000000000000
Obama -- socialist
Obama -- as ANTI-American as they come, even though he's living in the GREATEST nation on earth and has a chance at becoming president.
God bless (and help) America.
Gotta be McCain.
mary at 2:08PM on Apr 14th 2008
68. David
You must be really onto something big! I notice that whenever you or Cenk speak the truth with such insight, the whole Republican attack machine is out in force, not to mention Republicans masquerading as Hillary supporters. Going up against Obama is their worst nightmare. If they can only bring him down, they can then roll out their anti-Hillary campaign they've been working on for eight years.
Bill and Hillary are a piece of work, to be sure. They know they don't stand a chance in the general election now that they have alienated 90% of the Black vote and the millions of other voters who yearn for government that is responsive to the needs of middle and low income Americans.( Maybe they think they can send Bill back out with his sunglasses and saxophone and make up with Black voters)
It's obvious what they are trying to do: destroy Obama and regroup for 2012. In the process, they have shown themselves to be cold, calculating egomaniacs who I would never support again.
saneinva at 3:10PM on Apr 14th 2008
69. Born and raised in the South, and I can tell you one thing about red-staters - they only care about God, guns, gays and abortion (you can't be elected dog-catcher in our town unless you are anti-abortion). War, foreign policy, the economy, the environment, health care - these are not issues they care about. Obama was right, but he was a fool to say that out loud! He is not electable, and the Democratic party would be even more foolish to nominate him to be their candidate!
Sarah at 3:15PM on Apr 14th 2008
70. I have finally figured out why AOL continues to support your blog, Cenk. It's due to the fact that you make people feel good about themselves. After they read (or listen to) your post, they realize that you are significantly more ignorant than they are. Therefore, thank you Cenk, for your work in enhancing everyone else's self-confidence level.
David Pitlock at 3:37PM on Apr 14th 2008
71. "Barack,
Are regular Americans to be considered stupid because we do not hear what you are saying correctly?"
Yes. Exactly. The same stupid ones that keep voting for idiots.
Botts at 4:00PM on Apr 14th 2008
72. Ahhh, another leftie with no clue:
A) We're not "spying on Americans", unless you count taping a call coming from OUTSIDE THE US from or to a known terrorist sympathizer "spying". Only a coward would think it is.
B) "torture innocent people" .. already well documented that good intel that led to captured and/or kills of terrorists came from coercive questioning. Bring it on!
C) as far as "lead contaminated toys" are concerned, it's your precious ignorant Liberals in Congress that repeatedly squash anything that even smells of tightenting up security
Lay off the dope, stop watching Oprah, and write another article when you have a clue, princess.
Joe Vala at 4:22PM on Apr 14th 2008
73. IF OBAMA WINS OVER HILLARY THE DEM.WILL LOSE IN NOV.
AND YOU CAN BET YOUR ASS ON THAT.
jim at 5:24PM on Apr 14th 2008
74. Reading most of these comments, I'm tempted to say that Obama was far too charitable in his commentary.
But the problem you stupid, "conservatives" have is that Obama was standing up for you. You choose to interpret his remarks in the way that suits you. But then if your I.Q.'s were above room temperature dick & bush would be in prison or never have been allowed to steal the executive branch to begin with.
All you have done is proven Obama correct.
Captain Negative at 6:11PM on Apr 14th 2008
75. I'm not sure why so many "debates” come down to false dichotomies: "liberal" vs. "conservative."
I wrote the first post and tried to point out that the words that matter MOST when it comes to candidates are the words that distort, slant, intimidate, and hence INHIBIT, DEFLECT blame, or CONTROL the debate. These sorts of tactics, employed by politicians and the press, tend to focus on NON-issues, or on the most emotionally-charged issues, giving both powers an OUT as regards responsibility to the public.
Using the term "Anti-immigrant" to not-so-subtly cast racist aspersions instead of discussing, HONESTLY, the economic and social ramifications of the issue of "ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION" is perfectly Orwellian.
By REFUSING to differentiate between legal and illegal, as well as between immigration and immigrant, Obama, and, to be honest, MOST REPUBLICANS and Democrats, until relatively recently, (and most of the press even currently) have enabled the non-enforcement of immigration law status-quo that has led to the underground economy that is a REAL issue that has reached crisis status as regards economic and environmental resources (see open space, droughts, wages, healthcare, welfare, falling dollar, recession). Legal American citizens, including legal immigrants, have not only a right, but a duty to expect and ultimately DEMAND that their interests are the first priority of their representatives at ALL levels of government.
This same conflation of right and left has enabled the overuse of outsourcing, with the billionaire likes of Bill Gates continually calling for MORE HB1 visas so he can pay LESS (while patting himself on the back for helping out the "third world" while creating a bigger one here) ensuring that our country does NOT employ or educate more American citizens for high-tech jobs.
What enables one to be “elitist’ or out of touch, is wealth. The wealthy can BUY nature; they can even buy homes in other countries should this one go belly-up. They don’t have to worry about 401 ks and such. I’m talking about the extremely wealthy, over 7-figures. And, much as I love her comedy, this category includes J. Garofalo and most stars. This doesn’t mean that all wealthy people are evil or even that they all “don’t get it.” It does mean that far too many wealthy people in the press, in politics, and in entertainment, have a disproportionate voice in the discourse, and many of them DON’T get it, whether they‘re coming from what is labeled ‘right “ or left.” (Let me add that I think many artists and comedians are incredibly astute and helpful as regards social discourse, and I can't imagine a world without them.)
The other thing that enables one to be elitist is power. The term Noblesse Oblige comes to mind: with power, responsibility. To some degree it is the human condition to be solipsistic, to see things form one‘s own experience. To be fully compassionate we need to try hard to see past our own circumstances. This is true for all, but especially for those with wealth, health, and political power. Self-congratulatory hubris is the exact opposite of what is needed in leaders.
As for the aspersions Obama cast over religion, as many have pointed out-- glass houses-- and as for guns-- Is RURAL gun violence really the PRIMARY gun problem we have in the U.S. today, or is it urban gun violence?
It may be argued that fanatics have kept some reasonable gun control measures from being enacted that might make our society safer without infringing on the intent of the second amendment. But this issue is always being debated. And there is debate and disagreement within both “urban’ and “rural” communities.
To accuse an entire state and all rural people of being at the bottom of everything reactionary and evil in the U. S. is extremely ignorant.
Edwards saw ‘two’ Americas but he was talking about the haves and have-nots, and trying to focus on issues of economic fairness and plain economic practicality and sanity. To a large degree he forced this issue and forced Senator Clinton to be more realistic, which she has been, to her credit. Obama still seems to be ‘above’ many real issues. Yet when he makes a clumsy gaffe it’s called truth rather than, at best, ignorance.
Elitism is probably marked most by privilege and wealth. Some wealthy people work very hard to understand the role that circumstance plays in most people's lives. Others don't. Some scapegoat and stereotype. Others don’t.
Obama does not seem to get it, nor do his followers. It is NOT about left and right. The entire country, INCLUDING Obama and the entire government, has moved to the right as regards economics. To a large degree we need to think and speak in different terms. The world continues to change dramatically, and the old ways of thinking of liberal and conservative just aren‘t relevant or adequate-- or accurate.
Especially the concept of “free” vs. “unfree” trade. Look at Communist China, an incredibly repressive regime with ’free’” trade that is crushing our “capitalist’ economy. A vibrant, democratic capitalism always requires checks and balances. The right like to call these “regulations,’ but we all depend on them, as does a sound economy. Right now globalization is far too unfettered at the expense of the U.S. economy. It will not trickle down to the middle or poor.
Trouble with Obama is he vacillates between one extreme and another, when what we need is someone with practicality and wisdom about THIS country's interests, as well as about the world at large.
It's Senator Clinton. Or possibly Nader, but I'll be practical on this one.
gunless at 11:52PM on Apr 14th 2008