I posted a couple of days ago regarding the recent remarks on bitterness, religion and guns by Barack Obama. That post got mentioned briefly on Tim Blair’s fine website, and I must say my favorite bit of commentary on the whole subject was left by a reader there named “Paco”; excerpting it would be pointless — you should read it all (headed: “At the gun-cleaning-bee in a small rural town in North Carolina.”)

…

The key Obama quote, again, is this:

And it’s not surprising, then, they 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.

Also received an e-mail from a reader with the economical moniker “DO” who says:

Based on what preceded those remarks you quoted by Obama, I still can’t see it as a direct judgment on religion. It seems more likely that he’s speaking about the issues people vote on, not saying that the only reason they found religion is because their jobs went away and they got angry.

This is what came directly before the snippet:

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them…And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not.”

So they don’t believe any economically-centered political narrative anymore, instead “clinging” to hot-button issues, of the gun-control, religion, or immigration variety. What follows may be one hell of a lousy sound bite, but it doesn’t seem entirely unreasonable in context.

Well, when it’s all explained for Barack like that, it may not seem entirely unreasonable, so long as you agree with the idea that people in much of small town America have given up in bitterness and frustration on the possibility of any economic prosperity and now only vote on religion, guns and immigration. It is reminiscent of the kind of thesis put forth in the book “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”. It’s the idea that many people vote against what would be their economic self-interest — best aided, naturally, by the Democratic party — due to their foolish prioritizing of what are called “social” issues, like abortion, gun rights etc. Part of the theory is that these people have also been duped by the dastardly Republicans into voting in this way (perhaps also Republicans never plan on delivering on an issue like abortion, but just prefer to keep waving it like a carrot to get votes).

If you impute all these notions to explain Barack Obama’s comments, the problem is that these notions themselves are inherently condescending. People in Kansas, or small town Pennsylvania, we are to believe, aren’t smart enough to understand what’s good for them. If they should choose to vote for someone whose values they agree with in regard to abortion or gun rights, versus someone who might — say — vote to boost the minimum wage, then naturally they’re making the wrong decision. Why? Well, because elitists like Senator Barack Obama say so.

I don’t see how the debate thus expanded makes him come out better. At least, from the point of view of someone like me, who is, of-course, not a Democrat primary voter.

…

An ironic aspect of this whole brouhaha is that people like me appear to be throwing our lot in behind Hillary Clinton. She likely believes much the same thing as what Obama expressed, and the positions she is taking in the past couple of days are just cynically tactical (surprise, surprise). But I truly hope never to descend into the abyss of trying to figure out what Hillary Clinton believes about anything, deep in her soul.

The really cheering thing is that this whole argument is occurring at all. What Rush Limbaugh calls (and joyfully takes complete credit for) “Operation Chaos” is a wonderful thing to behold. It could be, indeed, that Republicans tactically crossing over and voting for Hillary Clinton have helped extend this Democratic contest, but the degree to which that’s true is ultimately unknowable. The importance of it being extended, however, can’t be overstated. Had Obama already sealed the nomination, these remarks of his at a private San Francisco fund-raiser would probably never have been reported on the Huffington Post in the first place. Even reported, they would likely not have been picked up by the mainstream media. Sure, the conservative blogs would fulminate (if they heard of the remarks) and Fox News might give them a mention, but to most liberal journalists and editors, there would be nothing of news value in what he said, for the simple and all-powerful reason that they agree with it. Move along; nothing to be seen here. Small-town people are quaint, but foolish in their conservatism — so what? The McCain campaign could still use the issue in ads, potentially, but the mainstream media would not be around helping out by treating the issue as actual news.

The reason why it is actual news, now, is because there is still a Democratic primary contest going on. The media are not about to ignore Hillary Clinton’s expressions of outrage on the subject. That’s news. This kind of focus in the mainstream media on missteps and flaws in the candidacies of Obama and Clinton will continue just as long as they are two Democrats competing with each other for the nomination. It will all but end when the Democratic party has a nominee; then, get ready to receive both barrels about all the flaws of John McCain: age, temper, alleged instability and every inconsistency he’s ever exhibited. The New York Times was merely warming up earlier this year with their innuendo-filled story of lobbyists and infidelity.

And that’s a reason I disagree with those who think that, with the damage now done to the credibility of both Democrats, this election now stands as McCain’s to lose. There’s a lot of baseball to be played, as they say, and you can score — or give up — plenty of runs in the last two innings or so. It remains to be seen how good a closer Senator John McCain will prove to be. He needs all the help that every day of this Democratic contest provides.

So, speaking as a naked partisan on this subject, here’s to Barack and Hillary arguing about guns, religion, bitterness, lies, and anything else they can think of, all the way from Pennsylvania to Denver, and from now till the end of August.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• A bitter taste
• Like Hill
• Strange show