Reflections on Today’s Campaign Speeches
Bill Clinton as Jimmy Swaggert
Bill can’t stop campaigning if he wanted to. He can’t cease talking about himself if he was paid a billion dollars. He can’t stop lusting after the limelight of the White House at any price.
But he can change his approach after almost losing the nomination for his wife and himself. So today’s appearance at a Los Angeles African-American Church saw a reconstituted Bill Clinton as the Reverend Swaggert begging for forgiveness after one of his assorted sins.
Yes, he still talked about his brilliant administration as the chief reason to have his wife continue it. In praising Al Gore he talked of “we”. But now there was no more finger pointing, no more red-faced, cheek-swelling outbursts, and no more flashing eyes and thundering voice.
Instead, we got the swollen, teary-eyed reminiscences about his impoverished parent. His voice was at times barely audible. His pauses went on for a few seconds, as he carefully drew his breath and like Ajax in his soliloquy solemnly went on. He bit his lip enough no doubt to require minor surgery. He paused and then went on in sad mournful tones. He often let out a self-effacing, heartfelt muffled laugh.
If Bill before slandered, accused and lectured at poor us who did not appreciate his genius, he now evoked Jesus, as his prophet to politely beg us to vote for him and her. “We all want to be in a gang,” he tearfully stammered to his African-American audience, as he reminded his listeners that he learned about gangs from none other than Maxine Waters—the most prominent Californian African-American to endorse his wife.
One final note. Bill kept talking of “Our government doesn’t————”. Fill in the blanks how we shortchange veterans, blacks, students, the poor, the indebted, the homeowner, and the sick. Aside from whether his accusations are true (most are not), one wonders, are not these so-called pathologies of longer standing than the past seven years? Were there no foreclosures, none without health insurance, no homeless, no racism, no evil whatsoever during his own tenure? Did George Bush alone undo all that Bill Clinton had bequeathed?
McCain’s Case rested
I’m neither a political scientist nor working for any particular candidate. Instead, as a historian I simply look at the Republican race empirically, as an observer who came to an understandable conclusion that (1) McCain is not that much more liberal than his Republican rivals or the actual record of recent Republican presidents such as Gerald Ford, the two Bushes, and Ronald Reagan. Note that if one uses conservative indices like the American Conservative Union’s, or those of the liberal counterparts like the Americans for Democratic Action, McCain scores in the 80s on the conservative side, Obama and Clinton below 10; on liberal scorecards the reverse is true. (2) Given the recent drift leftward, and the opening given by the Clinton drive-by attack on Obama, McCain has some chance to capture enough independents and moderates turned off by the Clinton roguery to squeak by.
That said, the race is not over, and Romney supporters should continue to promote his cause until the delegate count is decided. I understand that the base is angry not just because of McCain’s immigration or tax cut heresies, but mostly one of attitude and past pride in opposing conservatives. The complaint then is often that ‘McCain snubbed us once in an unnecessary condescending manner, but kisses up now since he can’t win without us” . Perhaps all that is true. But I would prefer to look to conservatives’ own self-interest—and it is not with Hillary or Barack.
My interest is not antipathy to Mitt Romney. I met and liked him. I have no grudge against Mike Huckabee. But I fear, I confess, another eight years of Bill Clinton—never brought home more than by his recent multimillion-dollar glad-handing trip to Kazakhstan to cement a uranium deal for Frank Giustra, who then donated generously to his various foundations.
Ms. Obama
I have now seen her speak three times on television on C-Span. She is attractive, bright, and educated, an effective communicator (though verbose and prone to go on too long), and the most impressive of the potential first wives still in the race. But she seems right on the edge. As she goes on and on without a scripted text, she starts to tense up and gets a little angry and then makes the implicit case that a vote for her husband is a sort of redemption for the entire country. Again, there is no argument on specifics. Never does she say: vote for Barack because of the a-z platform. Instead, the appeal is that we all will be morally better; she and Barack have suffered more than the rest of us, but can offer us still a sort of redemption.
A common target is once again “they” and “the government”— those nameless faceless people that have done everything wrong and bad and stupid to hurt folks like Ms. Obama and her husband, who went to Harvard law school and became professionals and live well, but have suffered since, she insists, because they only recently paid off their student loans (going to Harvard Law School is not a birthright, but for most quite expensive). No mention is made that this is the world’s wealthiest country, the destination of the worlds’ immigrants, or an amazingly humane and creative place– only that “it hasn’t gotten better.”
Ms. Schwarzenegger
Maria Shriver spoke as well on behalf of Sen. Obama today, even as her husband endorsed Sen. McCain. Rather than try to convince strangers to vote for Obama, she should try to convince the governor to endorse him. But her endorsement was once again framed in religious tones—we find salvation by “going beyond the labels” and voting for a self-labeled black candidate? It also again reminds me of Clinton today singing Hillary’s multifaceted strengths that he apparently in the most gratuitous fashion in the past had serially disdained. (e.g., if Obama is so great and we strangers are to be swayed by her endorsement, why not first sway the Governator?)
Oprah as Jesse?
One wonders whether Oprah has overdone it a bit for Obama. She was not reflective like Bill at today’s UCLA rally in her usual talk-how therapeutic host mode, but angry, fiery, fully in campaign form, with full black intonation and a hint of the Southern preaching style, as much evident on the stump as she eschews it in her syrupy talk show. Ms. Winfrey should learn from Bill; he squandered his faux-statesman persona by campaigning crassly; she may lose her Dr. Phil trust-me endearment by morphing into a female nice version of a partisan Jesse Jackson.
A final note. After Winfrey talks about gender and race ad nauseam, she quickly notes that race and gender have nothing to with the election. The effect on the casual listener who is not hypnotized is surreal. Barack Obama is considered the “black” candidate; his white mother and the complete outsourcing of his formative years and education to his mother and her parents go unspoken. And this is to bring us together?
The subtexts of today’s speeches by the Obama and Clinton supporters are that the perennial culpable white male has finally met his nemesis. He can pay penance for past sins by voting for either a woman or someone of mixed racial heritage. We can unite the nation only by endorsing candidates whose first identification is apparently to their race or gender—something that would be considered abominable for the white male.
But when I think of white male, I don’t evoke a billionaire John Kerry or Ted Kennedy, but thousands of poorer, blue collar whites here in southern Fresno County, who live a world apart from Ms. Obama, or Ms. Winfrey or Ms. Schwarzenegger, and are hardly a “they” or “them.” In this regard, Mike Huckabee’s Lava Soap speech today almost matched Ms. Obama’s pain for pain, hunger for hunger—but praised the past generations rather than blamed them.
The final irony? The way the election is going, the Obama and Clinton obsession on race and gender will ultimately so alienate the demonized white (but middle and lower class) male that he might really vote, in sheer contrarian fashion, with some consideration of race and gender in a way that he would not have before.
As my old Swedish cowboy grandfather used to say as he lumbered around his barnyard, trotting a wild horse in a vast circle tied to a stake and gasping from his gassed lungs at the daily idiocy— Iyiyi!
PJM Home
A War Like No Other How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War
Carnage and Culture: Landmark Battles in the Rise to Western Power
Mexifornia : A State of a Becoming
Why the West Has Won: Nine Landmark Battles in the Brutal History of Western Victory
Between War and Peace: Lessons from Afghanistan to Iraq
The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece (Paperback)
Wars of the Ancient Greeks (Smithsonian History of Warfare) (Paperback)
Who Killed Homer: The Demise of Classical Education and the Recovery of Greek Wisdom
Fields Without Dreams : Defending the Agrarian Ideal (Paperback)
The Soul of Battle: From Ancient Times to the Present Day, How Three Great Liberators Vanquished Tyranny
The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War (Paperback)
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
25 Comments
1. Jim Rockford:The problem us conservatives have with McCain is that we believe he will be no different than Hillary, and perhaps worse, in office.
While he has an 80% ACU rating, lifetime, I suspect it would be around Ted Kennedy’s rating in the last six years or so.
McCain has a habit of betraying conservative principles after first agreeing with them, out of a “moral” stance and to please his NYT pals.
The stories about McCain nearly joining the Democratic Party in 2001 are emblematic of problems Conservatives have with McCain. He’s a Scoop Jackson Democrat not really a Republican. In some ways he’d be worse than Hillary.
Hillary at least would keep every measure possible to prevent another 9/11, including wiretaps on AQ, renditions, Gitmo, and a host of other means that McCain opposes. The last think Hillary could afford would be another 9/11 because it would get her impeached and convicted. A nuclear 9/11 would erase the Democratic Party forever and make Hillary the most hated President in history, easily outstripping Nixon. She knows this.
McCain? He’d feel he was “right” and shrug it off. His personality includes zilch political fear and that is unwholesome in a President. He more than Hillary is likely to balance staying in Iraq with namby-pamby, Liberal-PC-Multicultural WoT policies that are likely to get America nuked. Mostly, forgoing surveillance/intel opportunities because it would upset the NYT and his own sensibilities.
Bottom line: I’d trust the naked self-interest at Nixonian levels of Hillary over McCain’s sense that his PC platitudes are always right. But I’d vote for McCain over Obama. Who would be a total disaster.
Feb 4, 2008 - 1:06 am 2. vb:When I hear Hillary’s line about cleaning up after the Bushes, I would like to remind her that the Lincoln bedroom needed a good disinfection after Devito and a few other guests. I have no doubt that they would resume polluting it for contributions to Bill’s ego.
Feb 4, 2008 - 2:58 am 3. RE:Conservatives look at McCain the way soldiers look at traitors. Soldiers have more respect for the enemy soldier. McCain must have known there was a price to be paid for putting is stick in the eye of the conservatives at every opportunity. He made the calculation. Now conservatives are expected supposed to warm up to him because he won a primary election? I have difficulty with that.
This election is about how deep into the bunker we’re going to have to go.
I’m with Romney. He doesn’t vilify private enterprise.
Feb 4, 2008 - 5:40 am 4. MrUniteUs:I was there and it was great uplifting event. Caroline Kennedy kicked it off saying that people have told her they haven’t been as inspired since JFK.
Feb 4, 2008 - 5:49 am 5. Dale:Oprah reved up the crowd, and was kind enough to the football fans in attendance. Michelle Obama inspired to the crowd sharing her own story and the love and respect she has for her husband. Maria Shriver was the big suprise, and drew standing O’s. I got home in time to catch the start of the Second quarter of the Super Bowl. It turned out to be a super day.
Todays white male has no sin against blacks or women! To vote for either based on race or sex is ludicrous.
The only sin that a white male could part take in today would be to vote for any Democrap, including McLiberal.
Feb 4, 2008 - 6:29 am 6. Gary:I don’t know why someone like VDH, who in the past has been a for a strong stance against illegal immigration, could possibly support McCain.
Yes Hillary is no better but we could mobilize our opposition to amnesty easier with her in charge, personally I don’t think she would push it in her first term anyway. McCain is OK on the overseas aspects of the WOT (although his grandstanding on torture and closing GITMO is a negative) but he is horrible on domestic security. No way I will ever vote for McCain, even if Obama were the Dem nominee.
Feb 4, 2008 - 6:30 am 7. Tim J:Thank you for not counting Mitt Romney out too soon. I have been with him from the start and a lot of other people are starting to gather to him. He is within 10 pledged delegates of McCain after his Maine win, and that is not much of a gap when considering how many delegates are left.
Also, when I saw a clip of FOXNews where McCain and Hillary were both on together for a couple minutes, I realized I don’t feel safe having McCain in the same room with Hillary, let alone trying to debate her. I don’t know why but he got very nervous when they brought her on. She looked a bit akward trying to talk to him, but he was knocked way off his game. When he made the last joke about starting the debate between them now, I could tell that it was the last thing in the world he wanted to do. The joke and the nervous chuckle sounded like he was trying to cover up how intimidated he was by her.
Mitt will stand strong for Conservatism no matter who the opponent. Unfortunatly he has already had to do that in the primaries against some of the Republicans. I am sure I would much rather fight for Conservative America against a Democrate than a supposed Republican.
I stand for Conservatism with Mitt this election.
Feb 4, 2008 - 6:51 am 8. Vincent Richardson:The above article is nothing other than smear tactics.
Feb 4, 2008 - 7:59 am 9. Sweating Through Fog:McCain’s being against torture is not something unique to the New York Times! Torture is an un-American abomination that knows no justification – and anyone who argues for it has both perverted himself and put his eternal soul in jeopardy. It is unreliable and unethical. It is against the honored armed services manual.
General Douglas MacArthur said – and then backed it up by action, that he would persue any ne’er-do-well over the globe and prosecute him relentlessly for torturing a prisoner.
A delusion has come over anyone who can so bring themselves to be the prisoner of such irrational hate of a very great American hero, John McCain. Winning the Silver Star and the DFC (Distinguihed Flying Cross), McCain’s sheer goodness is being unjustly and falsely represented.
Approbation of conservatives is thoroughly due, however, to Romney, so low as to disown one’s previous “deeply personally held” views of Pro-Abortion (and the first state in the Union to go, under his ‘watch’, Pro Gay Marriage!) and then forswears such “deeply personal” convictions for mere expedience because you want to run for president. What temerity!
Approbation of conservatives is due someone, Romney, who made money in leveraged buyouts that gutted families lives and careers, from a Caribeean off-shore Cayman Island tax-free shelter.
Romney, by the way has not been vetted yet. Since he has done this kind of sharkthroat business, its only a matter of time until Patrick Fitzgerald gets ahold of him.
“Due diligence” is thus required of all citizens, because deception is being promoted on the part of a slowly creeping late night fascist cult. False religion is no mere laughing matter.
McCain, is being treated no differently than Winston Churchill, who also pointed out the late night Vichy ‘quizlings’ and appeasers of fascism among the materially greedy in his own party. Who sell their own country for a dollar.
When will conservatives understand that the military wants honesty in their commanders-in-chief, because their lives are on the line, as well as yours and mine! And you better tell the truth. Such is the truthful practice and experience of John McCain.
The true conservative wants to, like Churchill and McCain, conservative honesty, conserve integrity, and ultimately freedom itself. That’s why McCain has perservered under such calumniators, writing books about the different virtues, to have a good effect on young people. “Character is Destiny” by John McCain should be reading for all conservatives, and all those who Vichy quizlings who just call themselves such.
“His voice was at times barely audible. His pauses went on for a few seconds, as he carefully drew his breath and like Ajax in his soliloquy solemnly went on. He bit his lip enough no doubt to require minor surgery. He paused and then went on in sad mournful tones.”
As if we haven’t seen this tired act before: Bill Clinton the chastened, Bill Clinton, talking wistfully about his love for “my Bible” to a group of black ministers when the Lewinsky scandal broke.
The man, and his wife, are absolutely shameless. Oh, to be rid of them both, once and for all!
Feb 4, 2008 - 8:34 am 10. David Thomson:White men are perceived to be evil by the politically correct establishment. One does not need to be paranoid to admit this harsh fact of life. The issue must no longer be ignored. Either sensible people will deal with it—or David Duke and his ilk will take full advantage of the opportunity.
Feb 4, 2008 - 8:46 am 11. Alan Smithee:A perhaps trivial comment about a serious blog post…
Have we reached a stage in our cultural life where a person I would describe as conservative and, perhaps, a bit of a traditionalist feels compelled to refer to the wife of Barack Obama as “Ms. Obama”?
I suppose I can understand it in the case of Maria Shriver who has chosen to keep her maiden name. Though the post refers to her as Ms. Schwarzenegger when it seems that either Mrs. Schwarzenegger or Ms. Shriver would be more appropriate. Or Mrs. Shriver perhaps? But wouldn’t that be her mother?
I don’t know. I’m far too young to be a curmudgeon (back in my day…) but I still find myself annoyed more and more by some of these conventions which are working their way into our lives. As I said from the first, I suppose this isn’t a serious issue. Still, I’m so tired of trying to figure out how to refer to people. Ms. Mrs. handicapped disabled physically challeged black African-American… It really does become exhausting after awhile.
Feb 4, 2008 - 10:36 am 12. JHoward:I honestly never thought I’d see this day: Baldfaced pandering to imagined victims — who have no apparent compunctions about being pandered to in the most baldfaced ways a politician’s evil heart can conceive, witness the Clinton machine — as we finally descend to bread and circuses and to voting the idiots.
That it’s in the name of the women (when it’s not in the name of their kids) is all the more telling of our collective inability to think and our inability to collectively act.
Women already possess vastly more lobbied, opportune, manipulated, and cajoled hunks of the emerging federal Collective than do men.
They live the better part of a decade longer, don’t die in battle in even remotely equal per capitas, own tens of billions more in property than men, and have an entire division of the seven trillion dollar federal social teat to drink from, namely the social services, health, and family law debacle and Washington’s onerous part in it.
Sure, we’re all chivalrous. We all “know” women need help. We want to see women taken care of. But surely the best way to make sure that in the end they aren’t is to have government do it.
As if that quaint notion registered anymore.
Feb 4, 2008 - 1:31 pm 13. Lawrence B:I agree with Jim Rockford, and it distresses me no end that the Republican Party has failed so miserably at fielding a viable candidate.
The only solution now may be a brokered convention and a new face.
Feb 4, 2008 - 2:26 pm 14. ken harmon:Re. Bill Clinton…No, there were no homeless during BC reign. We had been deluged endlessly with “homeless” stories by MSN throughout Bush I term; as soon as BC took over the subject vanished from the news. One week after Bush II took office, the homeless returned in droves to be a major news item. Wonder where they went in between?
Feb 4, 2008 - 3:15 pm 15. Tom Holsinger:I don’t like McCain on issues but that isn’t enough to make me vote for the Democrats. What has convinced me to vote for Hillary Clinton over McCain, should they become the nominees, is McCain’s temperment.
IMO he is flat out so impulsive as to be a threat to America should he become President.
“He who would govern others must first govern himself.”
John McCain does not govern himself. And I’m not the only one with this opinion.
I suspect you could name some notable ancient Grek leaders like that.
Feb 4, 2008 - 3:19 pm 16. john petric:This Democratic obsession with the ol’ race/class/gender thing–when oh when will it pass? Personally I think the electorate is much beyond that, in fact, only these squawking elites seem to care. Sigh. Oh I don’t know, it’s so tiresome, really it is. Heaven forbid if genuine philosophy of life was actually discussed amongst the candidates. If a Democrat fell down in the forest, would the trees hear it, or would there be the sound of one limb clapping?
Feb 4, 2008 - 4:54 pm 17. Jack Denver:“While he has an 80% ACU rating, lifetime, I suspect it would be around Ted Kennedy’s rating in the last six years or so.”
Rockford, you are just making stuff up. You are entitled to you own opinions, you are not entitled to your own facts. Teddy Kennedy has a perfect ZERO ACU rating.
http://www.conservative.org/archive2/Senate_standout.asp
Feb 4, 2008 - 5:22 pm 18. Pete Siracusa:This should be front page on every newspaper in the country!! I love the comparison of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Swaggart!! With all the important issues facing our country that need to be discussed we end up with a campaign like this!
Feb 4, 2008 - 9:01 pm 19. Gregory Koster:Dear Mr. Hanson: Many thanks for writing:
“That said, the race is not over, and Romney supporters should continue to promote his cause until the delegate count is decided. I understand that the base is angry not just because of McCain’s immigration or tax cut heresies, but mostly one of attitude and past pride in opposing conservatives. The complaint then is often that ‘McCain snubbed us once in an unnecessary condescending manner, but kisses up now since he can’t win without us”
Should McCain win, those words will make it much easier for Romney supporters, of whom I am one, to come across. McCain supporters could keep that in mind.
I will note that the second biggest selling point McCain supporters push is that he is “electable.” The evidence? A lot of polls that recently had Obama annihilating Hillary in New Hampshire. Consider this: Massachusetts is one of the bluer states in the nation, yet Romney managed to win statewide office there. That, I think, ought to count in the ‘electability’ stakes.
It is also worth noting in re federal judges being appointed, that the President can only nominate. It is up to the almost surely Democratic majority Senate, to confirm. Until the GOP regains control of the Senate, there will be no more Roberts/Alitos, no matter who the President is.
Sincerely yours,
Feb 4, 2008 - 9:04 pm 20. Bud:Gregory Koster
I think that’s Maxine “Waters” and not Walters.
Feb 4, 2008 - 9:21 pm 21. Suetonius (not-so) Tranquillus:Thank you again, Professor Hanson for your quite enjoyable and insghtful analysis. I think your final observation in this piece will prove to be most prescient. “Jimmy” Carter also alientated the American male, and they not only threw him out of office, but swung him to and fro, counting “1,2,3!” in order to fling him as far as possible to ensure he get the message. It was a political act, but reminded one of bouncers and playgrounds. Whence this electoral overreaction? Carter single-handedly came as close to emasculating the American male (and thus the national pride) as any president ever had. Voting him out of office in a landslide was a reflection of the American male public casting off the shame of humililation and standing as one to answer Ronald Wilson Reagan’s warm and inspiring invitation: to vote for him and reclaim their testicles at the same time. America: land of freedom and convenience. Indeed, Clinton(F) and Obama (B) are playing with fire, because the one voting block always ignored by the left-leaning punditocracy (and which took the entire national media by utter and total surprise in November 1980) is the American so-called “White” male. I very much look forward to your continuing commentary on what is proving to be a very interesting political and historical season. Godspeed.
Feb 4, 2008 - 11:32 pm 22. chiefpayne:Oh really?
Guess they FORGOT that McCain and Romney are in this race, now didn’ they.
Feb 5, 2008 - 11:05 am 23. Trudy B. Taylor:Dr. Hanson: You are one of only a few who have commented on -perhaps only a few have even noticed- Michelle Obama’s veiled anger. While listening to her I’m made to feel like I’ve somehow willfully missed a salient point once too often, and she’s losing her patience with me. It’s a personal vibe, and believe me, I’m not a touchy-feely kind of gal. To say it is off-putting is an under statment.
I cannot but wonder how, paired with the willful vagueness of her husband’s approach to campaigning ( real hope for real people–onward, into the future!!), she will play to vast middle-class audiences during a long, rough campaign. After all, if she’s mad now, what will she be six months from now?
Feb 5, 2008 - 2:27 pm 24. Dave Begley -Omaha:I, too, saw Mrs. Obama and Miss Winphrey on Sunday. Mrs. Obama gave a better performance than Oprah. Michelle could have her own TV show.
Mrs. Obama’s performance was slick, but the substance was pathetic. She mentioned Harvard and Princeton only about ten times.
According to Mrs. Obama, a first-class college education should be FREE! No student loans. Too hard.
I checked out her background. Most recently she worked at the University of Chicago. Why not make the Univ. of Chicago free for everyone?
And let’s tell the truth, blacks with the same test scores and grades have a much easier path to admission to the Ivies then whites or Asians. And it was the case back when the Obamas were applying. Don’t LIE and say your grades had to be twice as good as whites to get accepted at your elite, liberal Ivy schools.
The Obamas sound and look great. But underneath their spin it is the same old liberal money-spending and victim playbook.
And why brag about being against the war in Iraq? UBL will eat Obama’s lunch.
Message to the Obamas: bin Laden is not just a nasty Republican from the Northshore or a meany from Dartmouth. He wants to kill Americans but cutting off heads and has done so in the past. He’s a divider. Deal with it.
Feb 6, 2008 - 7:54 am 25. PA:“Meanwhile I am editing a prequel to the classic Princeton volume “Makers of Modern Strategy”—a “Makers of Ancient Strategy” in which prominent ancient historians like Donald Kagan, Barry Strauss, Tom Holland, Ian Worthington, Adrian Goldsworthy, Josh Ober, and others relate the ancient world’s experience with terrorism and counter-insurgency, wars of national liberation, preemption, multilateralism, imperialism, border defense, etc. to shed some light on our current challenges and to remind us, in this current war especially, that there is nothing new under the sun.”
This sounds like a wonderful, not to mention much needed, work. When will this title be released Dr. Hanson?
Feb 7, 2008 - 11:23 am