‘We can end a war. … We can save the planet. … We can change the world.”
A few years ago, if you’d suggested that a leading contender for the Democratic presidential nomination consider airing these sentiments in ads broadcast during the Super Bowl, most political pundits would have said you were insane. The Super Bowl, watched by nearly a third of the U.S. population, is about football, beer and machismo. It’s not about the antiwar movement, the environmental movement, the antipoverty movement or peace, love and understanding.
But on Sunday, Barack Obama aired a 30-second Super Bowl ad that drew unabashedly on the iconography of the American left — and no one batted an eyelash. The ad offered images of rallies and protest marches, of poverty and environmental destruction, of the devastation of war and of beaming, hopeful, multiracial crowds. Broadcast not to a niche demographic of activist students or South Carolina African Americans but to a cross-section of football fans, the message was unashamedly nostalgic and idealistic.
The Obama ad highlights a recent sea change in Democratic politics, one that’s impossible to understate. Just a few short years ago, Democrats were on the defensive. On national security issues, the party’s Beltway power brokers anxiously debated how best to look “tough.” That led easily into a depressing sort of “me tooism,” as Democrats competed to show that they weren’t the wimpy, soft creatures of Republic caricature but hard, chest-beating types, willing to embrace wars, abandon civil liberties and kill terrorists deader than dead.
On domestic issues, Democrats were also running scared. Most congressional Democrats voted to support Bush’s ruinous 2004 tax cut, for instance. And in general, Democrats did their darnedest to avoid using words or images that would remind the average American of the 1960s. The conventional wisdom was that bringing up the antiwar movement or the women’s movement or race or poverty would be a gift to the right.
Brooks conveniently leaves out the fact that Democrats took control of the Senate and the House in 2006, promising change. Promising is not the same thing as delivering, campaigning is not the same thing as governing. Without question, Obama is a brilliant campaigner, particularly in caucus states, and he is tapping into a deep need for optimism, affirmation, etc. But governing is not (at least not merely) about the directional, the emotional, it’s about particulars and hard choices. So far, Obama has been long on the former, and short on the latter. The analogy with Kennedy is apt: JFK immediately faced a tough economy, several flaps (Bay of Pigs), aggressive foes abroad, and had great difficulty moving his “New Frontier” agenda through Congress, despite enjoying a majority. I understand Obama supporters are enthusiastic (sometimes frighteningly so), and enjoying the rush can be uplifting and a healthy consumption good, but at some point the vagueness of “change” needs to be planted in reality.
Check out this link: [url=http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/and-obama-wept.html]Cult of Obama[/url]
Can anyone imagine a summit between Pres. Putin and Pres. Obama?
Putin would eat Obama for lunch.
Because I believe Hilliary has supernatural powers (and not the good kind) I am pulling for Obama to upset her. The fact that he does badly with Hispanics, persons over 65, and downscale whites – all important swing constitutencies and the least likely to vote for him in a general election against John McCain is icing on the cake (any generic Democrat will win 9 out of ten African American and upscal white liberal votes). I am sure that President McGovern was very happy about the youth movement behind him in 1972. The fun part about the media is that because most of its members are as similiar as a bunch of Tri-Delts at a big state university is that they tend to go in for group think.
puke. i hate the sixties and don’t relish a return to anything like them-except for the environment. but unfortunately we have to ‘like’ our heads of state rather than think about how qualified they would really be. he is more electable than hillary. for heaven’s sake let the sixties die in peace!
#2 Evan – To get an idea of what a summit between Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin would be like, check out this You-Tube short, [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXCUBVS4kfQ]Bambi meets Godzilla[/url]
Magnolia,
why would you want to return to the ‘environment’ of the sixties? Our air and water are much cleaner today, and our soil management is far and above what we were doing then. Not to mention even more lands set aside by the Federal gov’t for parks and recreation and protected from development.
Celebrate the Super Bowl with friends, family, and good food. Good, hearty fare is perfect for the game. Chili is always popular, and a make-your-own-sandwich spread would go nicely alone or with a hot main dish or stew. If you want food for the Super Bowl Sunday, you can make a great spread and you don’t necessarily need to get a payday loan to do it. Chips and salsa, along with chili and other dips, are perennial favorites for Super Bowl Sunday, and you can make a large batch of your own for cheap. A few batches of dip won’t require a payday loan – as long as it’s not caviar. Remember it doesn’t matter whether your team wins or loses … it’s what you serve at half-time that they will remember. Check out this site for cheap food and recipes for your Super Bowl party that won’t require a payday loan.