Following is a photo of President Clinton with the Rev. Wright, the Chicago preacher and a man who played a significant role in Barack Obama's life (performing his marriage, for example) who has come under so much criticism. Much it apparently is now being generated through the efforts of his wife's campaign. They contend that the Obama-Wright link is evidence that he would be "unelectable" in November, trying to way "superdelegates" to her--because her closing the gap in elected delegates has become impossible.
There has also been an attempt to "marginalize" Wright; at least that is my impression, as a Chicago north-sider, not a south-sider. He is being presented as a kind of white-hating black bigot extremist. But in fact the church is a fairly major one, according to its
website, with some 6000 members. And it is clearly a very
Christian one, although the previous slander against Obama was that he is "Muslim."
Hillary, according to her schedule, was there with her husband and the minister, and apparently it was on that occasion Bill that told the clerics he had "repented" of his numerous marital transgressions.
Anyhow, it really is ridiculous! I mean, as a way to run a country, or as a way to pick leaders to run a country. I believe it is the case that Obama made major speeches on Iraq and the economy, offering positions and views, in the last couple days. But I have seen no significant reportage on either. Instead, you get headlines like "
Obama tries to shift focus away from race." Apparently talking about "real issues" facing the nation is considered, in this horserace and scandal driven democracy, to be simply a distraction, a side-show.
Substance has definitely been superseded by "style" and "symbolism."
And I suppose in some tiny way I am contributing to it. If I saw more about, say, the merits of competing health policies, I certainly would comment on them! But, admittedly, such issues are indeed very confusing. When I worked on a newspaper for a semester, they talked about a "three bowler." That referred to a news story so dull that the reader's face might plop in his (her) bowl of oatmeal three times before finishing reading it.
I guess pretty much anything that affects the fate of the nation is, for nearly all of us, simply too complicated and, ultimately, too boring. It is more fun to learn about the sex-capes of the succession of New York governors (among other major figures).
Anyhow, it is painfully hard, so now I will go back to the "other," non-electoral, March Madness. Which I don't really understand either, but I get some satisfaction from her concluding that, as of right now (10 pm) I'm doing a bit better on the pool than she is!
Comments