How To Get The Barney Gumble Vote
The terms nuance, satire, racist, subtlety and flip-flopping are taking a pretty good beating this political season with the feckless news media outdoing itself in the further dumbing down of what passes for political discourse.
Barack Obama’s position on Iraq is fundamentally unchanged, but every nuance of that position is attacked by supporters of John McCain as flip-flopping if it doesn’t conform verbatim to what he said earlier.
The New Yorker magazine cover showing Obama as a Muslim president and knocking knuckles in the Oval Office with his AK-47-toting, Afro-coiffed wife is unadulterated satire, but is being attacked for being racist.
McCain’s digs at Obama are sometimes subtlety in the finest tradition of that art form, but he is attacked by supporters of Obama, who is pretty good at subtlety as well as satire himself, as being racist.
McCain also is being unfairly criticized for flip-flopping, although he certainly is not a racist. This stems from the fact that McCain doesn’t necessarily change positions on some issues, he just has multiple positions.
And so a modest suggestion for Messrs Obama and McCain from here on out: If Barney Gumble down at Moe’s Bar doesn’t get it, then fuggedaboutit.
Belch!!!
opinions powered by SendLove.to
14 Responses to “How To Get The Barney Gumble Vote”
I post links to gems, but some simply are, ahem, too “inhibited” — Shaun, you didn't do your homework. And Obama has changed his positions, and he will do so again, like any other politician. Maybe yesterday's letters are also in order. He is not the Messiah and you needn't continue to treat him as such. You seem not to be a fellow Personality Cultist, but merely a left-Dem party hack, but it's still bad.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/opinion/16ega…
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/opinion/lweb1…
Hey Shaun, you forgot “elitist”; that's been knocked around pretty well too. For example, I might be an elitist for using a semicolon.
JS:
You are most definitely an elitist because you not only used a semicolon, but you knew how to place it outside of the close quotes mark. (!!!)
I wholeheartedly disagree. I think these tactics appeal more to the Moe Szyslak voters. I think Barney would be an Obama voter because he has more fund raisers that are rock shows (presumably serving beer).
Projecting one's own weakness onto an opponent is a pure Rovian tactic. I wonder where Turdblossom got that idea, Nixon perhaps?
DLS- why does everyone keep throwing out the Messiah talking point? We who do support Obama do so NOT because we believe he's Gods gift to humanity but because he presents the next best hope. Is he a politician? Who has ever run for the highest office in this country and has not been one? is course, though seems to be less backtracking on issues than McCain (Torture, troop withdrawals,GI BIll etc.) Bush's “We don't torture” is equivalent to Clinton's lying under oath. The President is a lying f8ckwit just like his cabal of cronies. There is a difference between mis-direction for national security's sake and baldface lying when you are confronted with the facts(stubborn things those facts, like pictures of Abu Gharaib and Youtube videos)
Obama hasn't changed his position on Iraq- maybe the FISA ( which I am still trying to get my head around- but given Bush's complete mangling of it warranting a vote on it in the first place is what people fail to grasp) but a politician cannot be all things to all people.
At least he's not trying to define the use of a condom as “abortion”. What's next after that, denial of services because people mas turbate?
for some women going on the pill helps other health issues.
I guess our Divider in Chief forgets about that.
/ end rant
ps DLS I did enjoy those gems thanks for posting them.
http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=1441
jeez.
RN:
Yeah, the Messiah thing is beyond old and I have addressed its oldness several times. Apparently always on the days the DLS is busy elsewhere.
“why does everyone keep throwing out the Messiah talking point”
It describes the personality cult trait of so many Obama supporters accurately, that's why. The stupid furor over the New Yorker cover is related to this. It's so ridiculous even Dems writing to the New York Times felt moved to remark about it.
That and it's a neat talking point that allows the accuser to place themselves in a position of superiority without having to go near sticky policy discussion. I'll never accept the lazy conflation of opinion columns and news. Opinions aren't facts; they can't effectively be used to prove points.
“ps DLS I did enjoy those gems thanks for posting them.”
You're welcome. They're good reading. Along with the New Yorker article, probably the best most-recent writeup on Obama _and his background_, probably the most and most useful articles written and published this year.
(Maybe Janine below needs to read it and join the rest of us who have already.)
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/07/21/0…
* * *
“That and it's a neat talking point that allows the accuser to place themselves in a position of superiority without having to go near sticky policy discussion.”
That is not the case with my remarks about the Messiah-cult nature of so many Obama supporters, which are accurate. I don't even need to add that I have been reading about his background and remarked elsewhere that his rapid rise (with actions similar to today's; he is no fluke) constitutes an example to provide motivation for other, and particularly younger, people. That is irrelevent to the issue of Obama worship. (His policy-clarification remarks of late have “shocked” or “betrayed” some idealistic lefties but hopefully they'll learn from this that he is real, not unreal.)
In fact, there even has been some creativity expressed _months ago_ that exploits the Messiah-worship “personality cult” nature of Obama fans (particularly before his recent policy clarifications), which goes far beyond merely being delighted by his clever sound bites and good looks — the Obama poster from Obey Giant (an excellent creative work).
You can't know what's in the heads of millions of people. No matter how declarative the statement. Sorry.
Sure, that “Messiah” thing seems like a possible motivator for those folks who appear to have ignored the fine print, but I wouldn't go as far as say that's what's in every last one of their heads. Let alone Obama's entire base. Even you had the good sense to use the word “some.”
Look, it's fun to make bold, rather than nuanced, statements in comment threads (I usually save those for music blogs). I understand. At the same time, any time an argument assumes that sort of knowledge into a heterogeneous group's single motivation for believing a thing or for doing a thing, especially when you use these unprovable, assumed yet somehow “accurate” facts to prove your point, you can't expect it to hold water for everyone. You'd get spanked in a Freshman sociology class for it.
In any case, I won't deny that it's a media narrative that you can find tons of coverage on. That doesn't mean I buy it. Shoot, a few months ago there was tons of coverage saying that Hillary's voters are racist and Hispanic voters don't like Blacks. I didn't buy that bull either.
“the Messiah thing is beyond old”
It's not old yet. You stand corrected. It will become old once those engaging in that behavior change (no pun intended) and it goes away. Incidentally, by starting to clarify his positions on issues and surprising or even disappointing some of his fans, it's Obama himself who is leading the way to make it old (actually, to make it end).
“I wouldn't go as far as say that's what's in every last one of their heads.”
Nor would I, but those who do have it in their heads make it noteworthy (and in fact, remarkable).
“tons of coverage saying that Hillary's voters are racist and Hispanic voters don't like Blacks. I didn't buy that bull”
Those Clinton supporters included women involved in their own “identity politics” (in this case, pro-woman reverse sexism) and more broadly, they represented the existing party and political Establishment while Obama is an outsider or interloper (the same attitude toward Obama expressed by some old-world black “leaders”).
There also was likely resentment at the realization that Obama was coming up seemingly out of nowhere, relatively early in his life and career for someone in contemporary presidential campaigns, while Clinton likely (in my opinion, did) wait too late to run and she's on her way gradually if not quickly down from here while Obama can afford to lose this election and run again four years later (Clinton should have run in 2004 to get the nation-wide exposure in my opinion, even if she would have done poorly against Bush that year).
“You can't know what's in the heads of millions of people. No matter how declarative the statement. Sorry.”
You can't assume I claim the ability to read when I instead observe what so many Obama supporters are saying, doing, and behaving. Sorry. [grin]
Is DLS the one campaigning for the post of Messiah?
That's what I OBSERVE, as I read the incessant self-congratulatory claims to superior insight and wisdom
Sounds like Messiah envy to me.