(Offered with th best intentions -- I really do like the guy - promoted by Mike)
Obama has arrived on the political scene, and he has brought his new style of rhetoric with him. Rather than adopt the heightened speech of a Kerry or a Sharpton, or the emotional tenor of a Clinton, Obama's rhetoric invites the listener along. "Come along with me while we explore this issue," is what you hear, no matter what he's saying.
And come along you do.
And so it's no surprise that the man who builds his speeches, moving from "um" and "uh" ridden stops and starts to slow confidence, and from there to a rousing conclusion, it's no surprise that this man has become the perfect potential candidate. If ever there was a person born to talk about thinking about running, Obama is that man. He's a man who looks best when mulling something over.
Click on "There's More" for rest of story...
|
|
I mean this all, incidentally, as a real compliment to Obama, and especially his skill as a politician. After six years of stay the course, Senator Obama's rhetoric of thought in motion is a relief to us all. It's the equivalent of a math student showing their work, and it's the reason, I suspect, that you walk away from his speeches not angry, not riled, but with a profound sense of calm goodwill. With a desire for him to lead us. And yes, with a sense of hope.
But underneath the rhetoric there are cracks.
In Manchester Sunday, he talked about getting beyond "slash-and-burn" politics, getting beyond the us v. them, and bonding together in "hope". So, much as Elwood has suggested on this site, part of Obama's message is Camelot awaits: after a period of vicious partisan fighting, he is ready to lead us to that peace beyond.
This is an acceptable message in itself, and it's similar to what centrists like Bayh are preaching.
But is it the final destination of Obama's thought? Within 30 seconds of stating we have to come together as a nation, he begins to give examples of Americans bonding together in "hope" and overcoming obstacles. And a good number of them are very us v. them: The Revolutionary War, The Civil War, The Women's Suffrage movement, the Civil Rights movement.
There's a very clear rift here which Obama will have to resolve. What he has to decide, in short, is whether we are truly at a Camelot moment, where if we were simply to stop fighting one another we could build America up again, or whether we are at a moment akin to the historical examples he cites. If the latter, the problem is not that we have been fighting. The problem is the right side hasn't won yet.
I continue to watch Obama with much interest, and have faith he will deal with that rift sooner or later. If he is going to be a force in this election, however, I think it's in our interest as Democrats to ask him to deal with it sooner.
|
