Beware the rhetoric of Obama
Voting for a candidate should be based on fact, not oratorical abilities
Issue date: 9/18/08 Section: Viewpoints
|
Now, let's be perfectly clear here. Obama seems like a great guy - there's a good chance that I'll even vote for him - and I'd be extremely surprised if he invaded Poland or perpetrated a genocide.
That said, I've seen Obama live twice, and what I saw scared me a little. A charismatic speaker about to take power on the heels of nearly a decade of economic and national security disasters, seducing an audience - and an electorate, for that matter - that is so desperate for something to hope for that they'll cling to anything.
Obamania has gripped the nation and allowed a man who has done absolutely nothing of significance in four years in the Senate to appear on T-shirts, spark viral video frenzies and speak in front of 200,000 at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.
This almost messianic anointment of Obama has given me pause. Yes, he could very well be the greatest thing to hit American politics since the teleprompter, but...
If you can, find a video of Hitler speaking. If you can put out of your mind for one moment the unbelievable evil he did and just watch and listen, his public speaking manner is absolutely hypnotic. In 1938, when Hitler's ugly side was starting to show, Princeton University freshmen voted British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain the "greatest living person." He beat Hitler by one vote.
Obama and Hitler both represented vehicles of change (though of obviously different kinds) and have enjoyed meteoric rises to national and international superstardom by being, probably, the two best political orators of the past 100 years.
That, of course, is more or less where the similarities end, but the lesson remains: be extremely careful of being seduced by political rhetoric. Hitler was seen as a great man by many Americans as late as one year before the start of World War II. Within seven years, he would start and lose the second-bloodiest war in world history, systematically arrange the murder of 11 million innocent people and change the course of world politics forever.
Like I said, Obama is not Hitler.
But Obama is also not Jesus Christ, and we should treat his rhetoric - beautiful, optimistic and seductive as it may be - with a fairly large helping of skepticism.
I have the luxury of knowing that my vote won't count. I'm registered in New Jersey, a state with 15 electoral votes that would go blue if Stalin ran for the Democrats and Gandhi for the Republicans, so whoever I vote for, be it Obama, John McCain or Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, it won't matter.
But many of your votes will, particularly if you've come here from Ohio, Florida, Virginia or Pennsylvania. So if you vote for Obama, vote for him because, for all his shortcomings, you think he'd do a better job running the country than the other guys, not because you think he can save your soul and forgive your sins.
If you do that, you're going to be very disappointed when the other shoe drops.
Spring Break

Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 35
Bill Jeffreys
posted 9/18/08 @ 2:18 AM EST
I agree that votes should be based on substance, but it's factually untrue that Barack hasn't done anything in the Senate. Here's a list of resolutions and bills sponsored by Barack - http://thomas. (Continued…)
Bill Jeffreys
posted 9/18/08 @ 2:26 AM EST
I agree you should base your vote on substance, but its factually untrue that Barack hasn't done anything in the Senate. Here's a list of resolutions/bills he sponsored: http://thomas. (Continued…)
Andrea Parker
posted 9/18/08 @ 8:55 AM EST
Comparing oratorical abilities and having the flock fall for words, the very same could have been said about Ronald Reagan, hmmm?
James
posted 9/18/08 @ 9:47 AM EST
I too hope people will look at the substance of Obama's platform, and I think people do. While Obama and Hitler may be great speakers, there is still something that bugs me about this article. (Continued…)
James
posted 9/18/08 @ 9:51 AM EST
Oh, and I forgot to mention Bush didn't win the election his first time either...
john.depew
john
posted 9/18/08 @ 9:52 AM EST
Rhetoric did not win the election for Ronald Reagan. Jimmy Carter's dreadful term as president gift wrapped the election for him. I think that the Republicans would have won in 1980 regardless of who was their candidate. (Continued…)
Jake
posted 9/18/08 @ 10:35 AM EST
You lousy piece of shit. Congrats on learning your fucking miserable writing style directly influenced from 24 hour news networks. It's the fucking douche bags out there like you that continue this goddamn cycle of dirty smear politics. (Continued…)
Anne
posted 9/18/08 @ 11:07 AM EST
I was not originally for Obama, but as he beat out John Edwards and Hillary Clinton, I am going to support him. What really scares me is the McCain/Palin ticket. (Continued…)
John
posted 9/18/08 @ 11:23 AM EST
Jake
posted 9/18/08 @ 11:01 AM EST
Fuck you too in that case. If you ignorant morons think your votes count or that I'm gonna waste the time casting a vote, you're sadly mistaken. (Continued…)
Gates
posted 9/18/08 @ 11:40 AM EST
Beware the Rhetoric of Obama?...you gotta be kidding me! Beware the continuation of the Bush lineage through the old dude that's trying to take his place and further the decline of the US. (Continued…)
Post a Comment