The reality-based campaign
Alexis de Tocqueville in the 1830s wrote about the American tendency to use “crisp, clear and unadorned language” in business dealings, only to turn to “bombast” and “relentless pomposity” when indulging in supposedly-poetic public speaking. But de Tocqueville thought that realism would eventually win out—and so it has in most presidential elections of the past 30 years, even when the campaigns initially were full of air. Obama’s brilliant oratory so far has allowed him to escape specifics, but he eventually will have to go beyond the question of who opposed the war in 2003: the real question now is what to do in 2008. An article by Angelina Jolie in The Washington Post late last month, with the surprising headline “A Reason to Stay in Iraq,” was worth a thousand bombastic speeches.
Jolie argued that the U.S. should not squander what the troop surge has achieved, an opportunity to make “humanitarian progress” that will be lost if American forces pull out precipitously. Although Cosmogirl.com readers voted Angelina Jolie #3 on their list of desired presidential candidates (behind Oprah and Jon Stewart, ahead of Bono), she apparently is not on McCain’s list of possible running mates—but he should run with what she wrote.
If the race is McCain vs. Obama, the older senator will needs to pop the younger’s halo of humaneness. One way is to listen to Jill Stanek, the whistle-blowing nurse who saw close-up at an Illinois senate committee hearing Obama’s opposition to protecting even babies born alive after failed abortions: “Obama’s clinical discourse, his lack of mercy, shocked me.” The Chicago Sun-Times ran a cartoon of Obama holding a sign with “LIVE BIRTH ABORTION” on it, God reaching down from heaven to a baby in front of the state senator, and Obama yelling at God, “You keep out of this!”
Is McCain up to criticizing Obama (or Clinton) on abortion? Perhaps not, but GOP honchos should talk with Clarise McFarlen, a 16-year-old from Wichita, Kansas, who—like Obama—is of a mixed racial background. At first excited to hear of Obama’s candidacy, Clarise changed her mind when she learned of his position on partial-birth abortion: “My heart just stopped. If you support killing babies, there’s no way you can have true compassion.”




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top16 Comments to “The reality-based campaign”
If the race is McCain vs. Obama, the older senator will needs to pop the younger’s halo of humaneness.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
No need to do that; Jeremiah Wright just did it.
I’m guessing that this was written several days ago. Either that or Olasky forgot to pay his cable bill.
Report comment to moderator
Now, Night Train…. don’t you want to wait for Obama’s speech today in Philadelphia?
I think no matter who the opposing candidate is, McCain should be bold enough to talk about the lack of compassion on the part of his opponent. Whether Angelina Jolie supports him or not, why can’t he acknowledge them and even embrace them? He’s a centrist. He could pull that off.
Report comment to moderator
I think with Barack the USA has found another “Teflon” candidate: nothing will stick to him. Or by the time we finally hold the general elections this entire nutcase pastor dustup will be sooooo yesterday.
While I find the militant in-your-face, hate-dem-honkies, firebrand rhetoric to be in extreme poor taste and totally unPC, can anyone point to a bill or policy Obama supported or opposed after consulting Wright? I think Obama probably consults his religious folks on matters of state as often as JFK and Clinton did. I’ve pointed that out elsewhere and I’d rather not beat a dead horse.
For a man so many had hoped would transcend the racial divide and render it a closed issue, Obama has helped widen it in the worst possible way.
Meanwhile, how can we lambaste Wright for saying 9/11 was some type of divine judgmt on the USA when the late Dr Falwell said more or less the same thing??
Report comment to moderator
Meanwhile, how can we lambaste Wright for saying 9/11 was some type of divine judgmt on the USA when the late Dr Falwell said more or less the same thing??
You PC types want to pretend that that’s the only objectionable thing/statement Wright’s ever done/said. No dice, PC Man. He gave a lifetime achievement award to Farrakhan. He says his teachings are based on the theology of James Cone, who says that white people are the enemy and the devil, and that the Jesus of black people wants to kill their white oppressors.
No dice, PC Man
Or by the time we finally hold the general elections this entire nutcase pastor dustup will be sooooo yesterday.
Yeah, sure it will.
This thing ain’t goin’ nowhere. Obama is done. Finished. Kaput. Even Shelby Steele, the noted black writer on race, speaks of Obama’s presidential hopes in the past tense in today’s WSJ.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner, I don’t have to consult with the judge I worked for to remember what he always said: “what does the statute say?” when I’m working on something. It’s just in my head. I don’t have to consult with an old minister who used to say “master the situation; don’t let the situation master you” when I’m in sticky straits. These things come to mind because they have been internalized.
I wouldn’t want to be Howard Dean and the other Dem party leaders for anything right now.
Report comment to moderator
As I recall Jerry Falwell was kicked to the curb on his 9/11 statements and rightfully so. I was not a follower of Falwell, but when you compare his overall ministry to that of Wright’s, who really taugh the hate?
Report comment to moderator
I just read Obama’s speech on Drudge. It’s eloquent, but it ain’t gonna do the trick. Much of it is a defense of Wright; some of it is criticism of Wright. But Obama makes it clear he’s standing by his man. He really has no choice; if he denounces him unequivocally or cuts ties with him, he’ll be seen as an Uncle Tom, and he can’t have that. He closes with a story about a white girl named Ashley who ate mustard and relish sandwiches for a year to help her cancer stricken mom save money. Now grown up, Ashley is an organizer for Obama. That’s real nice, but according to Wright and James Cone and Farrakhan, Ashley is a blue eyed devil, the black man’s enemy, a white oppressor that Black Jesus wants to kill. And he’s been going to a church that teaches that for 20 years. And all the eloquence in the world won’t change that fact.
Obama is burnt toast.
Report comment to moderator
If Obama’s campaign does go down in flames and tatters due to statements MADE NOT BY HIM but by a neighborhood demagogue hiding behind a pulpit, how will it be spun? Not favorably you can bet on that.
Can anyone here cite for me a case of a Christian pastor who’s been honored by Farrakhan or any other muslim (US homegrown Malcolm X-styled muslim or imported from abroad variety)??
I’m not sure any mosque anywhere would ever honor or fete a man who championed the exclusive claims of Christ (”I am THE way, THE truth..etc”)
Report comment to moderator
So ea of you is in total 100% agreement with everything every minister of your church or denomination has ever spoken in your presence??
We rightfully deplore spineless politicians and other govt officials who have been made skittish about introducing any biblically-derived moral opinions or beliefs in policy discussions.
Might this dustup with Wright prompt other would-be politicians to withdraw from churches or other ministries perceived by the MSM to be controversial?
I fear so.
Be careful what you wish for!
Report comment to moderator
Sorry, no time for debating gluesniffers.
I just watched the speech on Foxnews.com. Wow. I don’t watch TV more than an hour or so every few months, so I’d never seen one of Obama’s speeches. I’ve been hearing for a year what a powerful orator he is. So I was shocked to watch him give a dull and lifeless recital of his prepared remarks. The speech was much better in print than delivered. Obama was clearly uncomfortable. He’s not a very good liar
Report comment to moderator
He shoulda had Wright come on stage with him, and then broke into a spirited rendtion of Joan Jett’s “I Hate Myself For Loving You”.
Report comment to moderator
Far be it from me to disagree with Night Train on this. He’s usually quite prescient.
I read the speech, and it wasn’t bad on paper, though I can’t say it changed my mind or was inspiring enough for me to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t know about you, but it still seems that Wright’s church is more concerned with politics than salvation. And when Obama says: “We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that shes playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.” — this gives me the feeling that it was ok to pounce on Hillary, but now that he’s been pounced on, well, we ought not do that anymore. I really didn’t read anything about personal responsibility, just that the government ought to solve everything. That’s just not possible.
We’ve had this discussion before, but there are ways of discussing current issues through the lens of Christianity rather than politics, and ministers who follow Christ can do that. (Evidently, Wright is not one of them.)
Report comment to moderator
OBAMA CAMPAIGN REPUDIATES, FIRES WRIGHT; TAPS DON IMUS AS CAMPAIGN’S RACIAL SENSITIVITY ADVISOR
Report comment to moderator
McCain will eventually get Obama to fess up that he hates white people, especially older ones with white hair, just as much as his Reverend Wright, Father Figure, Mentor hates them, and admit he used to mug guys like McCain so he could buy enough crack cocaine to impress the Hoes in the Hood and keep them high enough so his real hope and dream could be fulfilled
Report comment to moderator
How does the last paragraph have anything to do with the rest of the article? The article is supposed to be about contrasting the rhetoric we use in business with the rhetoric we use in politics.
By littering an otherwise decent article with a gratuitous reference intended to appease the anti-abort crowd, Olasky shows that he’s comfortable with the spurious rhetoric of politics.
If Olasky believes that we can improve the rhetoric of political discourse, then maybe he should not be so quick to engage in demagoguery.
Report comment to moderator
There was one line of personal responsibility, so I have to revise my previous post.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!