Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

Politicswithagrin — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 01:16:39 GMT

I definitely agree that the term "elitist" can be applied to both candidates, but the way each candidate is portrayed - and the way they portray themselves to the media - is different. McCain regularly chats with the press and is more accessible. Obama is less accessible and is portrayed as a celebrity. The crowds in Berlin and the cover People magazine put a distance between Obama and the average citizen (even if the People cover was meant to make him relatable). There may also be the sense that McCain has earned the creature comforts of elitism (POW time) whereas Obama came upon elitism more easily. I think these differences make Obama an easier and more believable target in the elitism war.

http://politicswithagrin.blogspot.com/

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

The Issues Please — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:30:53 GMT

The GOP has become expert in distracting people from the real issues. The whole idea of the "elitist" is designed not only to distract from issues, but to redefine who real elitists are.

Traditionally, politics has defined elitists as those who believe that their wealth should be able to buy extensive control over American democracy. These are people who often consider themselves "self-made" but fail to recognize how they are inextricably linked to others who helped them "reach the top". A useful synonym would be an aristocrat. However, with the GOP's reframing of elitism as which sort of consumer products one buys, we are distracted from reality and the GOP's pervasive assaults on the few remaining protections held by the middle-class in America.

Sure, we can debate things like who is the bigger elitist, or whether McCain's $100 million wife is a "trollup" who wears too much makeup as McCain has said, but these things distract us from the real issues. We don't elect politicians to entertain us in movies, nor do we depend on them to babysit our children. These people enforce and enact laws, so it's about time that we recognize this and realize that democracy is about issues, not somebody's character flaws as perceived and politicized.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

barefootinbaltimore — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 04:54:19 GMT

Call me crazy but, I think the sexual symbolism of the 'Celeb' ad runs even deeper than previously acknowledged. Consider the visual and audio markers:

1. First, two famous, attractive white women known in part (or in whole) for their promiscuity. [previously noted]

2. Immediately thereafter, photos of Obama and a voiceover describing him as "the BIGGEST celebrity in the world."

3. Next, camera flashes (which are obviously associated with publicity, but also with a different unsavory industry on the web... ahem).

4. Then, a shot which makes the tall, dark victory column awkwardly prominent (i.e. - Obama is squeezed into the lower right corner). It's taken from a terrible camera angle, which is probably why we haven't seen much footage like it on the networks. (Correct me if I'm wrong?) I think the real reason for the inclusion of the shot is to hit on a theme that Rush Limbaugh pushed the other day: http://big-girl.livejournal.com/1136521.html

5. Then, a second camera shot which pans up from the crowd and focuses on the tall column.

6. Finally, a voiceover and overlay pertaining to "drilling." (Even though offshore drilling is common line of attack for McCain, it seems oddly placed as the first volley in an ad that mostly focuses on Obama's celebrity status.)

Maybe I'm just a pervert or a crackpot for assuming this is all intentional, but if the admaker is already channeling semi-obscure fascist imagery (see here: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/liberal-fascism), I absolutely wouldn't put it past them to reach for subconscious sexual triggers (a la the "call me" attack ad against Harold Ford Jr. two years ago).

Anybody else agree with this? Or am I really just crazy?

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

joeferng — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 13:58:05 GMT

Great dissection.

Let's get back to real substance. Demand the campaigns to just tell the American people why their guy is qualified to be president, and/or why the other candidate isn't. If this 'Celeb' ad is an honest attempt to argue the latter, then it certainly undermines my trust in what the campaign has to say about the former.

Great job Andrew in exposing this latest campaign strategy and summary its merits--"asinine" indeed.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

Dollared — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:26:57 GMT

Best discussion I've ever seen on this. The hypocrisy of a Bush son calling anyone elistist is still shocking. Now MCcain, the favored son of an admiral.....it's revolting.

But you've nailed it - anybody who wants to be president has a big ego, or they would be afraid to do the job. Well put.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

orion12 — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:46:12 GMT

A very good article, Andrew Romano. I cannot help feeling sorry for some reporters who try to equate elitism with not being qualified to be president. This is stupid. A president is not an "ordinary" person. He must have certain qualities, including, stature, poise, cool, intelligence, savvy, track record, success.... Well as we all know, if you go for the presidency, you just do not come from the gutter, or the food line. You have made it to some extent and that puts you in a minority layer of the society. That makes you elite. It is not bad to be elite. Check out the dictionary. Excuse me, Andrew, some journalists and some of the handlers of the campaign do not deserve to have such freedom to develop such silly conclusions regarding elitism.

I think McCain is in for a big surprise with his dirty tactics. You know, Obama is right, such attitudes should change. McCaiin does not seem to know what to do to win. He seems frustrated. So he goes dirty. Obama meanwhile maintains his usual cool disposition and he is branded arrogant. He talks well and he is branded elitist and presumptuous. What should he be doing? Jive talking? Swearing when upset? Being incoherent? I am perplexed!! Some people say his demeanor is being criticized because he is not white. I have had to think about it a lot and objectively. I think that they are right. Did people give these labels to Kennedy, or Reagan, of Clinton, or other white people who were campaigning?

Now, I think that people are also very immature. Why the name-calling. Hussein or Hassan or Osama.... Is this what it takes to win an election? If McCain is so sure about himself why does he not stick to issues? The point is that Obama gets many people scared. I think they feel that if one of "them" is so effective, then "destroy him, or the rest like him will follow". This is however not going to work because the world is ready for change. Look at Berlin and Obama. Look at the US and Obama, the train is moving.

I would personally like to see a good campaign with good discussions. But McCain disappoints me with his childish ads. And if Americans respond to it then it is scary. Slowly I am coming to see Obama as a better candidate; a person who has the qualities I prefer in a candidate. The rest of the story about experience and heroism is just a ploy to grope for celebrity status.... and they say Obama is the only one seeking to be a celebrity.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

nbeck2 — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:16:37 GMT

Excellent article and fiercely smart take on the ridiculousness that, in my opinion, has become the McCain campaign. Whose running things over there -- 14-year old Heathers?

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

sanrioscenario — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:53:55 GMT

John McCain's recent ad attacking Barack Obama for not visiting injured troops is being played round the clock without costing McCain a dime! Why the free airplay? Because the ad is "controversial," and therefore news channels and Sunday morning chat shows want to play it 24/7 to fill the airtime normally clogged with news.

The controversy, of course, stems from the fact that the ad is full of lies: http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/30/want_to_get_free_airplay_for_y_8031.php

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

HappyDay41 — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 12:56:33 GMT

This article illustrates the whole problem with obama as a candidate... he isn't real.

His whole story is dependent on 'reporters' who simply repeat the mythological origins of 'The One'. For example, the article states: "Nevermind that the Illinois senator is a bi-racial child from a broken family raised in a modest single-parent household." This simply is NOT TRUE.

HIS MOTHER WAS MARRIED. His fomulative years were spent in a home with a mother who was MARRIED. His step-father, whom he adored, was right there and they were living quite well by Indonesia's economic standards. He then returned to Hawaii to live with his grandparents... his grandmother being THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE BANK OF HAWAII. (i.e. not poor). He attended AN ELITE, PRIVATE PREP SCHOOL with ambassador's children and future emperors. This means... shockingly... that the story he tells the public about being a poor little black boy subject to abuse and discrimination... is NOT TRUE. He is bi-racial, but another way of saying that is that he is bi-national because his dad was not American, and the boy was not raised American until he was 10 (if you count Hawaii back then as America... according to their state constitution, a baby born to a non-American was also not American... unless one parent was American and had been in America for ten years past the age of 16. Stanley Ann was a teen-ager when she got pregnant by a guy from Kenya who already had a wife.)

So... who is the real obama? All we know for sure is that he is a parasitic opportunist.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

esperanzanueva — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 16:57:26 GMT

@ HappyDay41

I am actually trying to fight back laughter at the fact that bi-nationality is somehow less of a target for discrimination than being biracial. Or that because he wasn't technically in a single-parent household or wasn't technically that poor that he probably suffered no discrimination whatsoever because he was black. What?? This appears to follow a similarly treacherous line of logic: "Oh, that Hispanic guy is from Ecuador, so even though he looks Hispanic and is discriminated against because he is Hispanic and is called a Mexican frequently and incorrectly, it probably doesn't matter to him because he's not actually Mexican." I'm confused as to where his bi-nationality is even marginally relevant.

re: Elitism: A Game Two Can Play

HappyDay41 — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:42:21 GMT

esperanzanueva--

The point is... which you conveniently glossed over... the media 'report' myths and untruths about this guy.

His mother was MARRIED. He was NOT poor. He was PRIVILEGED and ELITE.

The point of bi-nationality was simply that 'bi-racial' doesn't mean squat. And.. the point is, he lived in Indonesia. Then he lived in Hawaii. He wan't a 'minority' there, he was in the majority. If he had been white he would have been the minority and would have suffered discrimination.

AS for your argument about anyone of any nationality being discriminated against-- get over it. We are all discriminated against in some way, either by gender, class, wealth, or racial standards. In my little home town, it could be because you don't go to the 'right' church, or live in the 'right' area. I'm not whining about it and asking for special treatment. Discrimination exists. If you are strong enough in character, you go one with your life and do your best.

None of that changes the fact that the man lies consistently about who he is, and where he came from... his whole CV is fake.