The Democratic convention was a unique event in the way in which it continually rejected the storyline the mainstream media was determined to push. We live in a far different media environment than past elections, particularly on the liberal side. The Obama campaign has come along at a fortuitous time, recognizing that Democrats lose when they try to curry favor with the mainstream press. What exists now is a party that has alternative media to get reality out beyond the filter. Why let Fox News hold you over a barrell when you can embed bloggers or create the media for yourself, publish it online and blast it out to your supporters to pass along?
The early storyline from the fading media was about unity. Would the Clintons be pleased, would they embrace the Obama candidacy? Then the press wondered if Michelle Obama would be too “angry” for mainstream America. The most ridiculous attack was an echo of the McCain campaign’s flailing versus Senator Obama – the elitist nonsense. They attacked the stage design, even though it was as traditional American as you get. They tried and tried to make the Democratic convention something it wasn’t.
The Clintons both gave rousing speeches, unambiguous expressions of support for Sen. Obama. How stupid do you have to be to underestimate Bill Clinton’s skill at speechmaking? Quite stupid. And for Michelle Obama, her speech continued to dissolve the GOP/MSM spin against her. She came across as a likeable affable wife and mother and sister. It continues a racial pattern that has been used against the Obamas for eighteen plus months now: The desire to paint this family as something different, something “other”, to sow the seeds of doubt that it is impossible that the first major party candidate who is black could be just like you. But that’s just it: The Obamas are just like the rest of us. And they found the best way to cast aside the caricature the Republican noise machine has invested so much in creating: they spoke.
Most of all, that’s what Joe Biden and Sen. Obama did. People who are paying attention are realizing that Sen. Obama is the real deal. I hope the mainstream press and the Republicans continue to talk him down. Before the speech, we were told that it would be a speech that sailed over the heads of people, given by the aloof law professor who couldn’t possibly speak to the average American.
Except of course that Sen. Obama is a creature of the middle class in a similar way to President Clinton, and not of the elitist class like President Bush and Sen. McCain. As his speech – seen by over 38 million in real time, plus more in repeats and by over 68,000 mostly swing-state voters in person – made clear, Barack Obama is more than ready and able to communicate concrete solutions to the American people. The McCain campaign has repeatedly tried to tell us that Obama’s communication skills are no more than mere celebrity, but as history has shown us – especially the last eight years – we need an American president who can speak about issues more complex than basic sloganeering. It’s a complex world that we live in and we don’t need more of the same stupidity and irresponsibility in the highest job in the nation.
Obama and Biden refined the “change” message at the convention, now describing it as “the change we need”, bringing a sense of urgency to the ideals that the Democratic party stands behind. We no longer live in a world where the GOP’s spinners who write the mainstream media’s storylines get to define the box in which liberals operate. Obama has been able to bypass the filter right to the Democratic nomination, and he and Joe Biden now have the momentum and backing to continue the journey right to the top.
hat exists now is a party that has alternative media to get reality out beyond the filter
What sort of unadulterated crap is this? I swear oliver, you just write bullshit and expect people to believe you.
Your employer, Media Matters, has come out and said that the press is grossly favoring The Obama….Media Matters!
And then you have the gall to pen something like this?
Your desperation is palpable…..
Are you going to ever write a post that makes sense? Try and read sometime, the press is still in the tank for McCain and now Palin.
Excellent post sir. Didn’t disagree with a word.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200808290010
A nice bit about how sexist the media is behaving with Gov Palin, written BY YOUR OWN EMP:OYER
I think there is a problem, though, with the media gushing over him too much. I don’t think he thinks that he’s all that, but the media does. I mean, the coverage after, that I was watching, from MSNBC, I mean these guys were ready to have sex with him….It’s embarrassing.
Well know republican supporter, Bill Maher.
This may not make sense to you Oliver, but believe me, it does to rest of america that isn’t bought and paid for by The Obama.
Excellent spot on analysis. When we reject the media memes about what “true Democrats” are supposed to be the rest of America finds out we’re more like them than the Republicans are.
Yep, Obama’s speechifying is working great so far. He’s exactly the same point the day after the convention as he was before the convention.
That darn media. Why won’t they see the greatness of the Messiah and just forget about the evil McCain?
I love the new “Scranton” ad with Biden
Because there is sexism in the press that means the press is pro-Democrat? Oooookay. I love how you accuse me of being bought and paid for by Obama and by Media Matters and that’s because what I opine on doesn’t necessarily line up 100% with someone.
Or something.
And in some polls Obama is even, some he’s up and some he’s up by a little. If, like McCain, Obama’s campaign had ever been about the daily up and down of polling, that might be something of a concern. But as they are focused on winning an election state by state, it isn’t.
It is a bit weird that the polls show independents preferring Democrats to Republicans by such a wide margin this year, but the presidential race is so much closer. I blame the cosmetic issues (Wright, the ‘bitter’ blather, scary black Muslim scary, etc., the ‘proud’ blather, etc.).
Gee, it’s almost like Oliver looked at his front page, realized he’d spent eight straight postings on Sarah Palin, and suddenly realized that there’s someone else on the national ticket who he hadn’t mentioned in a while…
So he reminds us that Obama talks a good game, but he has virtually NO record of, you know, actually DOING things and getting things done. His main talent is giving a good prepared speech, so let’s remind everyone of his amazingly stage-managed talk that got utterly blown off the scene by Palin.
Who, you know, has actually won seriously-contested elections and gone after corrupt fixers like Tony Rezko and taken actual stances and gotten stuff done…
J.
because what I opine on doesn’t necessarily line up 100% with someone.
No, I accuse you because what you opine doesn’t line up with reality.
Look, when your opinion is based on what Obama wants to do with this country, then you can at least argue a point. But you are constantly finding some scapegoat for the democrat parties poor performance.
Now when left wing organizations start pointing out that the media is in the tank for Obama,and you still just ignore it, that is when it becomes clear that you aren’t even interested in arguing a point, just a political party.
“Who, you know, has actually won seriously-contested elections and gone after corrupt fixers like Tony Rezko and taken actual stances and gotten stuff done…”
Jay Tea, if winning “seriously-contested elections” is on your list of qualifying accomplishments for public officials, there’s a little thing called the 08 Democratic primary you might want to read up.
No liberal orgs have said the media is in the tank for Obama. Can the media be sexist, yep. What you are saying, like what cons usually say, has no actual connection to reality.
Not that I want to feed Jaytea’s unhealthy preoccupation with my minute to minute writing and whereabouts, but the posts I put up about Palin – and will continue to – are links and tidbits I found out about her as I traveled yesterday. This post I’ve been planning to write since Thursday night, but I’ve been traveling.
What I would really like to hear about is, how what Obama is offering is different from what all Democrats have been offering since 1964 — with differing levels of success?
fafaroo, primaries aren’t elections. I was comparing Palin’s election as governor — where first she took down the sitting Republican governor in the primary, then the former Democratic governor in the general — with Obama’s breezing through his first election to the Illinois Senate, and the remarkably convenient unsealing of embarrassing divorce/child custody records his opponents that took out his Republican opponents for the US Senate.
Also, I have to wonder why the election reference was the only thing you felt worth addressing.
J.
This is the second or third time you’ve accused Sen. Obama with those Illinois revelations. You have the same lack of evidence as those previous instances.
Frank, the point is that what he’s offering is different from what the REPUBLICANS have been offering since 1980: trickle-down economic policies, crony capitalism, and the hell with the working class. Oh, and lots more wars!
Also, I have to wonder why the election reference was the only thing you felt worth addressing.
I’ll confess I don’t understand why you guys find Rezko so interesting.
From Rick Brookhiser on The Corner:
“Numinous Negro”?
“Liberals love Obama because he espouses a sensible liberal agenda based on sound, time-tested (if in countries other than this one) pragmatic principles, is articulate enough to communicate that agenda and is symbolic of a lessening of importance of cosmetic differences (such as race) in the United States.”
Fixed.
Prick. (not you Nimrod, this jagoff at the corner)
This is the second or third time you’ve accused Sen. Obama with those Illinois revelations. You have the same lack of evidence as those previous instances.
Seriously, are these people living in the ’20’s or something?
Excellent post, Oliver. And I hope in fact the New Media are the decisive edge for Obama. The McCainite slams in response make me wonder why these abusive types hang around here–are they exercising some kind of directionless hostility? Do they hope to make converts here? Are they frustrated debate squad fugitives? Too much free time? Or do they subconsciously want to BE converted, to get permission to vote for a candidate they know to be remarkable and bypass whatever stands in their way? I truly wonder.
Meanwhile Sarah Vowell has a fine piece in Old Media, the Sunday Times Op-Ed. Recommended to everyone.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/opinion/31vowell.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
I probably should “back off” the Rezko bit. After all, while Obama did have quite a few associations with the convicted felon, it’s not quite as bad as Hillary Clinton and Norman Hsu, who met with Hillary and raised tons of money for her while a wanted felon. There’s no real evidence that indicates Obama actually did anything corrupt with Rezko.
Just like there’s no real evidence that he ever did anything else in his career of substance. He gives good speeches (as long as he has his teleprompter on hand), talks a good game, but never actually does anything. He certainly didn’t do a damned thing about the incredibly corrupt Democratic political machine in Chicago that was his benefactor on his rise to power…
But I can’t help but think that Tony Rezko is precisely the kind of person Sarah Palin dealt with in Alaska — and she fought like hell against them, and beat them. Obama, on the other hand… not so much.
J.
“fafaroo, primaries aren’t elections …I have to wonder why the election reference was the only thing you felt worth addressing.”
I think the first sentence explains the second. You have a pretty skewed idea of what counts as “accomplishments” if you think primaries aren’t “elections” and so winning one of the toughest primaries against Hilary Clinton doesn’t say anything about Obama’s organizational and management skills.
Would it even matter if I listed Obama accomplishments as a community organizer, lawyer, senior law school lecturer, state senator and senator? All the links are in another thread where you spewed the same ignorance.
I’ll repeat what I said there. You know about Palin’s accomplishments because you’ve read about them, possibly even sought them out. It’s clear, however, on the other hand, that your sole source of information about Obama’s record comes from soundbites and gotcha moments spread by other conservative hacks like yourself.
You like being able to throw out stupid statements such as the following: “Just like there’s no real evidence that he ever did anything else in his career of substance.” It’s easy and fun. Why mess that all up with actual research and thought?
If you spent even two minutes googling Obama and his career you’d know that such a statement was ridiculous and without merit. You would prefer not to know that.
Barack Obama has four times as much experience in the Illinois state legislature, and twice as much in the US Congress, as Abraham Lincoln. What did Lincoln ever DO, before he became President? What scholarly papers did he publish? What were his legislative accomplishments?
Maybe it would be a roll of the dice to elect Obama. On the other hand, we know what we can expect from McCain: four more years of the same old shit.
From what I’ve seen of Obama the last four years, and what I’ve seen of McCain the last quarter-century, I’d rather roll the dice.
Bruce Henry: well put, and amen!
Thank you, sir.
It’s really funny to read how Palin’s baby is someone else’s, how Palin shouldn’t fire a cop who threatens to kill his family and tazers his son, and how Palin is working the “casting couch.”
IOW, it’s fun to point and laugh. The unintentional comedy is better than TV.
It’s Obama’s fault that Ryan was sleazy?
I’ve said it elsewhere in some other thread: Conservatives don’t give a shit about experience.
It certainly didn’t bother them when they elected Bush in 2000 and it certainly isn’t something McCain really cares about either, having nominated a demonstrably ill-equipped person to be his VP.
But I can’t help but think that Tony Rezko is precisely the kind of person Sarah Palin dealt with in Alaska
Is that before or after she supported the bridge to nowhere and had Ted Stevens, possibly the most corrupt of all U.S. senators, cut ads for her?
Good post.
Does anyone use the tv MSM as their first source of information anymore? I’m slow so it took the flap about lapel pins for me to pretty much kick the tv MSM down to my second source of information. With social networking, RSS feeds from not only American but foreign papers, Wikipedia, YouTube, blogs, etc., I’m well armed with multiple sources of knowledge before I subject myself to the talking heads on tv. It’s almost a shame but it’s like MSM is the British during the Revolutionary War, walking in line, following outdated rules, expecting everyone to follow the protocols that keep them in power while the bloggers are disguising themselves to gain access, jumping from behind trees, throwing rocks, whether it takes to get the story. Neither way is the way is should be but within 5 years some new entity will emerge that is a child of both.
There’s no real evidence that indicates Obama actually did anything corrupt with Rezko.
Fantastic, Jay. You’ll not speak of him again? Can we get that in writing, or are we gonna play Whitewater 2.0 and spend years and years and millions looking for nothing?