The “Bitter-gate” Mess …

First of all, it lacks creativity and thought when cats paste the word “gate” at the end of every political scandal or controversy.  It’s whack.  There’s no other way to describe it. 

There is a manufactured quality to this controversy, and its timing – right on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary – creates the impression that it’s somewhat engineered.  In reality, it is much to do about nothing. Another example of the 24/7 news cycle needing something to clamor about.  There is the sense that the political news cycle is slow at the moment, the primary is dragging on and media folks are bored. 

In reality, small towns in rural areas are frustrated, they are definitely bitter about a whole array of economic challenges.  Republicans have been very good at using that frustration to create boogeymen like affirmative action and immigration to further their political agenda.  Which is why they are making much noise about it since they feel the political landscape shifting from hot button social wedge issues to substantive bread and butter issues.  If we were Republican, we’d get worried too – this isn’t 2000 or 2004.  It doesn’t appear as though peeps will be voting on whether their gay neighbors should be married.  People are hurting financially, and when it’s all said and done, they’ll be voting according to what their bank statements say.

 

Senator Obama has picked up on that sort of frustration during the course of this campaign and tapped into it – which is underscored by the type of enthusiasm generated by his candidacy.  When examining the entire quote, one finds that it is appropriate and cogent within the context of the question that was asked: how do you effectively reach out to “blue collar” voters? 

 

The Clintons are clearly looking for anything to reverse shrinking poll numbers at the moment.  But, Senator Clinton should be very careful in pressing forward with the “elitist” argument.  First, Hillary Clinton calling Barack Obama “elitist” is like Barry Bonds calling Roger Clemens a cheater.  She is not in a position to engage in name-calling nor is John McCain.  She’s been insulated in a political bubble of the Governor’s mansion and the White House for most of her public life, more recently earning $109 million over seven years with her former President husband.  John McCain is from an elite military family, his father an admiral, and he married into money, not to mention that he’s been in elected office since 1982.  Who is the most “elite?”  When was the last time either Clinton or McCain had to worry about paying off student loans, paying down mortgages or going from paycheck-to-paycheck?  The “elitist” argument simply rings hollow in this sense. Being in touch with the “blue collar” electorate is not about how many shots of whiskey you can drink, or how much beer you can swallow, or how many guns you own.  That’s being patronizing. It’s about whether you are truly addressing the serious issues of joblessness, economic despair and disillusionment felt by many in rural America. 

 

We’re not so sure Obama needs to deflect questions about this controversy during Wednesday’s debate.  There is a grand opportunity here to stick to his talking points on the economy, to present what makes his plan stronger. Here, he can discuss the need to rally people into a cause that motivates Washington to do things differently. What he needs to talk about is that during the course of this campaign, he is talking to people and is aware of their frustrations.  The issue is not whether people are bitter or angry, the issue is whether or not government has been responsive to their needs during times of economic crisis over the past three decades.

 

The other piece of this is the racial sub-text to this story.  Yeah: we appreciate Philly talk show host Michael Smerconish’s comments on MSNBC last night.  It is “rich” and ironic when you have the African American candidate being called “elitist.”  That’s a first.  But, in truth, media-heads are annoyed by Obama’s sophistication, annoyed by the fact that a Black man can get this far being the way he is – in many ways, it debunks the notions regarding the Black middle class, and that Black wealth and success centers around Black athletes and entertainers.  Finally, they see the opportunity to vent that frustration, the frustration that he’s “middle class” in a way that isn’t defined by the constraints of his Blackness.  It annoys many that he shops at Whole Foods, he can’t bowl, he’s Harvard educated. “Well, he’s certainly not acting Black the way he’s supposed to be acting,” they say “so he must be elitist.”  Essentially, he defies the conventional mindset. He’s the “uppity negro” that they have to respect, but can’t stand. And this latest controversy shows that in so many ways.