TNR BLOGS

September 06, 2008 | 3:43 PM
September 05, 2008 | 8:32 PM
September 05, 2008 | 8:16 PM

September 05, 2008 | 2:53 PM
September 05, 2008 | 3:45 AM
September 05, 2008 | 12:25 AM

September 06, 2008 | 3:14 PM
September 06, 2008 | 3:10 PM
September 05, 2008 | 4:28 PM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

September 05, 2008 | 1:35 PM
September 03, 2008 | 1:01 PM
September 02, 2008 | 6:20 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
18.02.2008
War of Words

Noam, I don't quite know what to make of the Clinton campaign's outrage over Obama's borrowed rhetoric. This strikes me as incredibly thin stuff for a nearly hour-long conference call. Perhaps it's just a sign of how difficult it is to bash a guy with a short political career, but there's a whiff of desperation here.

The only way I can make sense of it, then, is to believe it's really about something larger. That the subtext is a fuller comparison between Obama and Patrick. An attempt to point the media to the example of a black Democrat who campaigned with grand and inspiring rhetoric--Patrick even used the slogan "Yes, we can"--and then turned out to be something of a dud in office. On the call Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson denied that this is the real message here. But I suspect otherwise. It'll be interesting to see how many broader Obama-Patrick comparisons trickle into MSM coverage of this flap.

Link via Ben Smith. Photo: AP

--Michael Crowley

Posted: Monday, February 18, 2008 12:10 PM with 17 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

AaronBBrown said:

Plans within plans.  Bunch of desperate and sickly campaign puppies if you ask me.  :-)

February 18, 2008 12:40 PM

jacobt1 said:

Michael,

Thank you for pointers.

"Last week, people in Massachusetts had a second chance for hope - and took a pass"

They knew better. Will David Axelrod be able to screw up  American people the way he screwd up

Massachusetts?

February 18, 2008 12:45 PM

The Plank said:

Mike and Noam have already done a great job explaining the ridiculousness of the Clinton campaign's

February 18, 2008 12:48 PM

lymon1 said:

As maybe the only person on TNR who thinks Obama's gift to Tony Rezko of a senate internship was significant, let me say that THIS is not significant!

February 18, 2008 1:10 PM

blackton said:

yes, Obama and Patrick are both black so they will govern exactly the same way. and since Hillary is a woman she is bound to govern exactly the same way as every other Democratic woman governor does. I am also certain if I were to go over the campaign speeches of anyone of the present Democratic women governors I could find lines identical to what Hillary says. But why even bother, it is stupid and pointless as is comparisons between Obama and Patrick.

Hillary has a truly sad campaign staff, they remind me of the command staff in Hitlers bunker desperately searching for a scenario for victory. Obama and Patrick are black, they both speak English. Coincidence, I think not. Yes, victory is ours!

February 18, 2008 1:26 PM

blackton said:

jacob, so freaking what, are you saying that because Obama and Barack are both black they will govern exactly the same way, why not say that since Hillary is a woman she will be exactly the same as any other woman governor? I see the problem for you is the number of Democratic women governors endorsing Obama far outnumber the number of black Democrat governors endorsing Clinton. Hard to compare Janet Napolitano or Kathleen Sebelius to Clinton since they endorsed Obama.

lymon, wtf? if you were young and ambitious enough getting an internship isn't really that difficult. Why do you insist on pretending it is? i am literally a nobody, and I have known people from my school who did such crap. Hell, my own brother-in-law, who was also a nobody, started out that way, making connections, etc. to moving up to a fairly high GS position.

February 18, 2008 1:35 PM

drdannyu said:

blackton, I think you're totally wrong.  Any decent student of history knows that Hillary will govern exactly like Indira Gandhi.  Or possibly Golda Meir.

February 18, 2008 1:40 PM

jacobt1 said:

blackton,

They share much more in common, Read the article:

"But they have things in common as well, two black men with inspiring personal stories and unimpeachable academic credentials who are upbeat about America. And, as Axelrod discovered, there is great power in those stories and the hopes they engender. For some, it's a validation of the American dream. For others, it's a truly colorblind society. But for most, it's a rejection of the sordid compromises of political life - a chance to choose someone who, for so many reasons, does not represent "the system."

Except that when it comes to the actual substance of issues, there's no special agenda attached to the politics of hope. Both Patrick in 2006 and Obama this year have websites full of positions on the issues, but they're not easily distinguishable from those of other Democrats. The issues tend to get lost in the language of hope, perhaps because they sound and feel routine, and don't strike an inspirational chord."

February 18, 2008 1:46 PM

FWright said:

I don't understand how the Patrick comparison would help Clinton.  Outside of Massachusetts, does anyone even know that Patrick's first year in office was considered a disappointment?  

February 18, 2008 1:48 PM

jacobt1 said:

blackton,

"jacob, so freaking what, are you saying that because Obama and Barack are both black they will govern exactly the same way, why not say that since Hillary is a woman she will be exactly the same as any other woman governor?"

Just read the article and respond to it if you can.

February 18, 2008 1:51 PM

stgla said:

Hillary will govern like Bill Clinton but without the charisma.

February 18, 2008 1:55 PM

blackton said:

the lag time here is horrendous, I thought my first post was lost.

drdanny, Golda Gandhi it is.

February 18, 2008 2:00 PM

blackton said:

jacob, what article? the one above? actually yes we can was stolen from Si, se puede of Cesar Chavez, and I guess he stole it from somewhere else. these banalities are meaningless. you yourself know it is not so much what he says (most of it generic up with hope stuff) as how he says it. I have never seen Deval Patrick speak but doubt he has Obama's charisma. Is Patrick a dud, I don't know, don't care and find the fact that they had the same manager beside the point (how many campaigns did shrum f up?). GWHB and GWB are father and son and miles apart in competence, so just stop saying that because these two candidates color or manager is anything beyond an interesting minor footnote. Axelrod also worked for New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. Why don't you compare Obama to him? They are both lawyers, both went to Harvard Law school, both edited the Harvard Law review, both are minorities.

Why don't you compare the two? is it because it is silly and pointless? so don't compare Obama and Patrick.

February 18, 2008 2:29 PM

jacobt1 said:

blackton,

"Why don't you compare the two? is it because it is silly and pointless? so don't compare Obama and Patrick."

Obama   compared  himself  or was compared by his supporters to   Jesus Christ, Joshua, FRD, MLK, JFK, Reagan. Why not compare him to Deval Patrick?

"I have never seen Deval Patrick speak but doubt he has Obama's charisma."

Check for yourself:

www.youtube.com/watch

February 18, 2008 3:01 PM

blackton said:

jacob, my job froze out youtube, so I can't watch it. regardless, I don't compare Obama to anyone above, as I don't compare Hillary to anyone else. It is a stupid exercise. It is one thing to compare Presidents, but that is because they have actual records which can be compared, but these are candidates neither of whom has ever been President (as much as Hillary likes claim she was one by osmosis).

Honestly, is your argument that since Obama and Patrick are both black and charismatic, they are the same, and that every failure of Patrick is Obama's as well? Talk about guilt by association. Comparing personality traits is ok, to some measure, but I ain't no psychologist, but skin color and speechifying? Please.

February 18, 2008 5:22 PM

jacobt1 said:

Blackton,

"Honestly, is your argument ..."

It's not my argument. Read

www.boston.com/.../bay_state_voters_know_their_limits

" I don't compare Obama to anyone above ... It is a stupid exercise"

I agree, Tell Obama and Kennedy that they are being stupid.

February 18, 2008 8:42 PM

blackton said:

So Patrick's record has been a mixed bag. But the usual ups and downs can be devastating to someone who has staked everything on bringing about change. Whether posited by a candidate for governor or for president, the politics of hope invites disappointment, simply because hope means something different to every person.

That is it? That is as bad as he is? You mean people should be disappointed he didn't cure cancer?

How stupid is this? The point is to win elections and take power away from the republicans, who the hell cares if some dipshits feel disappointed. We are electing a President not a savior, since Obama's change theme is working better then Hillary's "only I have solutions" then he should ride that theme.

Hillary is promising everybody everything now. She will disappoint fewer people I agree but that is because most people know she is a lying sob already.

Following this logic, we really should elect McCain since he is basically promising nothing, therefore no one will be disappointed.

Yes, and Kennedy is stupid.

February 19, 2008 2:56 PM