OPINION & EDITORIAL
Barack Obama: Political St. Nick
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Gerald Cox:
- I'll take a female president, just not her (December 3, 2007)
- Religion aside, faith perseveres (November 26, 2007)
- Want Big Ten sports? Get a dish (November 19, 2007)
- Civil rights movement needs 'Black-In' (November 12, 2007)
Related Stories:
- Readers stop punching pillows, respond (September 21, 2007)
- Obama: Visionary, not fraudulent (September 19, 2007)
- Idealism on tap at Obama fundraiser (October 16, 2007)
- Dissecting Obama-mania (March 12, 2007)
- Obama's charisma essential to victory (January 29, 2007)
by Gerald Cox
Monday, October 15, 2007
For all the excitement, you'd think that Santa Claus was coming to town. In fact, the only thing that could make Madison happier right now would be a state budget. Today, however, the city of Madison will accept a worthy consolation prize: Sen. Barack Obama is coming to town. His arrival will be greeted with a frenzy of press coverage, adoring acolytes and Madisonian fanfare fit for a president — or a man who wants to be one. His is an eventful visit — the last time a man of Mr. Obama's political stature visited our city, it was John Kerry, and he too was trying — and failing — to become president.
Mr. Obama's upcoming visit allows Madisonians the opportunity to reconsider the excitement surrounding the political superstar that is Mr. Obama. And the more one considers Mr. Obama, the more one must become convinced that Santa Claus is indeed coming to Madison on Monday.
Their obvious physical differences aside, Mr. Obama and old Saint Nick really do share a few similarities. The electoral youth are falling in love with Mr. Obama's engaging and approachable style, his charismatic discourse, his Lincolnian inexperience and his virginal Senate record. His prescience regarding Iraq has us convinced of his sagacity and inability to make a wrong decision, and we are captivated by his race and youth. He's different. He's cute. He's Barack Obama.
But is it truly the belief that the young hold in him that makes him the political equivalent of Father Christmas? Is it his proverbial sleigh full of political promise and change? Hardly.
It is because President Barack Obama does not exist, will never exist, and has never existed. We, as a nation, won't, don't and have not elected men like Obama. Men who have a vision, charisma and youth. Men who haven't yet had the opportunity to sell their souls for political fortune. Men who espouse change. Who are, as of yet, unsullied by the corrupt depravity of Capitol Hill. Men who are different, outside of the cookie-cutter mold of the American Presidency. Men whose names are unpronounceable to a sizable portion of the voting population. Men like that, America will not elect.
Those contributing to his campaign might as well write a check to me, for America does not elect Barack Obamas. We elect Hillary Clintons and John Edwards. We elect McCains and Giulianis. We elect Romneys and Thompsons. If they'd only run, we'd elect Al Gores and Bill Clintons. We resurrect the corpses of our political past to guide our future. It's what we do, it's what we've done and it's what we're doing.
I, like America, prefer the experienced to the inexperienced. I prefer the prepared, able statesman to the young, naÃ
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 12:53am):
I love the article, but think it over-simplifies the role of the *woman* in Hillary's campaign. It's truly historic. I suspect the campaign has downplayed it for now, but expect more female rhetoric from Clinton to garner those independent womens.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 5:58am):
This is just laughable:
"And while we'd like to elect a man like Mr. Obama, we live in a country that doesn't"
The only reason the country doesn't is because of losers like you, Mr. Cox, who give up even before they try. And that's the difference between you and the high achievers in your class. I happen to belong to a different league of students who believe that a President Obama will give us the hope that we don't have to be corrupt, have a certain name or come from a certain family to hold high office. I will vote for him and let God take care of the rest.
Ike Bonaventure (October 15, 2007 @ 6:12am):
I don't mean to be disrepectful, but I think your comments explains why black people under-achieve in America. Not because they're not capable.
I'm a 23-year old white male. I don't struggle with my vote for Senator Obama, because I know what is right and I WILL DO THE RIGHT THING. I haven't the slightest doubt that he can and will be President. To suggest that I would write a check for Obama to help him win, while at the same time expecting someone else to win is just plain ignorant.
E. Diamond (October 15, 2007 @ 6:20am):
When a young student writes:
"We as a nation won't elect men who have a vision, charisma and youth. Men who haven't yet had the opportunity to sell their souls for political fortune. Men who espouse change. Who are, as of yet, unsullied by the corrupt depravity of Capitol Hill. Men who are different, outside of the cookie-cutter mold of the American Presidency. Men whose names are unpronounceable to a sizable portion of the voting population."
then you know something is wrong with the American society. Before analysing the minds of students who shoot each other, I suggest they start with the minds of cynical ones like the author of this gibberish.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 6:41am):
Just because your name is Gerard Cox doesn't make you more electable to any office than someone called Barack Obama.
Just like me, you're a descendant of African slaves. Cox is a borrowed name, not an African name. So don't deceive yourself with the impact of a name.
Give up now. Why do you even bother to go to college. No one will ever give you a good job, when there are other qualified white people called Edwards, McCain, etc. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm one sister who doesn't believe in giving up before trying. That's why I'm voting for Barack.
Sarah -Jane Smith (October 15, 2007 @ 6:52am):
WOW! This is interesting.
Isn't this the same person who wrote the piece blaming white people for an 'educational system that fails black pupils'? LOL!
You failed yourselves, Mr. Cox. And I feel sorry for you, because things are never going to change as long as you continue to accept the status-quo and embrace people like the Clintons who smooth-talked their way into the hearts of black people while sending their brothers and sons to jail without giving them any help or the second chance extended to white folks. They made you what you are today- skeptical and happy to be second-best.
I'm a white woman who has the common sense to tell that the only real choices are Obama and Edwards, Obama being my first preference and that's not likely to change.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 6:55am):
What a loser.
So, you managed to get your article on google.
Well, enjoy it while it lasts, because this is going in your record and we'll pop champagne in your name when Obama becomes President.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 7:37am):
No matter what your political orientation is, you must give Obama credit for his ability to speak well.
If he doesn't win the presidency, he can always get a job recording books on tape. I'd listen to that guy all day.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 9:41am):
And the 72 square miles surrounded by reality we call Madison is the Island of Misfit toys. Sing along now ... "There's always tomorrow for dreams to come true. Believe in your dreams, come what may. There's always tomorrow with so much to do and so little time in a day." Ahhh....
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 10:44am):
bravo, gerald cox. thank you for acknowledging the hyper-commercialism of the obama campaign.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 11:28am):
Which Obama are we getting starry-eyed for? The one that was unusually progressive, one of two non-millionaires in the Senate? Or the one that is now bowing to other interests, diving headfirst into a disastrous and worse-than-Bush Middle East policy and misguided trade deals like the Peru FTA? I used to support Obama, but the shifting scares me, and the trajectory is incredibly worrisome.
What will electing Obama really achieve? Or Clinton for that matter? Are we electing them because of the policies they will enact, or because as good liberals we like to show how much we like black people and women? Really, what are their policies? What will change? Will my life really be different? Will global warming be reversed? Will poverty be fought effectively? Will more children receive a better education? Will we stop supporting dictators, will we stop supporting our billionaires at the cost of foreign autonomy and democracy? Will anything be done to change the distribution of wealth that is destroying this country and much of the world? As much as their supporters will scream and rant that things will be better, at best they are only cosmetic surgeons, not transplant doctors.
Don't kid yourselves, nothing of importance will be done in the next four years. Stop wasting your energy with yet another campaign and work towards changing our own community.
Kyle Szarzynski (October 15, 2007 @ 12:15pm):
The underlying flaw of Gerald's argument is the notion that Barack is a candidate for change. This is the assumption that the entire piece relies on, yet there is not a single shred of evidence - save the incorrect comment about his "prescience regarding Iraq" (how do Hillary and Obama currently differ on the war, again?) - that he is actually different from the other leading contenders. Had Gerald tried to show how Obama is substantively different from the rest, he would have failed.
The reason why Obama appeals to the youth is his style, not his policies.
Anyway, Hillay's got it clinched.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 1:20pm):
Hilary is the worst nanny state minded leader possible. She'd sanction a bed time for 15 year olds if she pass it.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 2:52pm):
9:41 (and Something Verbose, for that matter):
MADISON IS NOT 72 SQUARE MILES OF FANTASY SURROUNDED BY REALITY.
The actual quotation, attributed to various people (Gov. Nelson and Gov. Dryfuss to name a few...) is that "Madison is 25 square miles of fantasy surrounded by reality."
72 square miles would reach half way to Milwaukee, almost down to Janesville, over half well to the Dells, and almost to Dodgeville. In case you're a moron, Madison isn't that big.
For God's sake can we PLEASE follow the advice of Miss Teen South Carolina and get these idiots a MAP?!?!?
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 3:14pm):
I'm abstaining until a viable candidate shows up. Which they won't, because making it this far in politics presupposes that you've already sold your soul to the highest bidder, or else have no shot in hell of winning.
Maybe a mass-abstention would get the message across that we're all tired of the candidates they give us and the total failure of the system to truly represent any of us "little people."
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 4:06pm):
Sad little children, who know nothing about politics; smoke, drink and misuse their parents' computer writing nonsense.
If at your gae you cannot recognize what a beautiful human being Obama is at heart, then your generation needs help.
It's campaign time. Everyone is going to have a plan, promise heaven on earth, etc. The real difference is, who has the integrity, likeability, fariness and judgment to meet the challenegs of the future. Barack Obama does.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 5:06pm):
to 3:14pm
We had a mass abstention in 2000 (and in 2004 I think). A third of eligible voters didn't vote. That's a mass. What we need is that "mass abstention" to get off their ass and vote for the person they want to but don't because they're told they'd be wasting their vote.
I disagree with the article's portrayal of Obama only in that it still frames him as a man of revolutionary change and vision and HOPE(!), but his voting record and rhetoric have matched Hillary Clinton since he got a Senate seat. I know he's charismatic and young and not-white, but take your eyes off the damn cover and read the book (I don't mean 'The Audacity of Hope').
But you, Mr. Cox, have apparently given up. Everyone eventually gives up, that's why your description of our voting tendencies hold true. So you're part of the problem, and so soon, too.
~A.L.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 6:15pm):
9:41-
madison to dodgeville=58 mi (mainly west)
madison to mil.=78 mi x .5=39mi (mainly east)
east-west total=97 mi
madison to wis. dells=58 mi (mainly north)
madison to dodgeville=46 mi (mainly south)
north-south total=104 mi
ns x ew=approx sq mi of your plot=4056 sq mi
you are the moron/one severely lacking geographical awareness
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 8:28pm):
All this talk of hope and for what? What do we have to hope for?
"Hope doesn't have a face and can't be grasped; her power and presence can only be sensed. We can smell her and we can taste her when she shines out of our own depths, in our very own nest of spiders. That is where we go down into her, and emerge infected all the way to the marrow. She shows up, body and soul, in ordinary human life, right there where everything's gone wrong, where all defeats flourish, where there is no chance for success and where disasters collect prizes. Hope is the right to be imperfect, to be perfectly human.... Hope lives in the pores of all those who have fallen down, of those who are exhausted, who cry, who fail, who make ridiculous mistakes, in those who once couldn't do something, and then later learned to do it better than many others, in those who betrayed others and then weren't able to build up enough courage to recognize it and not do it again, in those who in a passion forgot about principles.... Hope doesn't live across the street, and she isn't sticking her tongue out at us from the house next door. She doesn't live in someone else's skin. She's not peering at us with a neighbour's eyes: rather she can be found within ourselves, right when we feel our heart and soul breaking at the rejection by another, because in the end, we are that other as well. Hope is here and now, feeding on pain and joy and smiles from the past and the future." - Raul Gatica
http://www.horizons.ca/categories.php?op=newindex&catid=4
Barack Obama offers us no hope. He offers us no vision of a better tomorrow. His policies offer us nothing either. Perhaps through his attitude so many look to him for hope; but really what we see in him is ourselves, our own potential for change. We need to act on our own potential. Stop putting our energy and hope into the hands of one man--we will forever be let down. Hold that power in your own hands. Our hands can do so much more than merely hold a ballot for 5 minutes every four years. With our hands we can sculpt our world. This is our future! We're 22, 21, some of us 18. We have so much energy, so much potential. We can shape our future, not merely let it be handed to us by a dying generation of manipulators, thieves, and frauds. Gandhi said, "Be the change you wish to see in the world." We can do that! But not by putting our blind faith in a Barack Obama, a Ron Paul, another Clinton. One person cannot be trusted with our hopes and dreams-- when we do this, we have always been let down, and we always will be.
It is easy to throw out countless quotes: "Democracy is a form of worship. It is the worship of Jackals by Jackasses" (H.L. Mencken). "Democracy is nothing if it is not dangerous" (Carl Oglesby). There will always be a debate about the usefulness of voting. Casting one vote out of 100,000,000 clearly will do nothing. Or maybe it will make all the difference. But even at it's biggest payoff, what do we win? The lesser of two evils? What if it is likely that neither candidate will help us, but further drag us down? Should we continue to shovel our hope on the candidate like confetti at a parade? Perhaps there will never be a perfect candidate. This is unavoidable, any "populist" candidate has his drawbacks. Should this not reinforce the need for us to act outside the political system? If the two channels given us resemble quicksand more than they do ladders, shouldn't we escape the quicksand altogether instead of debating which will sink fastest?
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 8:56pm):
HAHA. Gerald, I guess you're a smart college student and I'm sure you can be a good writer but the premise of your piece has been nicely captured by many of the responses on this board. Not only is it misguided to give up because you think you have a funny last name, but it is a dangerous perception that unfortunately, disproportionately affects young black men especially. So what do you think we should do brother? Kill ourselves now? You always have to try, always. Regardless if Barack wins or not, he has already laid a path for the rest of our kids to look up to and one day emulate and do even better than what the people that came before them started. Anyway, I'm glad you got a ticket. My ticket is going all the way.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 10:23pm):
Great article. It's interesting how many people think you've "given up" when you never say you "gave" in the first place.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 10:40pm):
People tend to mistake polls for reality. Polls are only of people who voted in the last primary and alot of them may not even vote. You also need to study the undecideds. The vast amount of voters are undecided and will be until right before they actually vote.
Because the traditional media is obsessing on national polls and trying to convince you that it is no use to support anyone since the anointed queen is inevitable, you have to realize this is what they tried to do to people in 2000.
Hillary is only as inevitable as you let her be and that is what the media is hoping for.
That you will let her be inevitable and give in. It is up to everyone who is going to vote to make a decision. Vote for your candidate, be it Obama or Edwards or the man on the moon, or let the media tell you who to vote for.
the choice is up to you.
Anonymous (October 15, 2007 @ 11:46pm):
LOL to 2:52pm for not knowing what a square mile is. Next time you call someone out, you should know what you are talking about.
p.s. Madison is somewhere around 75 square miles depending on what you include (lakes, surrounding communities).
Anonymous (October 16, 2007 @ 6:05pm):
Just thought you guys should look at this video. Just take the 13 minutes required, I find it amazing that this has stayed under the radar for so long. If you don't believe the video look it up, there is plenty of evidence.
http://www.hillcap.org/default.php?page_id=2
Anonymous (October 17, 2007 @ 9:46am):
In 2004, Wisconsin did it's part, voting for the better of two poor choices (Kerry over Bush). Kerry was more of an, "alright, this is all we have" type vote.
Obama is a "what an amazing man and beloved president he will be" type vote.
Wisconsin will do the right thing...BUT LETS MAKE IOWA DO THE RIGHT THING!!! help out Barak Obama, he is an honest man of the people... lets restore America
Anonymous (October 17, 2007 @ 2:53pm):
Okay,people, you all don't seem to realize that Gerald Cox often writes in a "tongue-in-cheek" style. Some of you students do not seem to "get it', and so you resort to personal attacks on not only what Gerald writes, but also on him. You extrapalate, assume,and resort to mean spiritedness based upon your silly and sometimes erroneous assumptions and etrapalations. Come on, at least he has the courage to put his name on what he writes. You guys need to read things more carefully and stop putting your personal spin onneverything. Discussion is great, but attacking this truly fine young writer is small and ugly. Get a grip, people!!!!!
Anonymous (November 4, 2007 @ 4:35am):
Gerald, very interesting piece. It definitely has sparked some nice debates. Nice job giving people a little poke, I think we all need to be reminded what we feel is important once in a while. If the article makes you speak out and stand more firmly on what your vote will be, and that you will, in fact, vote, than it has accomplished something good. If you feel so strongly in opposition to something, being further challenged will often make you act where you may not have previously. Be active, and not passive. Be the generation that changes the norm, that says we won't vote like our parents did for the reasons our parents did. Vote what you want for what you believe. Bravo, Gerald. Very nicely done.
Anonymous (February 10, 2008 @ 5:18pm):
obama offers hope!!!
but we lose and gain hope everyday!!!
wat can we really find in hope!!!
we ourselves need a better response!!!
how can he really give us hope?
by telling us everythings going to be better
well i think not
now wat do you say?
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
