?

Log in

No account? Create an account
April 2012   01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Cadouri

An Intriguing Analogy

Posted on 2008.02.19 at 00:33
Current Music: The Foxboro Hot Tubs - Mother Mary
I was watching Tonight’s Hardball, and Chris Matthews made an intriguing analogy in comparing the tenor of the messages of Clinton and Obama. He said that Clinton was like if Moses, instead of saying ‘let’s get out of Egypt,’ said ‘I’m going to run for Pharoah, since I know that I can do a much better job than the one now. Obama is the Moses who says ‘let’s get out of here and clear the tables, start afresh.’ I am always glad to see Biblical imagery in the wider culture, so I am happy about that, but I have to think about whether or not I agree. I think I do, but... hmmmmn.
What does everyone else think?

Comments:


robin
yafah at 2008-02-19 06:06 (UTC) (Link)
Ehh.. the analogy doesn't make sense, even if you accept the view of the two candidates' positions.

Really, it should be something more along the lines of: Hillary is the person who would run for Moses and say that she can improve conditions for slaves and lobby on our behalf vs Obama is the person who would run for Moses and say this sucks, let's get the eff out of here.


:-P
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 06:25 (UTC) (Link)
That was how I understood it. It may be that after 1:00 AM my paraphrasing suffers.
uberconfused
uberconfused at 2008-02-19 07:13 (UTC) (Link)
You really think Obama is saying "let's clear the tables and start over?" He's running for Pharoah too! God, all of this "Obama is something new and different" rhetoric makes me want to vomit.
groundbyground
groundbyground at 2008-02-19 10:21 (UTC) (Link)
THANK YOU!
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 13:16 (UTC) (Link)
Cynic! No, well my point was just more about this interesting analogy in comparing their rhetorical styles and themes. I think he would do a good job, though. Better than any of the others.
uberconfused
uberconfused at 2008-02-19 13:19 (UTC) (Link)
I'm not saying I wouldn't vote for him if he's the Democratic nominee. But I can't understand why people are so willing to drink to Kool-aid when it comes to Obama. Is it just because he's an electable black man? He's marginally different than HRC and he's got two major strikes against him: 1)much less experience and 2)much less political capital. Not that I love HRC either. Mainly I'm glad to not be in the States for this one.
just laur
echafaud at 2008-02-19 13:29 (UTC) (Link)
thankyouthankyouthankyou

if he gets the nomination, i can't say with 100% certainty that i'd vote for him, and i can't beLIEVE i'm actually considering that. but, seriously, look what happened last time we elected someone with no foreign policy experience.

and i also agree with "i'm glad not to be in the states for this one." sighhh
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 13:36 (UTC) (Link)
Yeah, but we NEVER elect someone with foreign policy experience. Usually not, anyway. He has more than Bill Clinton did.
just laur
echafaud at 2008-02-19 14:05 (UTC) (Link)
that's true, but bill clinton had over a decade of gubernatorial experience, compared to obama's three years in the senate and, what, five or so years in the illinois state senate?

the situations are also very different, in terms of foreign policy, since the first gulf war was over and, comparatively, a huge and wonderful success! so clinton didn't have such a quagmire to contend with. and, at the end of the day, i was a little kid when clinton got elected, so i didn't even think about his foreign policy, but i've read obama's ideas and i disagree with some of them.

and you say we never elect anyone with foreign policy experience, but we will have the opportunity to this election, and that's the most important issue for me.

the country doesn't run on hope, it runs on bureaucracy and planning. i'll be the cynic, i am completely unswayed by "yes we can," i'm swayed by "here's what i'm gonna do, let me lay it out for you."
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 14:27 (UTC) (Link)
Yeah, but it is BAD experience!
I'd rather have someone with the intelligence to figure out who to listen to. I don't need the President to be an expert on everything, but a good judge of which experts to listen to, or more to the point, how to listen to various experts and distill out a good plan.
And Obama has consistently laid out plans for things. That is the Clinton Kool-Aid that he hasn't.
jonnymoon at 2008-02-21 03:35 (UTC) (Link)
Bah, he was "gubernor" of Arkansas. That's like saying you got a C average in school.

Hillary just has way too much blood on her hands and her "experience" is all on how to avoid scrutiny.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/chi-0220edit1feb20,0,7701301.story

Flat out...she is a lying murderer, and if this country elects her as president, it's clear that we are too far gone to recover.

Servant, your biblical analogy falls short. Here's a better example. If Hillary ever got to be King, she'd be like David...she'd screw the electorate (Bathsheba) and then murder the electorate's husband (Vince Foster).
(no subject) - (Anonymous) Expand
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 13:35 (UTC) (Link)
He does have a lot of experience in domestic affairs, and experience is overrated anyways. But my main point was just this weird, interesting Biblical analogy.
uberconfused
uberconfused at 2008-02-19 13:39 (UTC) (Link)
I know more about politics than the bible, so I can't speak to that issue.

However, I am scandalized that you just said "experience is overrated anyways." This is the A#1 thing that freaks me out about American politics--the appeal of the average. I don't want my president to be a "normal guy" (or "gal"). I want them to be exceptional, highly educated, well-trained, better connected than anyone else, and EXPERIENCED. What the hell.

Plus he doesn't even have that much experience with national level domestic politics, being mid-first Senate term.
Jonathan
theservant at 2008-02-19 13:51 (UTC) (Link)
It's not that I want average, it's just that experience isn't a guarantee. You will not find a more experienced team with more years of foreign service, more articles in foreign affairs, etc. than Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, and Armitage, and look where they got us. I don't want inexperience, but I want values and intelligence rather than just an impressive resume.
jonnymoon at 2008-02-21 05:18 (UTC) (Link)
Some of the most powerful people in business didn't get there by being "exceptional, highly educated, well-trained"...they did it by surrounding themselves with those sort of people and using *their* skills.

Nobody knows everything, and the smart man knows he doesn't know everything. But he will know how to find people who can tell him what he needs to know, and he will know how to work with the info provided to him.

I think that Obama's capable of this, at least.

Plus, his hands aren't as bloody as Hillary's.
Previous Entry  Next Entry