I hesitated to write about Obama's "bitter" comment, because I'm....what's that word...."bitter" that the media harps on such frivolous bullshit as this and calls it "news." But there is something to be said about why this "story" is getting so much coverage.
When you look at a picture taken by a great photographer, you should study what it is in the photo. Just as importantly, however, you should study what the photographer did not capture with his lens. The point here is that bias often hinges more on what one ignores than on what one focuses on.
How are Obama's comments "news"? How many Americans my age or younger leaked their lifeblood into the Mesopotamian mud the day Obama's words were uttered? 2? 3? 23? We don't know, because the media doesn't care. The media thinks that the most important thing that happened in the world that day was that Barack Obama said something that they thought was "controversial."
After we castigate the media for this talk-soup, entertainment-weekly, monkey-masturbation, he-said, we said bullshit coverage, we can analyze Obama's comment. I think it's important because what Obama said was true. Maybe that's why it's become such a scandal.
The cardinal sin that the media has harped on, as far as I can tell, is that Obama said that Americans are "bitter". Well, what the fuck else would we be? Should Americans not be bitter that their middle class has been destroyed, that their borders are unguarded, that their nation's armed forces and credibility have been impaled on the incomprehensable ideological spear wielded by a silver spoon-fed, draft-doging, male cheerleader frat twerp? Have I missed something? If you're not bitter, you're asleep.
There is an important dynamic at work here. Just as Americans can never acknowledge guilt for anything their armed forces have ever done, they also apparently can not be "bitter" about the results of the policies carried out by their "representatives".
If you tell anyone in the media that American militarism has sown death and misery across this Earth, you will be painted into a corner populated with schizophrenics and pedophiles. If you tell anyone in the media that Americans have anything to be bitter about, we now know that the remedy is the same.
This is a pitiful state for a great nation to inhabit. The reflexively violent backlash at any suggestion of self-critique is very unappealing, and must surely horrify the rest of the world. Imagine if you were among the other 96% of humanity, prey to the whim of a country that refused to even entertain the thought of its own fallibility.
Why is the media so invested in shooting down Obama for suggesting that working-class folks are bitter? Obama is obviously not reflective of the working class, but the media is even less so.
How is it that the media, that most isolated and pretentious and, yes, elitist institution in the country, the very people who decide what "news" is worthy of being relayed to the American people, can call anyone an elitist?
Obama decides what to say to 1,000 people. The media decides what part of what he said should be relayed to 100,000,000. Now, who's the elitist?
Hillary Clinton, of course, was given free reign to prove her street cred after Obama's comments. She told about how her dad taught her how to shoot. She took a shot of Crown Royal in 3 sips. And also had a Blue Moon with a twist of orange.
As a 20th generation blue collar grunt, let me say that when blue collar folks have a beer and a chaser, the have a Bud and a shot of Jim Beam or Jack Daniels. The words "Moon", "Orange", "Crown", and "Royal" do not fit into their equation. Neither is any "shot" taken in 3 sips. Typical Clintonian behavior. I didn't inhale. I took a shot....in 3 sips.
Hillary Clinton's husband makes 100,000 dollars per hour to talk to people. Only God deserves that much to tell us what he's thinking, but God would donate ALL the money to charity. Hillary "loaned herself" 5 million dollars a few months back. Hillary's only chance to win the nomination hinges on "super"delegates, whose votes are deemed approximately 150,000 times more legitimate than the folks Barack Obama apparently lords over. Yes, Hillary's only chance hinges ENTIRELY on superdelegates, but Barack Obama is the one who has contempt for the grunts.
I feel dirty writing about this. I've had 3 absolute intuitions about America in my adult life. The first was that George W. Bush would be president. I felt this in my gut before even seeing the man's face. I didn't know it would take a coup d'etat, but I knew he would be president. The second was the first time I saw Bush say "Iraq" after 9/11. I knew. The 3rd was in 2004. I never harbored a shred of doubt that Bush would remain in office.
I haven't had such a feeling regarding this election. It's like being in love; when you know, you know. And so far, I don't know. Intuitively, I know that Obama has the best chance, but I can't see it. After this latest charade, however, I have the beginnings of a feeling. It's a feeling that tells me that John McCain will be president.
His supporters, technically independent groups exercising their 1st amendment perogatives, will attack Obama as a closet Muslim, a black nationalist, and an elitist. How could a black Muslim be an elitist? Never mind. I can start to see it now.
Obama, being the best American politician in 40 years, managed to slip the Jeremiah Wright knot. But daring to say that Americans could possibly have anything to be "bitter" over, and daring to imply that "bitter" people often lash out, is what will sink him. Not because it's false, but because it carries a burden of truth that we refuse to bear.
No comments:
Post a Comment