alien & sedition.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Is Mickey Kaus the World's Worst Blogger?
Today, we get an Obama-related double whammy. The ever-insightful Kaus not only worries about Obama's supposed lack of "substance," he faithfully reminds us that Obama has not yet had his Joe Klein-approved "Sistah Souljah Moment." And we all know how Very Important for Democrats that is.
On the first point, Kaus acknowledges some of Obama's wonky legislative work. But, he says:
Or is this just the line on Obama?
In fact, I do think that the Democrats have a number of smart, accomplished candidates, and I'll certainly grant the need to hear more from Obama. But considering that he hasn't even officially begun to campaign yet, I figure there's a little bit of time for that.
Meanwhile, there's plenty of time for Kaus to yammer on about stupid things like "Sistah Souljah moments." Kaus asks: "What's the word for trumped-up contrarianism?"
Why, I do believe it's "Mickey Kaus."
(Paul)
There are a lot of bad bloggers out there. But only Mickey Kaus seems to have that special talent for swallowing vacuous talking points and attempting to dress them up as incisive and original commentary. At least the folks at the Corner are obviously working for the Cause. Kaus, though, is the world's most widely-read concern troll.
Today, we get an Obama-related double whammy. The ever-insightful Kaus not only worries about Obama's supposed lack of "substance," he faithfully reminds us that Obama has not yet had his Joe Klein-approved "Sistah Souljah Moment." And we all know how Very Important for Democrats that is.
On the first point, Kaus acknowledges some of Obama's wonky legislative work. But, he says:
It's not the same thing as confronting deeper, bigger, less easily addressed problems: How to structure the health care system, how to pay for entitlements, how to confront the terror threat, the rise of China, the problems of trade and immigration, the increase in income inequality at the top.Okay, that's fair enough. We do need to hear these things, considering that Obama failed to solve them all during his first two years as a Senator. But, uh, why aren't we hearing such loud demands that any other candidate - Republican or Democrat -provide clear answers to these questions? Do you automatically earn "substance" the longer you're in the Senate? Does "experience" exempt you from having to explicitly address the big questions of the day? Quick, without looking it up: can you tell me what plans Hillary and McCain have to tackle each of these issues?
Or is this just the line on Obama?
In fact, I do think that the Democrats have a number of smart, accomplished candidates, and I'll certainly grant the need to hear more from Obama. But considering that he hasn't even officially begun to campaign yet, I figure there's a little bit of time for that.
Meanwhile, there's plenty of time for Kaus to yammer on about stupid things like "Sistah Souljah moments." Kaus asks: "What's the word for trumped-up contrarianism?"
Why, I do believe it's "Mickey Kaus."
(Paul)
Labels: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Mickey Kaus, Sistah Souljah
¶ Posted by Paul Curtis 2:23 PM 0 comments Wednesday, December 13, 2006
March of the Straw Souljahs
At any rate, K-Lo has a very special Santa in mind this year: she's counting on Barack Obama to slide down the chimney and end all this nonsense by...uh...denouncing liberals.
While K-Lo sighs into her eggnog, let's note a couple things at work here.
One is the ongoing and ever-helpful conservative effort to tell Democrats about opportunities for "Sistah Souljah moments." Our friends on the right have fetishized the SSM and framed it as nothing less than a rite of passage for Democratic candidates. And, if you're a Republican, it's a neat deal. First your opponent is obligated to search around for some irritating and irrelevant extremist, pretend that he or she somehow represents a legitimate wing of the Democratic Party, and then denounce liberals and Democrats for being in thrall to such whackos.
So, yet another lesson Not Taking Advice from Your Enemies.
But there's something else here, which is Obama's success thus far at defining himself as the candidate of national unity. It's become increasingly common to describe - or criticize - Obama as a "blank slate," upon which anyone can project their political or patriotic hopes. I somewhat disagree: while it's true that, since coming to the U.S. Senate, he has kept a low profile to go with his limited track record (shocking behavior for a freshman Senator in the minority party!), he entered the national political scene with a very carefully crafted piece of rhetoric, which was designed precisely to define his politics - and his expression of what it means to be a Democrat - as a process of inclusion based around broadly shared values. It's a theme (further developed in his Knox College Commencement Address), that can seem irritatingly vague if you fail to realize how potentially powerful it is as a basis for progressive politics.
We'll talk a lot more about this later. At any rate, K-Lo's holiday (whoops, sorry - Christmas) wish for Obama points out the dangers of his approach: either that he could end up actually redeeming the cynical hopes of the pundit class - building and knocking down an army of straw Sistah Souljahs - or, on the other hand, that when the pundits realize he won't redeem those hopes - that he in fact represents a progressive politics which they cannot accept - he'll be subject to a truly vicious media backlash. One fueled by all the nastiness and scorn of spoiled children outraged to learn that Santa won't be coming down the chimney at all.
(Paul)
At the National Review this morning, Kathryn Jean Lopez searches for The Way Forward in the War on Christmas. Here at a&s, we are committed to staying the course in the War on Christmas, and we believe we have a clear strategy for success, which we define as a December 25 that defends itself, that is free of the colors red and green, and that serves as an ally in the War on Valentine's Day.
At any rate, K-Lo has a very special Santa in mind this year: she's counting on Barack Obama to slide down the chimney and end all this nonsense by...uh...denouncing liberals.
While K-Lo sighs into her eggnog, let's note a couple things at work here.
One is the ongoing and ever-helpful conservative effort to tell Democrats about opportunities for "Sistah Souljah moments." Our friends on the right have fetishized the SSM and framed it as nothing less than a rite of passage for Democratic candidates. And, if you're a Republican, it's a neat deal. First your opponent is obligated to search around for some irritating and irrelevant extremist, pretend that he or she somehow represents a legitimate wing of the Democratic Party, and then denounce liberals and Democrats for being in thrall to such whackos.
So, yet another lesson Not Taking Advice from Your Enemies.
But there's something else here, which is Obama's success thus far at defining himself as the candidate of national unity. It's become increasingly common to describe - or criticize - Obama as a "blank slate," upon which anyone can project their political or patriotic hopes. I somewhat disagree: while it's true that, since coming to the U.S. Senate, he has kept a low profile to go with his limited track record (shocking behavior for a freshman Senator in the minority party!), he entered the national political scene with a very carefully crafted piece of rhetoric, which was designed precisely to define his politics - and his expression of what it means to be a Democrat - as a process of inclusion based around broadly shared values. It's a theme (further developed in his Knox College Commencement Address), that can seem irritatingly vague if you fail to realize how potentially powerful it is as a basis for progressive politics.
We'll talk a lot more about this later. At any rate, K-Lo's holiday (whoops, sorry - Christmas) wish for Obama points out the dangers of his approach: either that he could end up actually redeeming the cynical hopes of the pundit class - building and knocking down an army of straw Sistah Souljahs - or, on the other hand, that when the pundits realize he won't redeem those hopes - that he in fact represents a progressive politics which they cannot accept - he'll be subject to a truly vicious media backlash. One fueled by all the nastiness and scorn of spoiled children outraged to learn that Santa won't be coming down the chimney at all.
(Paul)
Labels: Barack Obama, conservatives, K-Lo, National review, Sistah Souljah, War on Christmas
¶ Posted by Paul Curtis 11:28 AM 0 comments 
