Cult is a word with negative connotations, right? It is normally used for delusional, defensive groups like the Branch Davidians and the followers of Jim Jones.
"Cult of Personality" tends to be an especially prejorative term, usually associated with dictators like Stalin or Hitler.
Why, then, is the term of the week for the Obama campaign "Cult of Personality"? It is all over the news and blogs.
It seems like an attempt to belittle the enthusiasm and joy that American voters have for the first really inspiring candidate that Democrats have had since...I can't remember.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Yep, sounds like another attempt to demean his whole campaign. They are scared. I have to sort of admit that I like watching a group of cocky, overconfident people who put the Shrub into office squirm a little. Even if it doesn't last.
I like that song Cult of Personality, but I hope that he's not using it in his campaign. I don't pay enough attention to the news to know if he is.
I think it was David Broder in the Times that Clinton was Safeway to Obama's Whole Foods: one was staples and delivery of basic goods, the other was about emotion while shopping. If one considers 'cult of personality' as a slight, it's strange how Clinton is then faulted for her personality or lack thereof. Reminds me of when the term 'politically correct' was created by a right wing think tank (yes, this is true) then incredibly effectively deployed as a weapon against that initially egalitarian movement. Same thing here, but it won't work. Because I think he's the real deal.
Yeah, heaven forbid listening to a candidate talk should make us feel good. I even have a liberal friend who voted for Hillary because she thought Obama seemed "shallow and naive." Well, maybe your "shallow and naive" is MY "inspiring and idealistic." Sheesh.
Ahhhhh. Obama people.
:)
But could he be Trader Joe's instead of Whole Foods? I really miss Trader Joe's coffee out here in the hinterlands of Southern Illinois.
Kwach
I've got that song in my head now...
Normally I love, love, love NY Times columnist Paul Krugman, but he definitely claimed that Obama supporters are a cult of personalities. I found it disappointing that he would disparage people who support a candidate that Krugman doesn't. The entire coverage of this campaign is like that, though. Worthless. It's just that Krugman surprised me.
I loved the Krugman opinion piece as well as the Stanely Fisher one. Let's be fair and honest -- Obama is very much riding his charisma as far as he can without getting down into the nitty gritty details (look what happened to Perot and all those others who had such high hopes until they started laying out their plans) -- but can you blame him. He is not an idiot. He knows that if the press will let him ride by on his charisma and let folks project onto him what they most desire in a candidate he can cruise on easy. Another ironic thing is that Obama is tagged as the messenger of hope but he is clearly reveling in and benefitting from the bitter and vicious attacks aimed at Hillary Clinton. Why spend his campaign money going after Clinton when everyone else, including our pathetic excuse for a media, is doing it for him. He isn't by any means inflaming the situation but it certainly makes his job of staying positive and hopeful a lot less work.
I saw an awesome bumper sticker once that said "God, protect me from your followers." I have to admit this is what I feel when I see the news coverage of his rallies. I can't help but find it a little disconcerting to hear the thunderous roar of 'Obama' over and over again. Call me gun shy but after suffering 8 years with a president who considered himself 'messianic' I'd gladly suffer a less perfect, and most likely acrimonious, Clinton administration than a perfectly polished Obama one.
Post a Comment