Barack and Bill
By Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera's senior political analyst (June 2008)
When I wrote Bill Clinton, the Campaign, Administration and Foreign Policy in 1993, little did I know that it would help me understand the Obama phenomenon 15 years later and why the senator from Illinois has all but defeated Hillary Clinton, the senator from New York.
Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama grew up in broken families in modest homes but retained a dream that some day they would be president. They both had strong free-spirited mothers who left home and remarried, leaving the handsome little devils with their grandparents.
Both struggled on the border between Black and White America, and learned to confront racial tensions with a cool temperament and accommodation.
They attended Catholic schools as pupils and went to prestigious law schools, where they dabbled with drugs and married their college sweethearts, Hillary and Michelle, respectively.
Both women are highly intelligent and confident law students, and their husbands' staunchest cheerleaders.
Bill and Barack were both inspired by Martin Luther King's dream, and mesmerized by the charisma and freshness of the John F. Kennedy presidency.
But neither of them could ever shake the comparison to George McGovern, the liberal senator who lost the 1972 elections to Richard Nixon. Their eloquence is equal only to their oratory (a mix of theology and Enlightenment), and their capacity to inspire is equaled only by their search for recognition and acceptance. Hard workers and fast learners, they are more capable than any to memorise and relay vast and complex information.
In their mid-40s, the two impatient public figures reckoned their time had come. And despite lack of military service, they were enthusiastic to take on the older, more experienced, socially moderate Republican opponents, George Bush and John McCain, respectively.
Bush and McCain were both military aviators and war heroes turned security hawks with hardcore Washington careers.
It is this pedigree that explains why, when given the choice between Hillary and the 'new and improved' Bill, most voters have thus far chosen the certifiable Clinton brand in the form of an Obama candidacy
It is also an ironic twist that explains why the verbal acrobatics and random criticism voiced by the older Bill are not affecting the younger Obama; they were all leveled at Clinton when he ran for president in 1992, and failed to silence the message of hope and change over the politics of fear and familiarity.
The two men are pragmatic progressives, who understood early on that in order for his liberal ideas to reign, they would have to bargain their way by cutting deals with Main Street as well as Wall Street.
Having mastered the art of compromise to fit in during childhood, and schmoozed their way to social recognition and political leadership as adults, both men were more capable than most to bridge antithetical ideas and bring people together.
Socio-economic revival
Barack, like Bill, realized that his alienated countrymen seek someone to lead the way towards social-economic revival instead of more of the same foreign adventures. Putting America's house in order, he reckons, must take precedence and pave the way to world order, not the other way around.
…With his promise of a "great new society" and McCain's promise of more war, their race to the White House promises a clear cut choice for the American people.
http://english.aljazeera.net/f....html
This is an interesting comparison.
A comparison, Bill and Barack.
-
skylndrftr
- Posts: 1908
- Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 11:40 am
- Car: 07 Nissan Versa S
2010 Ariel Atom (pending...)
Re: (skylndrftr)
I think you'll see Hillary pulling for Obama after she does her delegate thing at the convention. I would expect her to plead the party unity line and work to unify the DNP from then on out.
Re: A comparison, Bill and Barack. (rn79870)
An interesting comparison, and valid in the points it makes.
Of course, it doesn't mention differences, which are also important. For instance Obama has not served as governor of Arkansas or any other State for 12 years, nor has he been a leading figure in the Democratic Leadership Council or any other body with a similar bipartisan agenda. Clinton had also been Chairman of the National Governors Association.
But it other ways, they have a similar appeal.
Of course, it doesn't mention differences, which are also important. For instance Obama has not served as governor of Arkansas or any other State for 12 years, nor has he been a leading figure in the Democratic Leadership Council or any other body with a similar bipartisan agenda. Clinton had also been Chairman of the National Governors Association.
But it other ways, they have a similar appeal.