The difference between ...

Quote of the day:

Campaign issues come and go, but this is a thread running through the race. One believes in the raw assertion of power, the other the power of communication. David Brooks, The New York Times.

This morning, David Brooks describes, in his way, what I have been trying to say for weeks. I understand it as Hillary Clinton: the gate keeper of Patriarchy. He refers to it as the difference between Combat and Composure. After reading his Op-Ed piece today, I wonder how anyone votes for Clinton. And then, I remind myself, once again ... this is a nation that elected George Bush - twice!

This contrast between combat and composure defines the Democratic race. The implicit Clinton argument is that politics is an inherently nasty business. Human nature, as she said Sunday, means that progress comes only through conquest. You’d better elect a leader who can intimidate. You’d better elect someone who has given herself permission to be brutal.

Obama’s campaign grows out of the longstanding reform tradition. His implicit argument is that politics doesn’t have to be this way. Dishonesty and brutality aren’t inevitable; they’re what gets in the way. Obama’s friend and supporter Cass Sunstein described the Obama ideal in The New Republic: “Obama believes that real change usually requires consensus, learning and accommodation.” David Brooks, The New York Times, May 6 2008

A year ago at Mining Nuggets: Age, age, age ...

 

Comments

[tamarika]

MotherPie: This is the very morning to be "ranty!" If not now, when? Thanks so much for your comments.

[MotherPie]

Great quote...I've yet to read the papers this morning. I came across a James Carville quote on Hillary and Obama --"if she would give him one of her cojones, they would both have two."

I think some are realizing that there are serious issues to be faced. With just completing a master's in media studies, with a big focus on political communication, I feel that the blogs are perhaps one of the hopes we have for democracy to overcome the selling of the candidates with sound bites. We need substance. This long conversation might be good for the country.

A viral social shift is needed... in politics, in lifestyle choices to save our earth...
Along with needed consensus, we need inspiration for change along values besides consumerism. And selecting a president should be more than communications meant to sell in sound bites to a passive audience that refuses to engage and think.

Wow. A little ranty this morning.