Great article from Erik Lundegaard at the Huffington Post. Only a small taste, but do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-lundegaard/who-is-barack-obama-attic_b_126803.htmlFor most of the year, Republicans have tried to negatively define Barack Obama. They compare him to the most empty aspects of our own society and the most violent aspects of global society. They twist everything, and lie about anything, and in doing so reveal exactly who and how desperate they are.
In the face of these attacks, Barack has remained calm, articulate, resolute. His anger, when it comes, is not the anger of a man with a hair-trigger temper, like John McCain, but the righteous anger of someone who knows that not only he, but our entire system, is being wronged.
And it got me thinking about who this reminds me of.
We know how John McCain defines himself -- as a maverick -- but anyone who's been paying attention knows how empty that slogan is. He's a follower at this point. He's following the lead of Steve Schmidt, his campaign manager, who once followed the lead of Karl Rove. Whatever smear works, whatever lie works, no matter how sleazy, that's what they'll do. So regardless of what John McCain once was, he has now been reduced to the role of a not very bright man surrounded by extremely malicious people. The same malicious people, I should add, who have surrounded another not very bright man, George W. Bush, for the last eight years.
But they keep pumping out the myth. The chest-thumping, Paul Fistinyourface myth of the stupidly aggressive American. In a magazine interview, John McCain even compared himself to TV hero Jack Bauer of "24," until he was reminded that Bauer's main (and suspect) means of gathering information -- torture -- is what John McCain suffered under for five years. But I guess torture is good as long as we're the torturers. I guess bullying is good as long as we're the bullies.
Barack, it's true, is no bully. When the Republicans mocked him for being a community organizer, he spoke eloquently about the relevance, particularly in troubled times, of "setting up job-training programs in areas that have been hard-hit when the steel plants closed," and then turned the question back on the Republicans: "The question I have for them is 'Why would that kind of work be ridiculous?' Who are they advocating for? Who are they fighting for?"