A cursory glance at any of the recent hot diaries will show innumerable examples of the disconnect between individuals on what Obama's stance is, was and should be. I'm no different, I have my personal view of what Obama stands for and how he should conduct his business. And so do you. The problem is the two may not be the same. The blank screen that served Obama so well in the primary is showing cracks around the edges.
During the primary, most of us remember Hillary lifting a quote from Obama's Audacity of Hope to pin him as a self described "black screen" where people paint their own desires, making him more attractive to a wide variety of people. At the time, this was viewed as lifting a passage out of context for pure political expediency. There is a somewhat different connotation in the entirety of the passage which Hillary was referring, but not much. Suffice it to say that Obama saw this coming, and credit where credit is due, Hillary was astute enough to point it out with an eye to future political endeavors. After the fact, it may turn out that Obama (and Hillary) were both right
The full passage and expert analysis after these messages.
"Undoubtedbly, some of these views will get me in trouble, I am new enough on the national political screen that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripe project their own views. As such I am bound to disappoint some, if not all of them. Which perhaps indicates a second, more intimate theme to this book - namely how I or anybody else in public office, can avoid the pitfalls of fame, the hunger to please, the fear of loss, and thereby retain that kernel of truth, that singular voice within each of us that reminds us of our deepest commitments." excerpt from The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama.
It's pretty easy to see that Obama was smart enough to see this coming, as our community is the "some" that is currently being disappointed. And to varying degrees. The evidence is as close as your nearest diary comments thread, maybe even this one. Where one Kossack feels betrayed, another makes a nod toward political expediency. When one espouses a charge toward the center, another eschews a retreat from the left. Where one promotes idealism, another avows pragmatism.
And we have done this to ourselves. If we have applied to him our highest morals and aspiration, then we are to blame for his failings. If we have set the bar impossibly high, we are culpable for his shortcoming. If you are miffed or hurt or betrayed, take a long, hard look at our candidate to see if he has let you down, or you have projected a herculean, unrealistic line for him to walk?
Granted, politics is a game of expectations. And the fact we have wronged him in those expectations does not absolve Obama from responsibility for his actions. It also does not mean he should be off limits to discussion or criticism.
But the blatantly wounded tone of some of the rhetoric in our community is over blown. Some of the angry sentiment, far out of step. Some of the argument and hostility unnecessary. We are falling victim to faction in our own community. Those that choose to defend our candidate are lumped into the "Obama is God" lunatics group, those that are angry are immediately part of the "cut off your nose despite your face" crowd.
I admit it. I am guilty. I think you might admit you are too.
As usual the truth is somewhere in the middle. We, as a community, must be vigilant and critical where necessary. We expect no less from ourselves. Obama, who we have tasked with the daunting job of winning a presidential election, will take the necessary steps to do so. We can ask no less of him. That's the reality of the situation. How we view it depends on what we see when we look at that blank screen.