As we all know, yesterday Barack Obama delivered one for the history books. Many here and elsewhere have heralded his speech for its eloquence, depth and moral clarity on the racial divisions that Americans continue to struggle with. Commenters have remarked on its honesty, integrity and call for understanding on all sides.
Yesterday, Barack Obama formally crossed "the Swiftboat Threshold." The attacks he faced over his personal association with a religious figure are a textbook example of what we now call "swiftboating."
This is the test that we now demand Democratic nominees be able to withstand. Obama has passed it with flying colors. And, as usual, he refused to take the conventional approach. In the end, swiftboating succeeds by instilling fear in candidates and their supporters. All too often, even "successful" Democratic responses reflect that fear by avoidance, distance or escalation - strategies which only encourage more attacks.
Instead, Barack Obama showed very clearly he is not afraid. He will not run from who he is. It turns out the only thing we have to fear from swiftboating is fear itself.
Democrats have been living in fear for years now. Fear of being swiftboated, even before the swiftboat happened. Fear that if we do or say the wrong thing, we are vulnerable. The other side knows we're afraid, and they use that fear to get what they want - like Congressional approval of a war that never should have been fought. Up until now, we have had three strategies for dealing with right-wing swiftboat attacks - avoid, distance, or escalate. All of these strategies are ultimately doomed to failure.
Long before John Kerry's nomination brought the term "swiftboating" into the permanent political lexion, Democrats have frequently chosen avoidance in response to right wing attacks. Not addressing the issue. Being vague about their position. Hoping nobody would notice their liberal viewpoints. Guess what? Eventually, they notice.
Or worse, Democrats distance. Long after Bill Cinton's campaign for the Presidency gave us another special political verb, they still "souljah" their former friends and allies and hang them out to dry in public. They vote for something they don't really believe in, in order to try to innoculate themselves against a future political attack. Well, now the other side knows they have the upper hand - all this proves is how much personal political survival trumps all other values and considerations. I strongly believe this only encourages more attacks.
There is another option we see at times. Fight back! Escalate! Attack! Try to out-Rove Karl Rove. Nasty political ads and underhanded strategies may be effective in the short term. But the third option promises only to make voters ultimately alienated from both sides. Ever wonder how a political party numerically outnumbered got so much power in the United States in the latter part of the 20th century? Fear and alienation may be part of the answer.
Right before Super Tuesday, and somewhat lost in the shuffle, Michael Chabon analyzed the Presidential race as Obama vs. the Phobocracy:
In a better world, people tell me, in theory, sure, having a president like Barack Obama sounds great. But not, you know, for real. Not in the base, corrupt, morally spent, toxic and reeling rats' nest that we like to call home. Things are so bad we just can't afford to waste our votes, people tell me, on some fantasy super-president with magical powers. We need someone electable, someone, as I have been told repeatedly in the past year, who can win.
Of course this misses the point; it misses all kinds of points.
*****
We let in the serpents and liars, we exchanged shining ideals for a handful of nails and some two-by-fours, and we did it by resorting to the simplest, deepest-seated and readiest method we possess as human beings for trying to make sense of the world: through our fear. America has become a phobocracy.
Since I started talking and writing about Obama I have come to see that this ruling fear, and nothing else, lies at the back of every objection or reservation people raise or harbor regarding the man and his candidacy.
This fear of the swiftboat is part and parcel of the larger problem Chabon identifies. Democrats have been paralyzed by the belief in craven captitulation to right-wing political attacks - preferably well in advance of when they come. If you fear the swiftboat, you will become its victim. No flag lapel pin will save you this time.
When Barack Obama says time and again we need a change in how politics operates in this country, this is one of the things he is talking about. And although he is far from perfect, he has displayed a remarkable readiness in this campaign to reject the phobocracy. To jettison the conventional wisdom that we must tailor all of our conduct to avoiding the swiftboat. Offered the chance to trash America's enemies, he says instead he would meet with them. That it would make us safer. Offered an opportunity to climb to victory on the backs of undocumented immigrants, he supports drivers' licenses. There are more examples than these.
And yesterday, in his speech on race in Philadelphia, "A More Perfect Union," he faced down the swiftboats speeding at him from Fox news in characteristically unconventional fashion.
Avoid? Distance? Attack your attackers? Obama chose none of the above. Instead he faced the issue head-on, and showed he would not be cowed by fear. The New York Times called it simply "Mr. Obama's Profile in Courage:
There are moments — increasingly rare in risk-abhorrent modern campaigns — when politicians are called upon to bare their fundamental beliefs. In the best of these moments, the speaker does not just salve the current political wound, but also illuminates larger, troubling issues that the nation is wrestling with.
Inaugural addresses by Abraham Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt come to mind, as does John F. Kennedy’s 1960 speech on religion, with its enduring vision of the separation between church and state. Senator Barack Obama, who has not faced such tests of character this year, faced one on Tuesday. It is hard to imagine how he could have handled it better.
Mr. Obama had to address race and religion, the two most toxic subjects in politics. He was as powerful and frank as Mitt Romney was weak and calculating earlier this year in his attempt to persuade the religious right that his Mormonism is Christian enough for them.
He would not souljah his church community of two decades for cheap political advantage. He would not avoid the debate or change the subject. He told us who he is, and what he believes, in honest and forthright terms. And he essentially said this election is not worth winning if I have to compromise what I believe in to win it. He defended himself with an unusual weapon in modern politics - his integrity.
Ezra Klein noticed:
[T]his speech was something I didn't expect: Honest. It was honest about Obama's affection for Wright, even as it repudiated Wright's comments. It was honest about the tragic history of race in America, even as it expressed faith in a redemptive future. It was honest about the resentment peddlers and racial charlatans who try and recast the increasing rarity of the American Dream as the consequence of ethnic competition rather than gross power imbalances. It was honest in its recognition that racial memory influences contemporary thought, honest in admitting that there's anger in this country, and it's justified, and that there's fear in this country, and it's real. . . . . Obama could have simply preached unity and forgiveness without recognizing the realities of anger and resentment. He could have done as Mitt Romney did, and sought to protect his political vulnerabilities by picking new enemies. Obama could have made this a speech about Fox News, and divisive commentators, and right wing talkshow hosts, and sleaze artists who need to be stopped. But he didn't. He's betting he can universalize this experience, too, and that he'll find more votes in unity than in division. It is, at best, a gamble. But at least it's an honest one.
Obama showed that he puts his faith in us - the people - to be smarter than the politicians and the media this time. He gave us not just a defensive response, but an expansive call to action. When told essentially "you are not one of us" he reminded us of who we are and should be as Americans. We are better than swiftboat politics. That's why, yesterday, I compared the speech to JFK's history address on religion. Facing a similar attack on his allegiance to America, Kennedy told us in no uncertain terms what he believed. There is no fear in that speech. No triangulation.
That is how you face down the swiftboats. Not by being clever enough to never give them a target - that's impossible. And not by escalating the attacks until we hate both sides - that's self- destructive. And not by triangulating enough to save yourself - that's cowardly.
By taking the fear card, and tearing it to shreds. By saying "enough is enough" to a destructive political culture. By taking your integrity and putting it front and center to defend yourself. That's how you cross the swiftboat threshold.
Update: There have been many excellent comments below, and a number of people have rightly pointed out that we have a long way to go. I don't think Obama can claim he won't be attacked again. What he can claim is that he has the ability to withstand a furious assault, and even turn it into an opportunity for leadership. Whatever "vetted" means, or "tested" or "ready" - and I'm not sure I know what any of them are supposed to mean - he's met that standard. In quoting Chabon, I was trying to make the point that some people refuse to support Obama because they are afraid of what the Republicans will do to him. I wasn't afraid before, but there is even less reason to be afraid now that he has proven himself, once again. To the extent this has been some kind of obstacle for him - he is over it. He's crossed the threshold.
Disclaimer: I am a volunteer with the Obama campaign in California, but when I write here I speak for myself and not for the campaign. The campaign has no input of any kind on my diaries - the ideas and all the words in them are my own.