Norman Kelley: Assessing Barack Obama's political future
/Assessing Barack Obama's political future
by Norman Kelley
The New JFK?: Barack Obama, or
The Politics of Charismatic Vagueness
With less than two years under his belt as a United States senator from the Land of Lincoln, Barack Hussein Obama is viewed by many as presidential material. Such a view has probably increased exponentially in the aftermath of the Democrats' triumph over the Republicans in the recent congressional midterm elections. Very few people will deny that junior Senator Obama is an attractive prospect as a potential presidential candidate: He's light, bright, and half white, and possesses telegenic charisma, which makes him appealing to some who don't like squirming before the demands or accusations of black politicos such as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton or, God forbid, Louis Farrakhan.
There hasn't been this much excitement about a politician in the last forty, fifty years, Bill Clinton notwithstanding. Described by John McCain's senior adviser, Mark McKinnon, as a "walking, talking hope machine" who "may reshape American politics," Obama may well be this era's John F. Kennedy, a man who personifies hope, renewal, reconciliation, dynamism, and the willingness to go beyond slash-and-burn politics.
The child of a white mother and Kenyan father, Obama doesn't have the same African American pedigree as most blacks in the United States; he's not seen as weighted down with the social baggage of racial "grievances" attributed to other blacks and their political representatives in the post-civil rights regime where racism is of a bygone era. He transcends race by not reminding white Americans of that troublesome and unfinished business of race.
Or, as political commentator Harold Meyerson noted, Obama is "post-racial."
"For many people Obama symbolizes a kind of break through, in that he's not merely a crossover African-American politician, but also kind of 2.0," observes Meyerson, who writes for the Washington Post and acting editor of the American Prospect. Obama is also developing a "different emerging politics." (In Kenyan parlance, the senator would be known as a ".5" because of mixed heritage)
People relate to him, Meyerson thinks, because Obama's "post-racial identity" makes him a "Rorschach test" in which "people project onto him certain hopes for where America is headed."
The senator himself is aware of this projection, noting in his latest book: "I'm new enough on the national political scene that I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."
What makes this possible is Obama's "unusual lineage": white American mother, and African father from Kenya. Meyerson speculates that this "makes him less the object of conscious and unconscious racism among whites."
He's the kind of black that "Meet the Press" host Tim Russert can query about the "appropriateness" of singer/activist Harry Belafonte's "tyrantterrorist" remark regarding President Bush while visiting Venezuela. Sen. Obama replied that, indeed, it wasn't appropriate. Obama was asked about the remarks of Belafonte, who has very little influence in American politics. Yet questions about the inappropriate remarks of Pat Robertson, who has made several controversial remarks, including calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, was not in Russert's purview of examining overheated political rhetoric.
Obama had passed Russert's test: he didn't come off as, Colin Powell once asserted about himself, too black. Instead, he became certified as a NTN: a Non-Threatening Negromuch like Michael Jordan or Condoleezza Rice.
With two or three speeches, most noticeably the keynote address he gave at the 2004 Democratic Convention, two books, and caf-au-lait Denzel Washington matinee looks, what has made the junior senator such hot property?
In a written email response, Peniel E. Joseph, professor of American American Studies, SUNY at Stonybrook, and the author of a narrative history of black power, Waiting Til the Midnight Hour, is of two minds regarding the sudden impact of the man from the Land from Lincoln.
"On the one hand, I think that it is spectacular and historic development that finds Obama being taken seriously as a presidential candidate It shows that in the post civil rights and post Black Power era, a certain style of black leadership can ascend to the very top of mainstream American politics," he wrote.
Yet he's wary of the "fawning media coverage" and the "genuflecting Obama's 2004 Democratic Convention speech" and how "liberal and conservative pundits" respond to it.
Other than being against the war in Iraq, which nearly half of Americans are against, one is hard pressed to ascertain any major bills or positions that the senator has taken to warrant him even thinking about running for 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
As a NTN or "post-race" black, Obama's lack of any discernible record as a senator or an established base may underscores an essential characteristic of some of today's black political leaders: a reliance on charisma, or rhetoric. As noted by Joe Klein Time, Obama can connect with white mainstream Americans in the Midwest and in posh environs (where he can solicit hefty campaign donations); he has charisma as noted by the reaction he has received since the keynote speech and the number of relatively adoring magazine articles (e.g., Men's Vogue, Elle) he's received on the eve of his latest book, The Audacity of Hope.
What Obama seems to offer is the possibility of hope, of appealing to people's better angels. Yet he doesn't seem to have much of an agenda, compelling vision or base, something that even Jesse Jackson once offered. He has a set of nice sounding, inclusive values, which no right thinking person from a blue state could fault. The senator comes as across sincere and authentic, and smart, which are important qualities to have if one is indeed pursuing the highest office in the land, but he has no military experience, certainly no substantial administrative experience as governor or CEO, and scant legislative accomplishments.
Yet, as political scientist Ron Walters wrote in The Washington Informer, "Americans yearn for an African-American leader who will give them absolution from the narrative pain of slavery and, instead, take them beyond race into a world of inclusion and, as such, blur the remnants that slavery has wrought in the present world."
Walters argues that Obama's "post-racial" positioning is somewhat akin to that of Colin Powell and how whites related to him.
"White Americans," says Professor Walter in an interview, "gravitated to Colin Powell partly because of his race and partly because he was race-less. Race-less in the sense that he his did not conjure up for them the accusatory past that [white] Americans associate with African American leadership."
Walters is a center-left black academic and director of the African American Leadership Institute at the University of Maryland at College Park. However, John McWhorter, a black linguist and fellow at the conservative Manhattan Institute, argued in a New York Sun article that if Obama was Barrett O'Leary (i.e., Irish-American), he wouldn't be "touted a year-and-change into his Senate appointment as a presidential possibility."
"The key factor that galvanizes people around the idea of Obama for president is, quite simply, that he is black," wrote McWhorter.
"What gives people a jolt in their gut about the idea of President Obama is the idea that it would be a ringing symbol that racism no longer rules our land," continued McWhorter. "President Obama might be, for instance, a substitute for that national apology for slavery that some consider so urgent. Surely a nation with a black president would be one no longer hung up on race."
After hurricane Katrina revealed that the politics of race subjects some American to less consideration, Obama just might be the answer.
Wrote Joseph: "I think that Obama's relative inexperience means that he has not lied, betrayed, or disappointed as many people as entrenched political leaders (see Hillary Clinton)."
However, the reaction that Obama causes with people is palpable, and not just wishful thinking.
For instance, take Ben Durant. She's a Washington, D.C. resident and an ardent Obama supporter, who sent him money after seeing him deliver his keynote address. His speech brought tears to her eyes. Durant confesses that she hasn't been "excited about any politician in years," and decided to support him since he would be the only black senator in the senate.
Although she has never met him, she perceives him as a "people person" who engages people, a man who over came his personal issues and "grew up." (And because she was a financial supporter of his Illinois senatorial race she receives Christmas cards from the Obama family.)
In Durant's eyes this is a man who after being the first black to edit the Harvard Law Review and was offered six-figure incomes from law firms and corporations chose, instead, to work as a community organizer in Chicago. "That really impressed me," says Durant.
Also as a black woman, Durant sees Obama as a successful black man who chose to marry a black woman, a "strong black woman."
"A lot of guys in his position," says Durant, "don't want to deal with black women."
For her, Obama's marriage serves as a "good role model for young kids in general, and black kids, in particular."
Even though Durant has only observed Obama from a distance, she views him as a "rock star" who's "very patient with people," possessing the same kind of people skills as a previous fresh-facer, Bill Clinton.
"I can see him as president, but I think it's a little too soon," she says. Obama still needs some "seasoning."
This need for "seasoning" underscores that the senator may be a virtual political leader since he has not been in office long enough to have his fingerprints on any ideas, policies, or laws that can be discredited at the national level. Since his status as a political leader is so undetermined, Obama, seen as a "rock star," has become something with even more currency: a celebrity. And a celebrity is better known for being known about than for what he or she actually does, says, or is.
As observed by Meyerson, Obama is essentially an empty vessel in to which people can pour their hopes and aspirations in to. He's recognizable as a black man who doesn't look or act too black, but black enough for others. Is this the sort of criteria upon which selection for a president ought to be made? Or, is Sen. Obama using the same tactic that Colin Powell used a decade or so ago when his autobiography came out and it was floated that he, too, was considering a run for the presidency?
Powell, too, had the same kind of relationship with the American public, as Walters noted earlier. As a general, he competently led coalition forces removing Saddam Hussein's fingers from Kuwait's neck. Ambigiously beige, he didn't make whites feel uncomfortable like Messrs. Jackson and Sharpton, and has been denounced by the likes of Belafonte and Spike Lee.
Yet Powell has been a major disappointment. More popular than Mr. Bush, Powell, whose performance before the UN Security Council sealed Iraq's fate, had doubts about the war yet did nothing to circumvent it. More loyal to the president, he forgot a higher duty and calling: serving the country by questioning the reason for this administration's current debacle.
Thus far the junior senator has had an easy glide to Washington. His first senatorial opponent, Jack Ryan, immolated himself when it was revealed that he'd asked his wife, actor Jeri Ryan, to engage in risqu sexual behavior in public, as revealed in their divorce proceeding records. Then the Illinois GOP seemed to have given up on the race by importing Alan Keyes who threw away the election by acting like the certifiable kook that every campaign he appears in confirms.
The recent midterm election only confirmed Obama's "rock star" status in American politics as he stumped for fellow Democrats, appearing on their behalf in the waning days of the election before celebrity-besotted, adoring crowd.
But the question still remains: Who is Barack Obama, and what does he stand for? And, if he does decide to run for the presidency, what issues and positions will he promote and defend? Does he have the gravitas despite his scant resume to become the chief magistrate of the republic as it confronts the war in Iraq and nettlesome issues such as immigration, entitlements, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and global warming?
In The Audacity of Hope, Obama's "personal reflections on values and ideals that lead to public life," he neither offers a "theory of American government" nor a "manifesto for action" Instead, he merely offers a rumination that's full of anecdotal reflections on values, the Constitution, politics, opportunity, faith, race, family, etc., "thoughts on the waysour current political discourse unnecessarily divides." (He does offer a thumbnail sketch of his basic beliefs on pages 10 and 11.)
The senator views the current political scene as a "dead zone" in which "narrow interests vie for advantage" and "ideological minorities seek to impose their own version of absolute truth." Such positions and attitudes have caused rancor in the body politic, preventing serious problems from being addressed and solved.
Obama stresses, from time to time, that what's really needed is a "broad majority of AmericansDemocrats, Republicans, and Independents of goodwillwho are reengaged in the project of American renewal," people who see "their own self-interest as inextricably linked to the interests of others."
He firmly believes that the country "has the talent and the resources to create a better future," but what's missing is "the absence of a national commitment to take the tough steps necessary to make America more competitiveand the absence of a new consensus around the appropriate role of government in the marketplace."
The senator thinks that Americans should be asking themselves "what mix of policies will lead to a dynamic free market and widespread economic security, entrepreneurial innovation and upward mobility?" The closest thing to any policy prescription he offers is "investments in education, science and technology, and energy of independence."
Reading The Audacity of Hope one can see the elements that have made Barack Obama a "fresh face," the "rock star" of a supposedly emerging politics. He's as eloquent on paper as he is in person; he's reflective and willing to question himself and attribute good will to those who disagree with him. In a word, he's authentic, which is something that Americans crave in a political leader in an era of prefabrication and artifice.
He's even-handed to a fault; for every criticism that he attributes to the right, he sees those of the left, and even in himself. He cautious but not apparently calculating, which can be attributed to him being a representative of Illinois; he's a pragmatic and practical Midwesterner, who, as a liberal Democrat, is attuned the necessity of values, faith and family as well as someone who is "guided by what works" in public policy. He's passionate but not ideologically doctrinaire. As evidenced by his book, he's charismatically vague enough to talk about consensus, family, faith and value while not coming across as a scary, redistributive black liberal Democrat.
The Audacity of Hope is predicated on the notion of a democratic conversation with citizens about consensus and renewal; however, the anecdotal vagueness of the book, with no definitive ideas or positions beyond its eloquence, may mark the project as a coy attempt of appearing to be saying something profound while not offering much substantively.
Despite such a positioning, the senator may be uniquely poised to address certain issues Washington Post reporter Dan Balz presented in a post-election article: "Which party can address the twin problem of keeping the United States competitive in a global economy and restoring the social contract that provided economic security to workers" and which party can "best navigate the social and cultural issues thatpreserve American values and accommodate the need for greater tolerance"?
By almost anyone's definition Barack Obama may be that man. But if Obama is trying to develop a "different emerging politics," as Harold Myerson observed, some of his practices and patterns as a politician are decidedly old school.
As journalist Ken Silverstein reported in Harper's November 2006 issue, "Barack Obama Inc.: The birth of a Washington machine," it is "startling to see how quickly Obama's senatorship has been woven into the web of institutionalized influence-trading that afflicts official Washington." He's received funds from corporate law and lobbying firms Kirkland & Ellis and Skadden Arps; Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, and Chicago firms like Henry Crown and Company, and Illinois-based Exelon Corporation, a nuclear power-plant operator.
According to Silverstein, Obama "quickly established a political machine funded by and run by a standard Beltway group of lobbyists, P.R. consultants, and hangers-on." As of this summer, as reported by Harper's, Obama "raised nearly $16 million for his original Senate run and for his 2010 reelection war chest," as well as taking in an "additional $3.8 million" for his leadership PAC, Hopefund.
Obama noted that his campaign's first $250,000 was " 'like pulling teeth,' " but after the post-convention notoriety, " raising money was relatively simple.' "
" 'It's one of the benefits of celebrity,' " he told Silverstein.
Prior to writing the piece on Obama, Silverstein, who writes the "Washington Babylon" blog for Harper's Magazine, hadn't known much about the senator, and had pushed for doing a profile on him rather than on John McCain as others had advocated at Harper's.
"I was aware of [his] rhetoric," says Silverstein, "and of course the famous speech at the convention. And to the extent that I went in skeptical, the idea I tried to get in the piece is that it's virtually impossible for a major American political figure to really be untainted by ties to special interests groups and powerful insiders, the people who provide the money in the Democratic establishment and the whole PR apparatus.lobbyists."
Despite Silverstein viewing Obama as "well-intentioned" in the goals that he would like to achieve for the country, he does think that it's "inconceivable that a national political figure could emerge without having some ties to the folks who run the show."
And nothing better shows such ties, as Silverstein points out his piece, than "well-known power broker and corporate boardmember" Vernon Jordan hosting a fundraiser on Obama's behalf in 2003.
It should be noted that Sen. Obama's office issued an eight-point rebuttal to some of Silverstein's points, but did not deny the senator's association with a DC "political machine" or the amount of money he's received from "corporate law and lobbying firms." There is nothing criminal in this; it's just the way the game is played, which numerous Americans see as a corrupting influence on the country's politics.
The fast track to the presidency and the money chase may be causing the senator to trip over himself. Senator Obama, an attorney, forgot to avoid the appearance of impropriety when he purchased propertyan adjacent lot next to the senator's home in Chicagofrom indicted Democratic political fundraiser and real estate developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko. Mr. Rezko, according to a National Public Radio segment, was indicted last month in a shakedown scheme.
"It was a mistake to have been engaged with him at all in this or any other personal business dealing that would allow him, or anyone else, to believe that he had done me a favor," Obama said in a written statement, as reported by the Chicago Tribune.
What makes Obama's appealing is his charisma and that he has advocated for the poor and for those who have made the economy work but are not receiving the benefits of hard and honest work, and that he seeks a consensus for national renewal, rejecting politics that's "solely based on racial identity, gender identity, sexual orientation, or victimhood generally."
Yet people do have questions about Obama's overall agenda or political program.
When asked about such, Peniel Joseph responded: "This is perhaps where Obama is weakest. On the one hand his supporters praise him as a fresh face on the political scene. Fair enough. But when asked where is the substance of his political program; where are the bold ideas in health care, racial reconciliation; the war in Iraq, etc., we are told that he is brand new and has not had the time to think of such things. Far as I can tell, The Audacity of Hope preaches a kind of bipartisanship without the muscular, at times ruthless, politics necessary to successfully push even a 21st century neo-Clintonian social agenda"
He appears, however, to be walking a tightrope as a political leadera reformeras opposed to merely being a politician, yet while still engaging in the kind ofsome say necessarypractices that have soured politics in the eyes of many Americans.
"I feel [that] he's really playing to a national constituency and a national media, and a national Democratic establishment, big time," says Silverstein. "He is very, very aware of what he needs to do to seek higher office than the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois."
Despite his rock star image, charisma, and minor stumbles, Obama is viewed by Annabel Khouri, a public service consultant, as a "down-to-earth person, who seems to be above board."
Like Durant, she, too, heard Obama's speech at the 2004 convention. Khouri considers him "ethical" although she has heard about the Rezko real estate deal on NPR, and feels that he's being held to a "higher ethical standard."
Would she like to seem him run for the presidency? "I would personally," says the native Vermonter, "but I don't know if the American public would vote for him for a few reasons. One, he's junior senator; he's not very experienced. He doesn't have a military background, and the fact that's he an African American. We haven't had an African American president and I think that would be an issue for a lot of Americans."
That Obama strikes a chord with millions of Americans like Annabel Khouri and Ben Durant may well verify a recent survey by the Center for Public Leadership's 2006 National Leadership Index, which found that Americans think the country is in a leadership crisis.
According to the index, "93% of Americans think political leaders today spend too much time attacking members of the other party," as well as "70% believe there is a leadership crisis in the country today; moreover, the number of Americans who strongly believe there is a leadership crisis has increased significantly."
The country is hungry for a leadership beyond partisan bickering, willing to lead in the 21st century. With millions of Americans feeling that way, one can well understand the appeal of an Obama candidacy. He offers hope and some vague sense of reconciliation, and optimism, and in the country's modern era Americans have tended to choose leaders who have a sunny, cheerful, optimistic disposition: FDR, JFK, Reagan, Clinton, and the most recent Bush.
When asked by NBC's Brian Williams on how the Democrats would govern, Obama suggested that the party would do better to concentrate "not on payback but progress." Likewise, voters looking for regime change at the White House in 2008 would do well to concentrate on truly understanding Obama's positions regarding issues and ideas, and not become lost in his smiling countenance or seduced by his "post-racial" heritage.
###
Norman Kelley is the author of The Head Negro in Charge Syndrome: The Dead End of Black Politics (Nation Books, 2004).
