Bittergate: Taking Politics Out of Context
Posted: Sunday, April 27, 2008
by Shan-ul-Hai
Globally Rational
For those of you who haven't been following the US election, Obama recently said the following (click here for the full transcript); some are calling it "Bittergate":
The truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
That aside, I have a more interesting note: why is it that we add "gate" at the end of every political scandal now? Watergate didn't have anything to do with water (it was related to the Watergate building in DC), so why was Clinton's sex scandal dubbed "Monicagate"? It seems that the media is running out of ideas they can't find any real problems with Obama, so they take a small word out of context and add "gate" to the end so that it sounds more important. Was Bittergate really as bad as Watergate, or even as bad as Monicagate?
Imagine what it'd be like if we made a big deal every time President Bush misspoke and said something like " "Wait a minute. What did you just say? You're predicting $4-a-gallon gas? That's interesting. I hadn't heard that." (Feb 28, 2008).
ADDENDUM (5:34 pm CST): Apparently, the reason why Bittergate hasn't hurt Obama in the polls is because working-class Pennsylvanians don't really disagree with him.
This Article has been viewed 107 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)hi Shan-ul-Hai, i thought this was a well executed, interesting article that has something to do with all of us, so we should all read it. it flowed nicely. it appears you have a "writer's mind" and that's a good thig, brilliant being one of it's adjectives, thanks for sharing, best regards, sue thom
Very thoughtful piece. I know it wasn't your main point but how in the world did we identify scandals before watergate?
Ah, I totally agree about Hillary's oft ignored 'lie!' She should be removed from the campaign for that. And wasn't she with some movie star like, Sharon Stone, or someone? She's utterly delusional. I think Obama is the only delagate that has the backbone and the credentialing to take on the role of President. He was a civil rights attorney, for Pete's sakes! Go Obama! Please! :)The most significant difference between Hillary and Obama, in my opinion, is honesty and judgement. Obama seems like he'd actually deliver on his promises because they're all logical and he has a history of honesty. Hillary, on the other hand, is a classic politician.So True! And Hilliary's type of political statesmen is on the 'outs.' We need a new breed of leaders, and Obama just might be the perfect candidate! cheers!
yikes, forgot my rating!
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.

