Amen to the general sentiment—I had to cheer myself up last night by revisiting pictures from our
Women for Obama Rally earlier this year in NYC. I differ with you slightly on one point, however: While I think Obama should have been more wary of the potentially combustive nature of his remarks, the way the press tells the story makes it sound far worse than what he actually said. Here is NBC, for instance: “The Illinois senator has spent two days on the defensive after comments he made at a San Francisco fundraiser suggesting working class people are bitter about their economic circumstances and ‘cling to guns and religion’ as a result.” Now here is Eleanor Clift of Newsweek putting the quote in context: “He was asked at this fund-raiser–it happened to be in San Francisco–whether he could win white working-class voters because he was black. And he basically said that these voters have a lot of other grievances much more salient than race, and he pointed out that their jobs are gone. He used the word ‘bitter.’ He used the words ‘angry’ and ‘frustrated’ also. And he said the politicians have failed them repeatedly and that they then are vulnerable to wedge issues. And the wedge issues, we’re all familiar with — God, gays and guns. That’s what he was saying. And Hillary Clinton knows perfectly well that’s what he was saying. It’s been the subject of Democratic study for years, going back to the Reagan Democrats in Macomb County, Michigan. It was the focus of a best-selling book, ‘What’s the Matter with Kansas?’ It’s hardly a new line of argument.” I tend to agree with Clift—Barack should have chosen his words more carefully (and in fact he said so himself later), but there’s nothing terribly subversive here. The sad part? A man who has spent more time contemplating his own spiritual path than most people do in a lifetime is now faced with scathing criticisms that he doesn’t understand people who come to religion.

Amen to the general sentiment—I had to cheer myself up last night by revisiting pictures from our
Women for Obama Rally earlier this year in NYC. I differ with you slightly on one point, however: While I think Obama should have been more wary of the potentially combustive nature of his remarks, the way the press tells the story makes it sound far worse than what he actually said. Here is NBC, for instance: “The Illinois senator has spent two days on the defensive after comments he made at a San Francisco fundraiser suggesting working class people are bitter about their economic circumstances and ‘cling to guns and religion’ as a result.” Now here is Eleanor Clift of Newsweek putting the quote in context: “He was asked at this fund-raiser–it happened to be in San Francisco–whether he could win white working-class voters because he was black. And he basically said that these voters have a lot of other grievances much more salient than race, and he pointed out that their jobs are gone. He used the word ‘bitter.’ He used the words ‘angry’ and ‘frustrated’ also. And he said the politicians have failed them repeatedly and that they then are vulnerable to wedge issues. And the wedge issues, we’re all familiar with — God, gays and guns. That’s what he was saying. And Hillary Clinton knows perfectly well that’s what he was saying. It’s been the subject of Democratic study for years, going back to the Reagan Democrats in Macomb County, Michigan. It was the focus of a best-selling book, ‘What’s the Matter with Kansas?’ It’s hardly a new line of argument.” I tend to agree with Clift—Barack should have chosen his words more carefully (and in fact he said so himself later), but there’s nothing terribly subversive here. The sad part? A man who has spent more time contemplating his own spiritual path than most people do in a lifetime is now faced with scathing criticisms that he doesn’t understand people who come to religion.