The Point of the Moses Ad (and the Celebrity Ad)

[kennetha]

You have to admit that whatever else Obama is -- astute politician, inspirational leader -- he is also something of a "rock star." He is probably THE most famous dude on the planet right now. And in some circles you have to admit that he does have a cult like following.

MCCain's ads are both designed to GRANT that status and then use it against him by saying to the undecided, persuadable, inattentive voter who is just tuning in that you shouldn't elect a president under the guise of a rock star/messianic cult figure. He's hoping to buck up the undecideds not to be caught up in the movement. Probably the Moses ad won't get any airtime. But still it's an attempt to create and spread a meme that Obama is some kind of cultural phenomenon but not a seasoned, tested, prepared political leader. I'm not saying it will work or that it's a good argument. But that's clearly its purpose, imho.


And I do think there's enough grain of truth to it that it will resonate with some number of people. For example, I myself found Obama's riff on Ghandi's words -- quote in the Moses ad -- a little creepy and poorly phrased.

"We must become the change we want to see" (GHandi) vs

"We are the change we have been waiting for." (Obama)

The former is a challenge and a directive. It says strive to make yourself something new. It doesn't presume that you have already achieved that. It doesn't suggest that it will be easy or automatic. It just directs you to become as you would have the world be. You want the world to be more just, more peaceful -- then become more just, become a bringer of peace. That can be said with great humility and little presumptuousness.

Ghandi continues as follows, by the way, "Change is the essence of life. Be willing to surrender what you are for what you could become.”

Obama's formulation always sounded to me triumphal and self-satisfied and self-congratulatory -- the very opposite of humble. It doesn't at all suggest the kind striving to improve one's inner self, as a step toward improving the outer world that Ghandi recommends.

See the difference? It's that kind of thing that McCain is trying to pick up and run with and turn against Obama -- though he's doing it with as much subtlety as a sledge hammer.

[nerddem]

1. yeah, but it's self-distracting, as well

mccain is all about "don't think about an elephant, don't think about an elephant, don't think about an elephant!"

so what will everyone think about? an elephant.

i mean seriously, it's like saying the fonz is too cool. but from the shooting hoops ad to the moses ad, the silliness factor has increased tenfold.

and touching back on the fonz, i'm sure he'd say, "i want chaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaange"

[AllentownJake]

2. Its purpose is to stop a debate on issues

and start a debate on bullshit. Its the GOP stragey since 1968. It also has some racial undertones. John McCain is channeling Richard Nixon the founder of the modern day Republican Party.

[kennetha]

5. Broad purpose vs. Narrow purpose

It may have the broader purpose you say. (Its broadest purpose is to help McCain win an election.) I really was talking about its more "narrow" or "internal" purpose if that distinction makes any sense. I think McCain fears the possibility that Obama's sheer celebrity, the sheer phenomenon of the man and the moment, will overwhelm his campaign. I think it's in a way a "defensive" ad.

Again, I'm not saying that it will make a huge difference. Just trying to analyze what they are up to.

[AllentownJake]

7. Its the start of a narrative

Take the guys strength and make it a weakness. Obama's biggest strength is the feeling there is a movement behind him for change and his personal story. Try to make that a weakness.

Its Richard Nixon 101 (Karl Rove had his inspirations).

The ads this week gave the media something to talk about other than policy differences which of course always favors the GOP. It really doesn't matter what the ads are about as long as it gets the media to stop talking about issues and talking about bullshit.

See Al Gore is a liar and John Kerry is a coward who actually didn't serve heroically.

[AllentownJake]

14. Also the ads were boldface lies

See Kerry and Gore.

[Cosmocat]

6. It is no more complicated than that ...

The BIZARRE spin on his "celebrity" as a theme provides the pretense to put two attractive blondes on screen with him ... They get to say that they did not design the ad with racial intents, but they knew darn well that IT WOULD generate racial undertones ...de

Plausible (as it were) deniability ...

Wonder what a McCain government would be like ???

[AllentownJake]

8. Same as the W government

McCain and W are the same guy biographically one's daddy was an admiral and the others daddy became President.

The only real difference is the POW vs. National Guard and the Marrying into money vs already having it.

[Cosmocat]

24. I gotta tell you ...

I have WANTED to not have near the same level of disdain for McCain as Bushco, and I find it hard to believe I could hold any other human being in the level of disdain that I do that moron ...

I REALLY wanted to just believe that BO was hands down a more capable person, who has an infinitely better paradigm from which he woudl govern ...

But ... I don't know if it is the age or his selling out like he did after 2000, or some combination, but this guy is just horrible ... Really ...

The one thing I would note as a difference between the two is that W is, quite literally, a moron who has been completely managed, and went along to get off on having the entire world kiss his butt, which he visably has grown bored with ... Conversely, McCain seems to have a mind of his own - deranged as it is ...

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. Your girl is solidly behind Obama.

So give it fuck up, already. Don't need any fucking PUMAs here.

[kennetha]

4. What is the point of this remark?

Are you opposed to dispassionate analysis?

[RaleighNCDUer]

9. You got no "dispassionate analysis".

You're just attacking Obama.

You want dispassionate analysis?

Quote in context. Obama, campaigning in a PRIMARY, is rallying the troops and says "WE are the change". That is a fucking world away from Ghandi exhorting people to "become the change". The context and the intent are completely different, and judging by how well you write you fucking well know that - therefore, you are just attacking Obama.

PUMA has several sites of their own - why don't you join them and leave Democrats alone?

[BlooInBloo]

15. Of course. All they live for is Obama's loss. And the mods allow it.

[AllentownJake]

17. Thankfully the worst and most obvious ones

All have granite cookies now.

[BlooInBloo]

18. The cowardly incognito ones can be as bad or worse.

[AllentownJake]

19. since they banned the grave dancing

Its hard to know when the SOBs do get caught these days.

[JTFrog]

11. No just sick of reading code for uppity.

"Obama's formulation always sounded to me triumphal and self-satisfied and self-congratulatory -- the very opposite of humble."

[elehhhhna]

23. And how dare he quote Gandhi? Who do he thank he iz?!!!

[AllentownJake]

13. Probably

Since you were a former Hillary supporter and you used the word "cult" and also said its a "good argument"

If things were the other way around I would be more careful in using the same arguments that were used in the Primary battle in my dispassionate analysis.

[ErinBerin84]

10. there will be different interpretations of the quote.

Personally, I found the use of "we" more comforting and uplifting (especially after such a bullshit eight years) than the candidates who ALWAYS used "I". The details that drew people to Obama's candidacy are the same ones that may have drawn others away, which is true for all of the other candidates as well. One perceived positive can be a perceived negative to another. But you're right, its also to stoke the fear of Obama's supporters as "cult-like". Before there was Rev Wright, Fox (in addition to harping on the "Hussein" thing), would always stoke this fear, likening the Obama campaign and its supporters to Nazi German, etc. Also, there seems to be an attempt by the GOP to paint Obama as humorless, yet to me, only an idiot would know that he wasn't fooling around when he was saying "the light will come down...and you will know to vote for me". That said, there are a lot of idiots in the country. Plus, Obama could have had the same response to Hillary when she mocked him for "the sky will open, etc" , but instead he just laughed it off and said that she was showing "good humor, and that it was a good impression". I'm not sure that it will resonate with people who were undecided, as much as it is an attempt to shore up his base, but who knows what the hell that campaign is thinking at this point.

[stellanoir]

12. Wrong

It has nothing to do with Ghandi's words.

Maria Shriver quoted a Hopi elder at an Obama event in early February and inspired Obama to say it.

Whether or not he was aware of the expression prior to then I'm not sure.

Here is the original context of the quotation. It's at the very end of this moving video.

http://www.sedonadigitalarts.com/html/video_previews.html

[Whisp]

16. that second line is not Ghandi's...

"We must become the change we want to see" (GHandi) vs
"We are the change we have been waiting for." (Obama) = this is a Hopi Leader quote if I am not mistaken.

I may have misunderstood you tho, as I didn't read your whole post. I kinda snoozed out at the suggestion Obama be more humble or less presumptious or whatever.

[gblady]

22. yep...

it is the Hopi statement...which has totally different meaning than Gandhi's quote.

[foo_bar]

20. "as much subtlety as a sledge hammer"

Mohandas K. Gandhi has a frequently misspelled name.

http://librarytypos.blogspot.com/2008/05/ghandi-etc-for-gandhi.html

Shankar Kalyanaraman observes that people often write Gandhi as "Ghandi". In fact, this misspelling is much commoner than either of the other two errors, "Ghandhi" and "Gandi":

The difference is even larger considering that many of the "gandi" hits are really examples of gandi.net or other completely different but equally valid words. We've commented on this pattern of errors many times before, for example with respect to Jennifer, tomorrow, parallel, Karttunen, Attila, and so on. What this means in the case of Gandhi is that people know there is an "h" in there somewhere, and just one of them, but they're not too sure where it is. As a result, the omission of the "h" after the "d" and the insertion of an "h" after the "g" are not statistically independent processes.

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/001006.html "(Mis)spelling Gandhi"

That’s how it’s spelled. Not “Ghandi”. If you like him so much, learn how to spell his frickin’ name. That’s all.

http://www.canadiandimension.com/blog/2008/03/spelling-gandhi/

[Whisp]

25. I make that mistake too often.

I'll try to remember it as: Hi, Gand.

[Mabus]

21. The ad's intended audience are the fundamentalists/rapture people

the message he's sending them is that Obama is the anti-Christ. He's trying to tell them that Obama is a dangerous man and that people are blindly following him as some new, albeit false, messiah.