There is an interesting juxtaposition between two recent stories in Politico. This one, "Obama strategy gets personal," notes that the President "has lately been getting personal with his political adversaries – singling them out for scorn". Tom Bevan at RealClearPolitics describes President Obama, when talking about reforming the financial system, as relying
"on rhetorical tricks and demagoguery to make his case – as [he] did [last] Thursday by declaring any opposing viewpoint to his as ‘illegitimate.’ Despite his eloquence and thoughtful demeanor, Obamadoesn't try to win arguments through persuasion so much as he does by demonizing and de-legitimizing those who hold a different view."
(Dan Henninger in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal notes the same thing. This link will hopefully be good until next Wednesday.)
On the other hand, this article in Politico, "War of words over Obama’s soft tone," talks about the less confrontational language the President and the administration have been using with respect to Iran, North Korea and what used to be called "Islamic extremism":
"The administration defends the moves, saying that by needlessly antagonizing or alienating nations and groups, it can make it harder for the U.S. to build alliances against violent extremists.
That’s why Obama’s Muslim outreach speech included references to people who carry out violence but without the word ‘terrorism’ …."
Hmmm. Let’s see. With countries and groups like North Korea, Iran and Islamic terrorists, the President and the administration are toning down their language, and moderating their rhetoric, to try to work with these people.
But on this side of the proverbial waters’ edge, the President is giving it to the opposition with both barrels. Getting personal. Demonizing those who disagree.
Interesting.
---------
Update (5/13/10 9:00 pm): The two links to Politico articles are reversed. I just noticed.
Comments