Republicans are running a string of TV ads on the theme "Obama as Messiah," using clips from Cecil B. DeMille "The Ten Commandments," and making fun of him. There are several interesting points to explore in this choice.
First, it is true that Obama received, for a couple of months, a very favorable attention by mainstream media. Maybe it wasn't "adoration," as McCain's campaign calls it, but it was a widespread attitude. The reason, however, is hardly the one advanced by Republicans (the cult of celebrities - they compared Obama to socialite Paris Hilton).
In February, New Republic's John Judis put that attitude in context: "Obama is the candidate of the new--a "new generation," a "new leadership," a "new kind of politics," to borrow phrases he has used. But, in emphasizing newness, Obama is actually voicing a very old theme. When he speaks of change, hope, and choosing the future over the past, when he pledges to end racial divisions or attacks special interests, Obama is striking chords that resonate deeply in the American psyche. He is making a promise to voters that is as old as the country itself: to wipe clean the slate of history and begin again from scratch."
Judis continued: "Early generations of Americans became captivated by the idea that they could create a future without reference to the past. The revolutionaries who fought for America's independence saw themselves as breaking not only with the Old World but with history itself. "The case and circumstances of America present themselves as in the beginning of a world," Thomas Paine wrote in 1792. Thomas Jefferson believed the new nation should regularly renew itself, arguing that, if necessary, "the tree of liberty must be refreshed ... with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
This issue of an America always ready to start again, to be "reborn" without reference to the past has been thoroughly analyzed in the past, at least since the importantR. W. B. Lewis's book of 1955 The American Adam. However, it is not clear how much this feeling operates with success in politics: William Jennings Bryan's hopes of "regenerating the Republic" were dashed in 1896. Franklyn Roosevelt did prevail in 1932, and was able to found a new political order, but in more recent times the political system appears to be insensitive to any desire for change. In 1968, "change" meant the election of Richard Nixon, a vice-president between 1953 and 1961. In 1980, "change" was the arrival at the White House of Ronald Reagan, an astute repackaging of Barry Goldwater's ideas of 1964. In 1992, "change" allowed the bizarre Texas millionaire H. Ross Perot to collect 19% of the popular vote but the Presidency went to Bill Clinton, who -confronted to a hostile Congress- never had a real chance of implementing his ideas. And today, it's not a given that "change" will deliver the White House to Barack Obama, who faces the formidable Republican war machine.
In other words, in 2008 Americans do crave for change, but their political system seems to be well insulated against it. Maybe we should start thinking less to the horse race between the candidates and more to the structures that channel political aspirations and movements.
The second interesting point is that the Republican party has built its political fortunes on a close relationship with evangelicals. In November, McCain's courtship notwithstanding, this constituency may well have a different attitude: the Senator from Arizona never was "their" candidate, and many of them have been disappointed by George Bush's policies. What will be their reaction to commercials making fun of Moses? Evangelicals are not know to be a fun-loving brigade: they believe the Bible to be literally true, and when Charlton Heston makes the Red Sea open to allow the Chosen People to pass, in their mind that is what really happened.
Therefore, Steve Schmidt (Karl Rove's protege who is the architect of these commercials) is skating on thin ice: the ads can be fun only for non-believers, while they may irritate devote Christians, of whom in the Republican electorate there are many.
The ad's conclusion is somehow risky, too. By declaring Obama "not ready to lead," Republican operatives forget that in a few weeks there will be three debates between the candidates. As Obama is an excellent performer on stage, he usually appears calm and in control of the issues, it is quite possible that voters asking themselves "Is he ready to lead?" might answer "Yes, he is." This is not necessarily true of John McCain, whose penchant for spectacular gaffes is well known. A deeply religious people may decide that it is better to have a black Moses than someone who is not able to remember how many houses he owns (an attitude more in tune with those of Egypt's Pharaohs).
____
____
