Fily Bâ Camara
ENG 111
Prof. Kari
7 November 2008
The Tone of the 2008 Presidential Campaign as a Reflection of a Disturbing New Ideology
Since early 2007, the United States has been captivated by a once every four year phenomenon in which the worldwide beacon of democracy, goes through a process to select its next head executive. Added to the usual drama that accompanies this occasion is the fact this election, primaries included, has involved a slew of candidates who would have been or will be the first of their kind to represent the United States as president. The Democratic Primary for the first time ever, had two front-runners who were a woman, Hilary Clinton, and a man with a white mother and black father from Kenya, named Barack H. Obama. By the end of this intensively contested primary, Barack Obama came out to be the victor, and in the general election of the coming months faced John McCain who questionably selected another woman, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. When it became evident that the final matchup would be between Senators Obama and Biden, and on the other side, Senator McCain and Governor Palin, many could already see that one side had much of the momentum following the unpopular Bush years, and carrying a message of hope and change. The question then remained, how could the two opposing sides combat each other, particularly when one had a visibly larger and more enthusiastic following. Thus, the decision was at some point made to attack each other, particularly on the side of McCain-Palin, who laced their remarks with inferences questioning things about Obama ranging from his patriotism, to his ability to be trusted, in a manner that was reflective of the shift in ideology that occurred in the years since the beginning of the new millennium.
After the horrors of September 11, 2001, the United States, collectively, took precautions to prevent against such an attack in the future. It was the Bush Administrations policy to combat “terrorism” with combat abroad and increased scrutiny domestically. Unfortunately, with these measures and others like them, many citizens are wrongfully profiled and categorized due to their ethnicities, faiths, or affiliations. At some point, it became unfavorable at all to question the establishment. The nation that is touted for its value on freedom and expression had resorted the incessant questioning of patriotism and loyalty as exhibited in the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections where the wearing of a flag pin took importance, as an issue, over health care reform or U.S. involvement in conflict over seas.
Many will argue that times have simply changed since 9/11 of 2001, and the United States cannot afford the loose attitude that lead to the attacks in the first place. It is with this notion, fostered by the Bush administration, that the campaign of John McCain lead a truly desperate attack on Obama, not necessarily calling him out on issues of allegiance directly, but fostering the sentiment and then doing nothing to quell the outcries later on. This is perhaps just a part of the campaign season and it is in fact, a tactic also employed by the Obama campaign, though not as much as an attack on McCain’s patriotism because it is widely thought to be “unquestionable”.
Perhaps what makes Obama so vulnerable to these attacks is the fact he is the first of his kind to be in this position. His father was Islamic and from Kenya, so naturally he is considered, to this day, a Muslim, he is black, so he feared by the more ignorant whites. Obama’s obscure relations to people like Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, provided fuel to the machine that sought to dismantle Obama’s character and play to the fears of a people victimized by years of an administration that relied on those fears and often stirred.