- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
While it may be much more pronounced now, this type of silliness has marked American politics for a long time. Anybody remember Bush-Dukakis in 88. Bush Sr. got stuck with the ‘wimp’ label (which even as a Democrat I found odd given his status as a decorated war hero) and Dukakis in an idiotic attempt to capitalize got himself filmed in a tank. That image was used to define Dukakis as ‘overcompensating’ for the rest of the election. Or when Dukakis was asked how he would deal with a man who raped and murdered his wife he didn’t respond with a visceral ‘he must die a slow painful death’ remark. Because he was able to stand outside the silly hypothetical and give a reasoned nuanced answer he was immediately labeled as ‘soft-on-crime’ and ‘an unemotional robot.’
The simple truth is most American’s vote on emotion, not on logic. Regan was the grandfather, Bill Clinton, not a Rhodes Scholar, but a good old boy who felt our pain. Bush Jr. a compassionate man who led with his heart and didn’t need all that high-minded book learning.
The sad part is how much the MSM buys into this imagery. Discussing posture, clothes, kisses, photo-ops rather than substantive issues that truly define how someone would lead.
