Somali Garb

The flap over the photo of Obama in Somali garb is an odd one. First, let me just say that I hope the Clinton campaign didn’t release it. Frankly, it smells of a Rovian tactic—something a really smart RNC guy might do: tar two opponents at once.

Now, as to the question of whether it was actually problematic at all. I was listening to a little Right-Wing radio last night, and the host was being, I thought, disingenuous. His patter was something along the line of “there’s nothing wrong with being Muslim, or African-American, right? That’s what Obama’s campaign has been saying. So why would they squeal if someone releases this picture..? And why didn’t Obama’s campaign release it themselves..?”

What bothers me is that I’m sure that there are lots of people for whom this makes perfect sense. So, here’s my take on it.

##
Human beings are tribal. Race, National origin, and religion are three major tribes. Obama has built his campaign on an Aikido-like strategy of motivating people to look at the future we can build together, rather than on the fact that he is “different.” He knows that his differences are a losing position.

This is very similar to what I noticed in Hollywood my first time around. If I could keep the executive’s attention on the story, or the project we could create together, I got the job. If race EVER came up in the discussion, I was screwed.

So…the photo itself was neutral. It could have been released by a neutral news organization, part of a “Politician’s in native garb” series showing a dozen different politicos and the ways they blend in with the natives around the world. Kilts, hula skirts, Eskimo garb, whatever. Hah hah. And maybe somebody would have looked at Obama in the turban and thought: “damn! He’s Mooozlem!” and a vote or two would have dropped out. Maybe his campaign would have thought: “ouch. Oh well…” but that would have been the extent of it.


But to my knowledge, campaigns never release information about their opponents unless it will have a negative effect on the opponent, or a positive effect on their own campaign. I mean, they have limited resources, right? So why spend a moment doing something that would have a neutral effect? I would start with that presumption.

Now…IF this was released by the Clinton campaign, I would assume it was released because they are desperate to stop his momentum. And to the degree that they can get people to remember that he is the “other tribe” those who have such problems will definitely waver in their support. Their intention could have been:
1) to ridicule him. (“Funny garb”)

2) To identify him as African. (And thereby get the racial-cultural polarization)

3) To identify him with a particular GROUP of Africans (associating him with a particular ethnic conflict, perhaps. If he is on the “wrong side” of one such, they can make a case for his naiveté. This is unlikely—too subtle.)

4) To identify him as a Muslim. The old “Manchurian Candidate” thing. By the way, I don’t think that this will be an approach used by the RNC. After all, wouldn’t that be cutting their own throats? It was MCCAIN who actually fulfills the Manchurian Candidate scenario, after all. American soldier, captured by commies and tortured/brainwashed, returns to the U.S. and involves himself in politics and eventually runs for President…if you think about it, there’s a pretty nasty little email campaign a DNC-sympathizer could stir up…

##
Anyway, there it is. The question is one of intent. I hope that this is below the Clinton campaign. I’m afraid that it is quite within the bounds of politics as practiced in the world. Hell, it’s even conceivable that the Obama campaign released it, “spoofing” a Clinton email address, just so they could act horrified. But I doubt it: he doesn’t need it, at all.
##
What I’m going to do in a week or so is march through the Seven Secrets one at a time here on the blog, and ask people to submit questions. Either your questions, or questions you believe others would ask. These will form the operational kernel of the book.
#
And the Question of the Day is: What is the Single Largest Mistake you’ve ever made that you’re willing to cop to publicly? For me, it was the series of mis-cues that led to the destruction of my first marriage. Dammit, I knew what Toni really needed and wanted from me, but I just wouldn’t step up unless she made her requests explicit. That was dishonest, and petty, and childish, and cost me hugely. Almost damaged my daughter, and hurt one of the very best friends I’ve ever had in my entire life. I was a fool. Yeah, I know, I was doing the best I could at the time…but I refuse to let myself off the hook for that one.

How about you?