Obama, the fallen messiah
President Barack Obama reads the Christmas book “The Polar Express” as he visits a Boys and Girls Club in Washington. (AP Photo)
During a time of economic decline, persistent cultural strife, deepening American involvement in far-off military conflicts, and rapid environmental deterioration, is there any wonder that some have turned to apocalyptic “salvation narratives” promising both a transcendent, everlasting future and violent retribution against perceived evildoers? A CNN poll in 2002 found that 59% of Americans believe that the prophecies in the Book of Revelations will come true. The startling number reflected the still-fresh trauma of the 9/11 attacks, but I suspect that it has held steady, if not risen. Indeed, mainstream American culture is permeated by apocalypticism; the blockbuster-movie hit 2012 is but one recent example.
I spend several chapters in my book Republican Gomorrah: Inside the Movement that Shattered the Party following the Christian right’s ascent to the mountain-top with George W Bush’s re-election, detailing how the movement shrouded science and reason in the shadow of the cross, then observing as it swiftly imploded during the Terri Schiavo charade. Because I completed my book days after Barack Obama’s inauguration, I was only able to foreshadow the right’s plan to undermine the new president. Having watched the right attempt to delegitimise and literally overthrow Bill Clinton for eight years, I did not harbour any illusions about Obama transcending partisan division by becoming (as many argued) the “liberal Reagan who can reunite America”.
What I did not include in my book was any sense of where the Democratic left was going, or how this movement had developed its own salvation narrative during the Bush era. Only a presidency as destructive and radical as Bush’s could have produced such deep levels of anxiety and desperation among progressives. When the Democratic primary began, some progressives seemed to ache for a secular messiah to descend from the political heavens, reverse Bush’s disastrous legacy and save the country from itself.
In their quest for a saviour, progressives discovered Barack Obama. “I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views”, Obama proclaimed in his book, The Audacity of Hope. As Obama’s primary battle against Hillary Clinton intensified, his rhetoric and the language of his supporters grew increasingly messianic. At a rally in South Carolina, Oprah Winfrey referred to Obama as “The One”, a fusion of Jesus and Neo from The Matrix. When Obama defeated Clinton in Iowa, he quoted from a Hopi Indian “end-times” prophecy that had become popular among New Agers: “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” Moved to the point of ecstasy by Obama’s victory speech, Ezra Klein declared the candidate, “not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of the word over flesh… Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our higher selves.”
Though he is not a progressive by even the wildest stretch of the imagination, it is worth noting that Louis Farrakhan, who had consistently ordered his followers to boycott elections and who attacked black politicians from Harold Washington to Jesse Jackson as tools of the white power-structure, declared in no uncertain terms that Obama was the Messiah. Now that some of Obama’s most zealous supporters are beginning to express grave doubts about his ability to deliver the transcendent change he promised, I think it is time for them to consider their role in contributing to the problems Obama faces with both his Democratic base and his opponents on the right. They embraced a secular salvation-narrative that Obama cleverly channelled to excite them and distract from his lack of progressive accomplishments. In the end, Obama’s messianisation created false expectations while establishing political space for the right to undermine and delegitimise him.
On a high
To be sure, Obama’s salvation narrative was dramatically different than the dualistic, malignant version that prevails on the Christian right. Obama never, to my knowledge, played to his supporters’ dark sides by promising them holy retribution against their perceived enemies. In fact, part of his appeal stemmed from his repudiation of partisan rancour - there were no red states where people reject science, demonise gays and attack minority rights. Until he was inaugurated, Obama behaved like a secular Messiah in a world without a Devil.
In my book, I detail a series of experiments by a group of political psychologists seeking to provide evidence that the fear of death inspires extreme conservative beliefs - including apocalypticism. Their study was inspired by a theory of cultural anthropologist Ernest Becker: “The idea of death, the fear of it, haunts the human animal like nothing else; it is a mainspring of human activity – designed largely to avoid the fatality of death, to overcome it by denying in some way that it is the final destiny of man.” The professors discovered that time and again, their study subjects would register more conservative responses to questions if they were first reminded of their own deaths.
The use of mortality-reminders came in to play as soon as Obama was inaugurated. Almost immediately, the right attempted to delegitimise him by reversing the phenomenon he relied on to win: while he attempted to serve as a blank screen for Americans to project their aspirations upon, they projected their most fearsome inner demons onto him. During the McCain-Palin rallies of October 2008, Sarah Palin and far-right surrogates like Joe the Plumber attacked Obama as an Other, a strange outsider who did not share mainstream American values. Their intention was to make him as unfamiliar and frightening as possible, and in doing so, to scare off wavering independent voters. By this time, it was too late in the campaign for the tactic to take effect, so it extended into 2009 and peaked during the Teabagger rallies and townhall disruptions of the autumn.
Teabagger activists transposed images of Stalin and Hitler onto Obama’s face. (Their propaganda bore a disturbing resemblance to the signs waved by right-wing Jewish settlers during rallies against Yitzhak Rabin that depicted the soon-to-be-assassinated Israeli prime minister in Nazi SS garb and as the collaborator Marshall Petain, two seemingly incongruous images). Obama was a Muslim; Obama was a commie; Obama was a cosmopolitan globalist; Obama was a black nationalist. It did not matter who Obama really was; the right simply wanted to convince America he was The Other. As cynical as their tactic is, it has damaged Obama in large part because he offered himself up as “a blank screen”, defining himself as he thought different audiences wished to see him, and ultimately not establishing a very clear identity at all.
The right has complemented its anti-Obama propaganda with false rumours designed to inject the language of death into the healthcare debate. The single most damaging rumour - adopted from the cult of Lyndon LaRouche, refined by former healthcare-industry lobbyist Betsy McCaughey, and popularised by Sarah Palin - was that Obama’s healthcare-reform proposal included a plan to implement “death-panels”. While the president pleaded for compromise and reason, the right repeated the baseless charge over and over that he planned to pull the plug on grandma, euthanise the severely handicapped, and kill the sick. Obama has not yet recovered from the damage the right’s mortality-reminders did to his political standing.
In the mirror
Since Obama announced his plan to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and with the White House apparently poised to scrap the public option and Medicare buy-in proposals to mollify Senator Joseph Lieberman, the progressive left is going into contortions. Turn on MSNBC or read any major progressive blog and you will see former Obama zealots proclaim, “Kill the bill!” while assailing the president as an empty suit.
The liberal left has become so disgruntled that a leading conservative talk-radio host asked me recently if progressives were considering a primary challenge to Obama. I laughed and stated my belief that despite his troubles, Obama would win a second term. Whether or not that happens, those former Obama fanatics experiencing a crisis in faith should look in the mirror. They demanded a secular salvation narrative and participated in the near-deification of the politician who so eloquently delivered it to them. They now know that Obama is just a politician. What they have refused to acknowledge is that he would not have fallen so hard had they not lifted him so high.
- ‘David Beckham to miss World Cup’
- Kallis, Uthappa reigns over Kings XI
- Tiger to return to golf at the Masters
- L.A Lakers top Warriors for 9th straight time
- Torres double inspires Liverpool to easy win
- Agassi apologizes for poking fun at Sampras
- Barca to unleash magical Messi on Stuttgart
- ‘Don’t confuse restraint with weakness’
- No question of bulldozing women’s bill: Moily
- Oft-injured Nadal won't change style



Add to Any
AskJeeves
Newsvine
Onlywire
BlinkList
Facebook
Furl
Google
Myspace
reddit
technorati
Windows Live Favorites
Yahoo MyWeb
Digg this story

Comments (6 posted):
Blumenthal says: -----> it is worth noting that Louis Farrakhan, who had consistently ordered his followers to boycott elections and who attacked black politicians from Harold Washington to Jesse Jackson as tools of the white power-structure, declared in no uncertain terms that Obama was the Messiah.----<
You are a liar the truth is not in you! Have you forgotten that Jesse Jackson's most vocal supporter in 1984 was Farrakhan. Did you note that he urged is supporters to vote for Jackson then? Have you forgotten that Chicago Mayor Harold Washington's was also publically and vocally supported by Farrakhan? Regarding Pres. Barack, Farrakhan said during his speeech, to MAKE NO MISTAKE about it that "Obama is NOT the messiah for sure" or any other politician!
The guy spouts Marxist principles every time he opens his mouth. He has stolen billions from investors to pay off his union thug support. He's attempting a statist takeover of a large chunk of the economy. His entire life has been spent marinading in the bile of communist agitators and bombers... but he's sure no progressive. How delusional does one have to be to think, let alone write, such drivel?
Only those completely divorced from reality ever thought of Obama as a messiah -- or, for that matter, even a qualified president. That Obama sees himself in Herculean terms is simply a tribute to his narcissism and doesn't excuse Blumenthal and the other naifs who expected --- what? Greatness?
I don't give a rip about the left's disappointment that Obama isn't quite the Chavez they'd like him to be; but I do hope those in the center and on the right will keep up the absolutely valid criticisms earned daily by this administration for its attacks on personal freedom and national security.
This one sentence deserves a response.
Here was a guy who simply asked Obama a question, and Obama’s answer was an unskilled repsonse that sounded vaguely Marxist in its intent.
Joe attacked Obama? By asking a question? I’d love to know how the “far right” managed to get their “surrogate” into the situation to ask the “question.”
The writer doesn't seem to mind the media, government officials, politicians, and political commentators attacking a citizen for asking a candidate a question. State workers in Ohio actually looked through records to smear Joe the Plumber. And the problem is that Joe attacked Obama?
The writer is counting on readers who don’t think about what they’re reading. This isn't the world of Walter Duranty any more, bud, and we're painfully aware of leftist propoganda when we see it. Sorry to disappoint him.
Liberals have bogus science on their side --- bogus evolution and doctored climate change numbers... Hatred and intolerance is what is in abundance with Obama's worshippers... I'm glad the asses of the Nobel Committee has been exposed for the entertainment of the world.
Robertson admits that she does not read the bills in their entirety and has no training in analyzing legislation beyond her BA in advertising. What she does is spot check, not fact check.
Ms. Robertson writes that Betsy McCaughey “falsely claimed that the stimulus bill required that doctors follow government orders on what medical procedures can and can’t be performed.” What McCaughey actually said was that the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology would “monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and ‘guide’ your doctor’s decisions” (442, 226 of the bill). Robertson, who admitted in a telephone interview that she had not read the entire stimulus bill, had difficulty locating the provisions on health information technology and confused them with another section of the bill that addresses comparative effectiveness research. But it is the health information technology that establishes the framework for guiding doctors’ decisions.
Dr. David Blumenthal was appointed by the President to head the system of computer-guided medical care as National Coordinator of Health Information Technology. In March, Blumenthal settled the debate on whether the system will control doctors' treatment decisions. In an article in the New England Journal of Medicine (April 9, 2009), he stressed that the real importance of computers is to deliver "embedded clinical decision support." He predicted that if controls are too tight, physicians may resist the government encroaching on their treatment decisions: "many physicians and hospitals may rebel -- petitioning Congress to change the law or just resigning themselves to…accepting penalties." Dr. Blumenthal's article corrects Robertson, who insisted incorrectly that nothing in the stimulus legislation indicated "the government is going to tell your doctor what to do."
Robertson is wrong again on what HR 3200 said about end-of-life counseling. She claims the bill “merely called for Medicare to pay for voluntary counseling sessions.” If this were the case, it could have been accomplished with a line or at most a paragraph. Instead, the end-of-life section went on for six pages and was highly prescriptive, detailing what doctors “shall” discuss. That should be left to the doctor and patient. Medicare billing codes already permit doctors to bill for time spent counseling patients and families.
Robertson fails to mention the penalties against doctors for non-compliance. “Quality” measures of a doctor’s performance would be determined in part by the percentage of patients who created living wills, and the percentage of those documents that were adhered to.
Fortunately, members of the House heard the concerns expressed by me and countless Americans, and removed these alarming requirements before voting on the health bill. FactCheck.org should rely on more qualified analysts than Ms. Robertson to critique lawmakers and policy experts.
Post your comment