Howard Kurtz is right. The media are getting mad. And we know why. They feel their role of educating the public against the evils and inconsistencies of conservatism and religious (Christian) zealotry has been obfuscated by the sound bite culture of political campaigns. Let me assure the media at large and Mr. Kurtz in particular that they are being heard loud and clear. We are able to pay attention to many different voices at the same time, and our judgment is clear enough to form our own opinions. What may continue to bother you, however, is that we choose to disagree with you, even in the face of what we recognize to be attempts at manipulation from the other side.

“Lipstick on a pig” is an old expression. It was not directed at Sarah Palin. We know that. It may have been a subconscious slip, since lipstick has become such a popular word in this campaign, but no one actually thinks Senator Obama would be dumb enough to call Mrs. Palin a pig. We also know that Mrs. Palin comes from a small town, is not cosmopolitan, has not met world leaders, has very little knowledge of foreign policy, is a devout Christian, probably has some issues regarding exercise of power (such as “troopergate”) and has made claims that stretch the facts of her own achievements (bridge to nowhere). We are fully aware of those facts. We also know that Mrs. Palin’s speech was written for her (as are all politicians’ speeches), and it is clear she memorized a lot of answers for Charlie Gibson. We just don’t really care. You see, conservatives are not uninformed hicks. We just see politics for what it is – a game of gotcha, where we try to find the lesser of two evils, and one where we try to find someone we can to some extent identify with. 

Sarah Palin is a person many Americans can identify with. She has been able to achieve success through her own efforts. She has faced the difficulties and rewards of everyday life. She is every person. Is she qualified to be President? Maybe not. Not yet. Was Bill Clinton, Governor of Arkansas qualified? Or Michael Dukakis, of Massachusetts? Or Howard Dean, of Vermont? What foreign policy experience did they have? Much the same as Mrs. Palin, I would venture to guess. But they were not questioned, since a. they are male and b. they are Democrats. To the media and the intellectual elites that indicates an inherent enlightenment which need not be questioned. What made Bill Clinton a winner out of those three? He was able to connect to the voters. Nobody was blind to Mr. Clinton’s faults. But he was likeable. He was not holier than thou. He was clearly not someone whose religious principles guided his actions, but he was intensely human and accessible in the eyes and hearts of voters. Mrs. Palin is human and accessible in the same way.

Mr. Obama seems to be a likeable man. He has superb oratory skills, has a compelling story and a beautiful family. He also has issues that make voters uncomfortable. His past associations, too quickly dismissed by the adoring, and now angry, media, make most voters take notice. Activists (or terrorists, however you would refer to them) from the sixties and seventies don’t concern most Americans – unless they have close ties to someone who might well become President. When those ties are dismissed without close scrutiny and when questions are dubbed personal attacks, voters become suspicious. We do have a right to know. We may not care when the final analysis is done, but we should be able to ask questions and have them answered rather than dismissed. Mr. Obama’s church, Trinity United, is another issue that voters are inherently uncomfortable with. Religious extremism from the right is viewed as a pernicious attack on clear thinking, evolution loving America - dinosaurs were, after all, not here 4,000 years ago. But while most of us know that, we are rattled when we hear our potential future President’s pastor of 25 years, one of whose sermons inspired the title of Mr. Obama’s second biography, refer to our country in the most hateful way imaginable. And when the media again accepts the implausible explanation that Mr. Obama never heard these rants, we become even more distrustful – both of the media and of the candidate. Now, Mr. Damon may be very concerned about a woman who may believe in Creationism having the nuclear codes. Most Americans are more concerned about a man who for 25 years sat and listened to racially charged sermons about the U.S. Government creating AIDS to kill blacks and their country deserving the attacks of 9/11 without protest or choosing to distant himself.

Another problem for Mr. Obama is his resume. It is too thin in palpable achievements or strong stances to convince many that there is true substance behind his lovely words.  All community organizing jokes aside, there is not one significant piece of legislation with Mr. Obama’s name on it. We may or may not like Mr. McCain’s campaign finance reform, or his immigration initiative, but at least we have seen it, and we have seen him fight for them tooth and nail. Mr. Obama’s speeches have always been just that… You see, we like candidates who take stands, even when we don’t like those stands. Mr. Obama’s convoluted tax proposals have changed dramatically since he first entered the race. We know he wants to raise taxes, but only for very few, and that he has enormous new social programs that will need funding. We don’t see congruence in his proposals or how he plans to carry them out. Same with his foreign policy ideas – voters may like Mr. Obama, but the idea that his congeniality, eloquence and good looks would make the leaders of rogue states swoon like college girls and become peace loving partners is a very tough sell.

Finally, there is the last and all important point. Mrs. Palin is running for Vice President. Mr. Obama is running for President. The assumption that so many are making that Mr. McCain, if elected, will die before his second in command is able to get her feet wet, borders on insulting. This is not a fair fight, and it is not one that should be waged. Mr. Biden has gotten lost in all this discussion. Why is his record not as closely examined as Mrs. Palin’s? It is certainly long and by no means perfect. We want to like our leaders. We want to trust them on a basic good guy human level. We don’t like dodgy characters or half baked stories. We like to think we can see thru our candidates, like them and relate to them, even if we know they are not perfect. That is what the media doesn’t understand, and why they are getting mad.