Editor's note: This article was updated to correct the misspellings of Herman Cain, George Will and Michele Bachmann.
Karl Kraus, the Austrian newspaper editor, once said: “Journalists write because they have nothing to say, and have something to say because they write.”
In truth, nothing has changed — so Kraus can rest soundly in his grave.
Nothing brings this thought into sharper focus than the swiftly approaching 2012 presidential campaign. Journalists have begun writing scathing editorials about the men and women from the Republican Party who may or may not be running for president, and the lack of anything real to say already has writers and reporters taking note of trivial information — no matter how inaccurate the material.
Lately, Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin have been put in the same category; instead of being recognized for their myriad of achievements, they are being recognized for their uteri. You can thank identity politics for this absurdity.
Even though these women have been building up their political profile for weeks now and making appearances from New York City to Alaska and from Florida to California, neither has announced her candidacy for president. The fact not one but two conservative women may run for president has journalists all but foaming at the mouth.
Never mind there might be a dozen men who may be competing against these two women, who may or may not be running, or that Bachmann and Palin have different areas of expertise: one is a governor, the other a lawyer, state senator and congresswoman. The press seems to already be declaring a Bachmann-versus-Palin catfight.
In a Politico story entitled “Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann Size Each Other Up,” the author writes: “The ironclad laws of politics suggest there isn’t enough room for the two powerful personalities to occupy the same space in 2012.”
This is the most melodramatic comment I have read. They, meaning Palin and Bachmann, are not the same woman. And would Politico write the same thing about two powerful male political figures, such as Newt Gingrich and Herman Cain, running against each other? Is Politico suggesting there is room for only one woman in the primary?
ABC News’ “The Note” said of the possibility of having two women run for president: “It would be an epic matchup, pitting two dynamic, conservative women who appeal directly to evangelicals and the tea party faithful.”
Really? I honestly do not know what to think about Bachmann versus Palin being any more of an “epic” matchup than, say, Bachmann versus Tim Pawlenty or Cain versus Ron Paul. Why does it become “epic” when discussing two women?
I know of female journalists associated with these shenanigans, like last week when the Los Angeles Times’ Maeve Reston wrote a story about voter anxiety and Bachmann “may labor in Palin’s shadow whether the former Alaska ends up running or not.”
The left-leaning media is attracted to this kind of obsession. On “Fox and Friends,” Bachmann was asked a series of questions, which were more of a comparison to Palin than anything else. Even George Will, a columnist, seemed to think the two are related. He believed: “If [Palin] gets in now, it will be because, I think Michele Bachmann is about to get in, and they take up the same political space…”
He should have known this supposed “political space” is about the size of a small, walk-in closet.
But these women are not the only potential presidential candidates being put into the same closet. Another story suggested Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, two Mormons, apparently take up the same space.
Politico dubbed it “The Mormon Primary,” and USA Today has written stories comparing their Mormonism. Sadly, I imagine Paul and Pawlenty will receive the same scrutiny.
In summation, Bachmann and Palin are simply “the women” about to brawl it out in the political arena, Romney and Huntsman are “the Mormons,” and Cain is undoubtedly “the black one,” rendering white, male, broad-based Christian candidates like Pawlenty, Santorum and Gingrich merely the “serious candidates.”
Then again, why am I surprised Democrats focus on superficial characteristics to define their candidates. Remember how Obama was simply called the “black president?” Despite our protestations to the opposite, America continues to stereotype and label anyone not a white, Christian male.
I hope as the campaign gains momentum, the media will be forced to look beyond identity politics and the silly superficial characteristics and tell voters who these candidates really are — not who the media wants them to be.
Until this pipe dream becomes reality, you and I are stuck with this drivel, making yet another Kraus aphorism apropos: “The mission of the press is to spread culture while destroying the attention span.”
— Sage Mauldin, psychology senior
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
localsooner 11 months, 3 weeks ago
Bachmann is crazy, Palin's a complete idiot. This goes way beyond gender or political party, and right to the heart of both of those characteristics.
Unfortunately, the author uses just about the worst two examples in the world for their thesis, and their points is lost in a sea of tea-party hysteria.
mythman 11 months, 3 weeks ago
"The left-leaning media is attracted to this kind of obsession. ... Fox and Friends ... George Hill ... why am I surprised Democrats focus on superficialities to define their candidates."
Wait. You think Fox and Friends and George Hill are part of the "left-leaning media"? This explains a lot of the problems with this article.
mythman 11 months, 3 weeks ago
"The unifying characteristic of Bachmann and Palin is not that they are both women. It's that they are both crazy."
This.
eightbitgirl 11 months, 3 weeks ago
This article is awful. And I have to agree, the unifying characteristic of Palin and Bachmann is, in fact, that they're both crazy.
Steven Zoeller 11 months, 3 weeks ago
Fox and Friends is left-leaning?
And pretty much everything else in the article is wrong.
OUDad 11 months, 3 weeks ago
You mentioned the "left leaning media" then pointed specifically to Fox? Was this some kind of joke? At this point I am just going to assume you're trying to stir the pot.
IF someone wishes to get past the surface of Bachman and Palin then both of those candidates will need to exhibit more intelligence than God gave geese. Right now both of them have even less credibility than Rand Paul...and every time Bachman opens her mouth a kitten dies.
Gene 11 months, 4 weeks ago
The unifying characteristic of Bachmann and Palin is not that they are both women. It's that they are both crazy.
raderj89 11 months, 3 weeks ago
Suddenly Cain is mentioned though we never hear of anyone in the column prior to this with the last name Cain, only McCain.
"Then again, why am I surprised Democrats focus on superficialities to define their candidates."
Two things about this sentence: 1) Questions are supposed to have question marks (?) at the end of them. 2) you were talking about journalists but then you say Democrats focus on superficialities, thus making it seem you believe all journalists are Democrats. Absurd.
raderj89 11 months, 3 weeks ago
And is it Michelle Bachmann or Michele Bachmann? Seriously, make up your mind.
raderj89 11 months, 3 weeks ago
I can't even finish reading this column after reading "Hermann McCain" twice in four sentences. It's HERMAN CAIN. For someone who seems intent to act as the GOP apologist, your credibility is utterly destroyed when you can't get their names right. Last column it was Tim Powlenty and this time it's Hermann McCain. Sad.
mythman 11 months, 3 weeks ago
Also--I should have realized this earlier--It's George Will, not George Hill.