"This is ridiculous"

At various times during the 2008 Presidential campaign, in moments of frustration, Barack Obama would tell David Axelrod that someday he would write a book about the election and the title would be “This is Ridiculous.” This is according to “Game Change,” by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann. Many of you probably read it already, this due to my inadvertently putting myself on the wait list at the library for the large print version, which in Florida can add substantially to the wait time.

But I had to read it. I started The Daily Blank in January 2008, not to be specifically about the election, but inevitably, we spent a lot of time on the topic and I followed it more closely than any before it. We all were very invested in the process that year, and this book does a wonderful job of recapping the major events and giving them a perspective that was impossible to have as the events were taking place.

The book is remarkable in several ways. It is eminently readable, and manages to infuse drama into a narrative in which the reader knows the outcome. Some of its most sensational revelations have been well reported since it was published in January of this year, but they are all the more sensational when read in the context of the story arc. Some of the event and conversations the authors reveal are stunning; so much so one has to wonder about the accuracy, but I’m aware of no challenges to anything reported in the book, and after four months without a law suit or a major hissy fit I think we can assume they got it right.

However, as enjoyable as it was to read on one level, I ultimately found the book depressing. It not only confirms, but amplifies, the impression I have of Presidential politics as being more theater than substance.

Obama, Clinton and McCain were stars. Like Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts, or Jack Nicholson. They hired professional political consultants who acted as their producers, script writers, marketers, and road managers. They cast various lesser politicians in supporting roles based more on their images rather than their abilities. They wrote different scripts for different audiences. They counter-program the way executives at NBC do against CBS. The press did its part by reviewing the shows they produced 24/7; building audiences without offering much insight into the show’s meanings or purpose.

If more than ten pages of the book were devoted to issues of political substance, I’d be surprised, but then, why should they have done so? That would have been beside the point. It would have seemed ridiculous.