The New Yorker Cover...What about the article?

The recent upheaval over the New Yorker cover (above) reflected the power of the New Yorker's brilliant satire to push the public sphere into certain conversations which, while uncomfortable, are important. While I think that some people who are not acquainted with the subtle satire of New Yorker's cartoons might take the cover at its face value, the cover brilliantly exposed the ridiculousness of the distortions and lies that have been thrown at Obama. Hence, I was initially surprised by Obama's reaction to the cartoon, which he called "tasteless," as I thought he was way over the top. The fact that his campaign advisers and himself responded to the cartoon only fed the beast that is the 24-hour cable television frenzy. But after reading the featured article inside of the issue, Ryan Lizza's Making It: How Chicago Shaped Obama, I realized just how brilliant Obama's response was. The shrillness of the campaign's response to a harmless, and brilliant in my mind, cover cartoon, pushed the un-self-reflective media away from the uncomfortable article and into a two day-long praise of Obama's historic candidacy in spite of all racist, chauvinistic attacks on himself and his family. By the end of the day, Obama had even the staunchest Republicans vociferously defending him.

I urge all to read Ryan Lizza's piece as it is a fascinating journey through the maddening nooks-and-crannies of Chicago's insular politics. It traces, in some detail, Obama's mind blowing rise from a Harvard newbie in 1991 to his successful bid for the Senate in 2004. For those who thought that Obama was a revolutionary figure and a saint, this article will probably cause you to go onto Zoloft. For me, the article showed that Obama was a brilliant politician. After reading the article I almost had no doubt that this would be our next President.

The main theme that runs through the article is Obama's ability to win over important friends in both, South side and the more affluent downtown, and Hyde Park districts. Lizza interviews many of his closest allies during this time--most of them now disenchanted with him--in tracing the meticulousness of his rise to power. Obama rode the wave of Illinois turning blue, starting with the election of Carol Mosley Braun as a Senator and Clinton taking the state for the Democrats in 1992, the first time a Democrat won the state since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Obama won his first Illinois Senate race by taking the Hyde Park seat from a popular woman from Hyde Park, Alice Palmer. Alice Palmer had initially planned to run for Congress leaving her seat in Springfield open and that's when Obama chose to run. However, during the campaign she decided against it and wanted to retain her seat. The influential Hyde Park elite asked Obama to bow out of the race for the sake of unity. He refused. And he won.

Obama brilliantly navigated the insular channels of Chicago politics. Not only was he not supported by the machine, but he soon found himself alienating the Independents as well. Lizza reports that his reception to the state Senate was so bad that at one point a shouting match between him and another Senator (and a Palmer supporter) almost turned into a physical fight on the floor. But he patiently navigated through these waters and forged a brilliant coalition of Chicago's affluent liberals and his grassroots base in South side. His marriage to Michelle helped him charm the city's black elite. Jesse Jackson's daughter, a good friend of Michelle, became a godmother to one of his daughters.

An event that is almost prophetic of Obama's rise to power is rather dull as it involves not a major speech that electrified a crowd, but a day in Stratton Office Building in Springfield, Illinois in the spring of 2001. On this day, Obama and a Democratic consultant John Corrigan redraw the electoral map of his district. As partisan redistricting is common in American politics, after taking over the state it was the Democrats' turn to redraw the districts in their favor. The two of them, Corrigan and Obama, sat that day in front of a huge map of Chicago and redrew the map of Obama's district. The new district included Obama's Hyde Park base, then it went up through the lakefront, and then through downtown. It encompassed half of the Loop (the southern part of it was becoming increasingly more developed and affluent), went through Michigan Avenue and into the Gold Coast. While the majority of the district were African-Americans, Obama drew himself a district that was wealthier, more educated, more Jewish, less blue-collar, and whiter. The district also included the highest concentration of Republicans in Chicago. It was this winning coalition that served as Obama's base for his US Senate seat in 2004. The rest is history....

But while Obama's calculating behavior might disappoint some, I found the story incredibly telling of what kind of president Obama would be. His ability to navigate the vastly different worlds of South Side and the Loop, each time winning over the powers in each world, bides well for his ability to achieve compromise and break the partisan impasse in D.C. Furthermore, it shows his brilliant diplomatic skills and shows him as a potentially successful peace broker. Above all, his sense of timing is impeccable. He senses the political moment, understands what it is that people are craving for, and molds a narrative which propels him to the top of the movement. But this is not a bad thing. Just because he deliberately constructs his story doesn't mean he doesn't believe in that story.

The New Yorker piece left me thinking that an Obama administration would be efficient, post-partisan (albeit, disappointing to the Left), pragmatic, and extremely cautious.