THINKING FOR OURSELVES

Fostering Fear

By Shea Howell

Michigan Citizen, Mar, 16-22, 2008

As the Republican Party consolidates behind Senator John McCain, the Democrats are beginning to worry that they are splitting apart. With each passing day the media is looking for slights, insults, and petty sniping between Senators Obama and Clinton.

"I am fearful; we are heading into uncharted territory," says Donna Brazile, who was Al Gore's campaign manager in 2000 and is now an uncommitted superdelegate. "Over the past few weeks, the mood and the tone have shifted. The Clinton backers are as adamant as the Obama people. The undertones [about race and gender] are the kind of cultural fault lines that lead to divisions. It is alarming and sickening."

Some of the most alarming and sickening material began with Senator Clinton’s ad in Ohio, emphasizing her ability to respond to the 3 a.m. phone call. Claiming she has the experience to take “the call,” many analyst think that the ad finally gave weight to her experience argument against Obama.

Senator Obama, for his part, has responded to the ad, using Clinton’s offer of a vice presidential position, to point out, with ridicule, that she’s willing to say he’s qualified to be vice president, a heartbeat away from the presidency, but not to answer the phone.

This flap over an ad about a telephone would be laughable except for its underlying message. Senator Clinton used the ad to take the country back to the politics of fear. The depth of this fear is indicated by the subtleties of the ad.

There is no substance to the call; viewers are left to fill that in from their own fears. But we all know it's bad. The ad taps into the almost primal fear of the dreaded message that comes in the night to disturb not only our sleep, but our world.

The Clinton campaign knowingly fanned that fear to get some votes. And Senator Obama has done little better in his response. He has decided to take the tactic of saying he, too, can answer the phone. He would use his judgment, already proven better than Clinton’s, to decide what to do.

The problem with this response is that it legitimizes the fear itself. It continues the view of the world as a dangerous, unpredictable and uncontrollable place. And it makes fear, not hope, the primary motive for action.

Senator Obama is at his best when he encourages hope, not fear. He has consistently said that his leadership would be one based on open dialogue. He has argued that we need to talk to our enemies as well as our friends. He has said that it is possible to create a safe world, based on mutual respect and shared actions.

Yet he is in danger of being pulled off this vision by a desire to show he can be just as tough as Clinton or McCain.

We need a president who can answer the 3 a.m. call, saying, “I’m glad to hear from you. Let’s talk.” We need a president who recognizes that safety comes from restoring our relationships within the family of nations, not in continuing our isolation.

Most importantly, we need a president who recognizes that fanning the flames of fear is a dangerous business. At a time of economic uncertainty and political insecurity, fear has a way of spreading.

In the nearly eight years that George W. Bush has been president, the number of hate groups in this country has surged, up 48 % since 2000 according to a report released this week from the Southern Poverty Law Center. Hate and violence are the companions called forth by those willing to foster fear.

Email Shea Boggs Center,