the “power” of words
by Sandra Kinne
Published: March 12, 2008
In an unfortunate slip of the tongue and an all-too late attempt to take her comment “off the record,” Samantha Power, a foreign policy expert, Harvard professor and Time columnist, called Senator Hillary Clinton a “monster.” While many people have probably applied the term, and others, to Clinton, they weren’t serving as a foreign policy advisor to Senator Barack Obama, Clinton’s archrival in the seemingly never-ending Democratic primary.
Power resigned; it was really the only thing she could do in today’s political climate and a very heated primary. But the name-calling reminded me of three things. One, recess duty as an elementary teacher; two, Connie Chung circa 1995; and three, Clinton’s recent “just words” spiel about Obama’s speeches.
First, I taught 4th grade for five years in Compton. There isn’t a name I haven’t been called or a spiteful word that hasn’t been used toward me while breaking up a fight on the playground, deciding so-and-so lost recess privileges, or rewarding the other team the Four Square point because the ball did, in fact, go out of bounds.
At times, I thought I should start rewarding kids for the creativity they showed with some of the names they’d call me. Was it right to call a teacher a name? No, of course not. Was it justified? Sure. Once in a while I was the meanest teacher in the whole wide world.
But after the stomping away and pouting, the kids usually came around, apologized, discussed the matter and accepted their punishment for the original disobedience that led to the name-calling. Or they brought in their 300-pound parent to share a few new choice words with me and test my bladder control. Usually, it was the former, but the point is that I didn’t let the name-calling get to me because I’m the adult and not the 9-year-old who doesn’t know better. I also didn’t revert to their level, because I understand that sometimes words are just words.
The monstrous slip also reminded me of how just a couple of weeks ago, Clinton mocked Obama for his speeches and efforts to inspire voters. “Just words” she called them. If these are “just words,” if what’s being said has no effect, no meaning, no power, then what’s the big deal? In Power’s case, monster was just a word, too. An unfortunate one, yes, but no worse than many of the other words out there about either candidate.
In 1995, in a now-infamous interview with Connie, Newt Gingrich’s mother called her a “bitch.” Gingrich and his mother got a good chuckle out of it, and according to an archived article in Time, they were invited to tea and cookies at the White House with the First Lady. Maybe Power’s just needed some Earl Grey and Thin Mints instead of one less advising opportunity.
The aforementioned “b-word” has since been reclaimed by woman as a sign of toughness, pride and getting stuff done (tm Tina Fey), and the “c-word” still considered too harsh, too vile and too associated with “Atonement” and Jane Fonda’s “Today Show” appearance. So we don’t have a word that evokes the animosity and disdain felt toward women we just don’t like. Now, despised politicians are just invoking names of other despised politicians.
Both Obama and Clinton have compared one another’s tactics and policies to George W. Bush’s. Though, this is an insult that seems to have tempered over time given the number of stupid things GW has done in the last seven years. There are only so many times you can call someone Bush-like before it ceases to be effective.
Lost in the hoop-la around Power’s is another example of Democrats referencing loathed figures from the Right. Last week, top Clinton advisor Howard Wolfson, in response to Obama’s push for Clinton to release her tax returns - a demand, by the way, the then-First Lady made repeatedly and furiously of her Republican opponent during her 2000 Senate run - decried Obama’s tactics as being “Ken Starr like.”
Calling someone a monster leads to calls for Power’s resignation and her subsequent official departure from the Obama campaign, but it’s okay for the Clinton camp to break out the big guns? They completely skip “Rovian” as an insult, surely disappointing Karl Rove, and went from GW comparisons to Ken Starr comparisons. Not only is this beyond ridiculously childish, it also begs the question, Ken Starr? Really? Really Hillary? Really? You want to remind people of Ken Starr and why we know his name? Really?
Both Clinton and Obama and their surrogates will, unfortunately, continue to find new ways to insult one another - and possibly their mothers - and the bar will get lower and lower until August’s convention, at which time McCain will have a whole thesaurus for his battle against whichever candidate comes out victorious.
In the meantime, if either camps’ wordsmiths need new ways to make fun of their opponents, maybe Newt can make his mom available. If not, I know some 9-year-olds in the Los Angeles area who might be able to help.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
