Up until now I haven’t had many complaints about Barack Obama’s campaign and in fact, I’ve even tuned into most of his speeches being that he’s an incredible orator. Hell, I might even vote for him if he (or whoever is at the helm of his campaign) avoids pulling knucklehead moves like the one that was reported in the NYTimes today. In the article, “To Avoid Conflicts, Clintons Liquidate Holdings “, as the Times noted, so far the Obama camp has held itself out as above the election-season mud-slinging that typifies our democratic process. Well, if there was any doubt that Obama’s camp isn’t just as waist-deep in mud as the rest of them you have your proof here. In a knee-jerk statement analyzing the Clintons’ recent disclosure of their asset holdings, Obama’s campaign attempted to send a “not-for-attribution” shot to Sen. Clinton by characterizing her as a sell-out to Indian interests. This was Obama’s (yes Obama’s, I don’t understand what not-for-attribution means when one’s name is all over the statement), spin on what were investments in Cisco, a few Indian companies and receipts from fundraising by Indian-Americans. Aside from the misplaced contempt for outsourcing which is surprising, Obama titled the piece, “Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab)”. I have a self-deprecating sense of humor just as much as the next Indian but Obama shouldn’t be surprised to find out that most of the target audience for this announcement doesn’t even know what or where Punjab is. He might as well have called her a Syrian democrat for that matter.
Second, I expect more from Obama on an academic level. Sure, it’s election season and we all have to anticipate dumbed down sound-bytes that oversimplify every issue but 1) Obama should know outsourcing is the natural result of this country’s failed education system and the emergence of hungrier people abroad who learn four languages (English being the most emphasized) by the age of 10 and can do long division in their sleep. 2) Outsourcing as a “hot-button” issue is nearing the end of its shelf-life. After Thomas Friedman’s documentary and companion article in the Times magazine, “It’s a Flat World, After All” it’s pretty much acknowledged in most academic circles (the ones that count) that outsourcing, for the most part, opens more opportunities for innovation and progress in economies that are “losing” certain service sector jobs to up-and-coming countries such as India. The upshot of it is that the more developed economies have to invest more in research and development, in science and technology, i.e. invest in the people in order to maintain an edge. It still remains true that some of the best ideas still originate here and spread like wild-fire across the world (think, myspace, youtube, Google). Of course, that’s a longer answer and its much easier to call Sen. Clinton a Punjabi democrat.
The sad thing is I’d still like to pull for him and will, for the time being, assume this was just a miscommunication within his own ranks a-la Gonzalez (“I didn’t approve the title, he did”). But why alienate a whole demographic by resorting to border-line xenophobic attacks? And besides, do would-be-Barack-voters want the jobs going overseas anyway? Working in a call-center for 20 hours a day sound like a good time? Barack, think and edit before you release “not-for-attribution” statements.
In the wake of last week’s “not-for-attribution” memo referring to Hillary Clinton as “D-Punjab” and referenced below by Kesav, a large amount of criticism has been directed at Barack Obama, particularly from the Indian-American community. However, in a positive development today, Obama took “responsibility” for the “screw-up”, calling the memo “stupid” and “caustic” at a meeting with Des Moines Register staff.
obama staff
