Return to: Home | Blogs | Bright's Blog

Obama, Brown and the Commentators

A brief round-up of the Sunday commentariat

For some time now there has been a triumvirate of must-read Sunday political commentators: Andrew Rawnsley in the Observer, Matthew D'Ancona in the Sunday Telegraph and John Rentoul in the Independent on Sunday. (I'm talking here about the straight Westminster-focused columnists, rather than other more free-form Sunday voices such as Nick Cohen, Catherine Bennett, Simon Jenkins or Suzanne Moore.

Until recently, the Sunday Times was somewhat lacking in the hard politics department. So the introduction of Martin Ivens was something of an inspired decision (by none other than the paper's deputy editor Martin Ivens). It's nearly a year now since he took over and he's really getting into his stride.

This weekend's column on Obama and British politics was timely.
Ivens thinks those who critcise his bland approach are missing the point:

"The senator’s neo-conservative critics don’t find him funny at all. Charles Krauthammer, the influential columnist, takes aim at the royal “we” in Obama’s slogan, “We are the ones we have been waiting for”, his narcissism and “the gaps between his estimation of himself and his actual achievements”. Having been in a live audience for Obama’s rolling cadences, I can understand Krauthammer’s frustration but feel he misses the point.

"There is a kinship here with the youthful Tony Blair – he of the verbless sentences – who also mouthed platitudes in quasi-religious language. A high moral tone may set the teeth of the worldly wise on edge, but it appeals to an audience that yearns for inspiration, not shop-soiled poli-ticking. Obama offers redemption from America’s original sin, racial inequality."

The Labour Party has been slow to wake up to the Obama phenomenon, not least because many of its senior politicians (including Gordon Brown) were sentimentally attached to the Clinton project. As David Lammy has argued in these pages, Labour must quickly learn the message of hope or risk obliteration.

John Rentoul also wrote about Obama this weekend. He too quoted Krauthammer on Obama: "His most memorable work is a biography of his favourite subject: himself." Rentoul argues that Obama must move quickly in power to distance himself on an unsustainable position on US withdrawal from Iraq. I'm not sure I agree, but it is certain that Obama is moving swiftly to the right on Iran, Israel as well as domestic issues such as gun control and the death penalty. So he may find it necessary to shift on Iraq.

D'Ancona and Rawnsley chose to concentrate on the economy. In the Sunday Telegraph, D'Ancona suggests that the government's decision to rewrite its own rules on borrowing marks the effective end of the Brown era. In essence, Andrew Rawnsley
agrees. "There is a persuasive argument that it is right not to crucify the economy, taxpayers and public services on rules drawn up more than a decade ago," he says. "But that won't stop his opponents grabbing their hammers to use this as another cross of his own making on which to nail Gordon Brown." Ouch.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

9 comments from readers

redharry
21 July 2008 at 18:01

'For some time now there has been a triumvirate of must-read Sunday political commentators: Andrew Rawnsley in the Observer, Matthew D'Ancona in the Sunday Telegraph and John Rentoul in the Independent on Sunday'

Must-read? I gave up reading these three members of the Tony Blair Fan Club years ago. Don't waste your time or eyesight on them.

Nigel Barlow
21 July 2008 at 18:27

Red Harry, Don't agree at all.Martin has got it spot on when he says that the three are must reads,especially I would add Rawnsley in the Observer

knave
21 July 2008 at 21:07

Nigel I agree it was a balanced article but don't you get a little tired of the fact that the only people the modern politician listens to is our the so called "opinion formers" in the press.

I must admit I do like Rawnsley .

redharry
22 July 2008 at 11:55

Nigel, don't you have anything better to do on a Sunday. You actually read John Rentoul? Christ on a bike!

Rawnsley is taken apart here for his apologist writing on Blair.

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/060601_andrew_rawnsley_an...

Springtime For Blair

“It was in the springtime of his premiership that he became a pioneer for a foreign policy which did not see championing liberal values as incompatible with prosecuting the national interest, but as complementary to an enlightened version of it.” (Rawnsley, ‘The ideals worth rescuing from the deserts of Iraq,’ The Observer, May 28, 2006; www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1784772,00.html)

So writes the Observer’s Andrew Rawnsley in his latest article on Tony Blair. Despite everything we now know, there is not a caveat in sight. Blair did not merely claim to pioneer an “enlightened” foreign policy, he really +was+ a pioneer....

Martin Bright
22 July 2008 at 12:35

Hurrah! A two-year-old article from Media Lens. That's just what we need.

The point about Andrew is that although it is possible to disagree with him about Blair and Iraq -- I did when I worked with him and I do now -- he also happens to be very well-informed about Westminster politics. He also writes about it in a very engaging way. Unlike the consistently dreary Media Lens.

knave
22 July 2008 at 13:05

Media lens dreary, a little convulated but interesting.

You are right about Rawnsley, he seems one of life's nice guys. Also he never is spiteful unlike some we won't mention. Not you by the way Martin

knave
22 July 2008 at 13:13

or you red and nigel.

gnuneo
23 July 2008 at 21:51

media-lens may not always have sparkling prose (although the occasional article burns brighter than most), but at least their hearts and minds are entirely in the right place.

not sure i can say the same for many supposedly 'left' or 'liberal' writers, including cohen, or indeed bright Himself.

obama's recent policies switch to the extreme right may win him support amongst the extreme right who quietly control america's media, and indeed to some extent his move was expected by those who are not dazzled by the bright-lights of america's political freak-show, but it is still strongly disheartening to hear.

"change, change, change". Odd it is that as he gets closer to power actual, less and less he will change. Dark Side he is falling to, hmmm? :/

knave
26 July 2008 at 11:01

A newspaper consists of just the same number of words, whether there be any news in it or not.

Henry Fielding (1707 - 1754)

That is so true of Sunday columnists and even the odd NS political columnists

Post your comment

(Your email address will not be published)

Recent Posts

The horror comes home

22 January 2009 09:58

Ken Clarke's return

19 January 2009 16:10

A New Deal of the mind

15 January 2009 09:31

It's a New New Deal

08 January 2009 09:51

A year of ups and downs

18 December 2008 09:44

Mystic Mart

15 December 2008 13:06

The two-man show

11 December 2008 09:44

Past Entries

Follow this blog

Vote!

Should we build new nuclear power plants?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker