« Justice denied | Main | Cri de cour »

You are what you eat

24 Apr 2008 09:45 am

As Matt notes, Maureen Dowd may have penned her stupidest column yet, on Barack Obama's eating habits. Apparently, he doesn't shovel it in well enough to be a real person.

He is frantic to get away from her because he can’t keep carbo-loading to relate to the common people.

In the final days in Pennsylvania, he dutifully logged time at diners and force-fed himself waffles, pancakes, sausage and a Philly cheese steak. He split the pancakes with Michelle, left some of the waffle and sausage behind, and gave away the French fries that came with the cheese steak.

But this is clearly a man who can’t wait to get back to his organic scrambled egg whites. That was made plain with his cri de coeur at the Glider Diner in Scranton when a reporter asked him about Jimmy Carter and Hamas.

This is stupid in many ways. Candidates spend most of their time sitting still, usually en route to somewhere else where they will sit still. They also get fed roughly 90 times a day. Usually by people who are trying to lavish the candidate with their tastiest--which is to say, heaviest--local delicacy. To finish it all, they'd need a gavage tube.

But also, this is one of those depictions of small town America that always reminds me of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica entries on colonial subject peoples--I mean, clearly the person who wrote the entry had caught a glimpse or two of a Zulu, but just as clearly, they'd never actually talked to one. Maureen Dowd's idea of western Pennsylvania sounds suspiciously like it came from a straw poll of Colonial Club cocktail hour.

I mean, I've spent a fair amount of time in the territory just north of western Pennsylvania. And yes, their diners do offer some large servings. In this, they are exactly like the diners in Manhattan, except that the eggs have some flavor, and they usually have extremely good raisin toast.

To be sure, my relatives don't really grok vegetarianism--when I became one in college, my grandmother memorably asked me "Can you have steak?"

But shockingly, fifteen years later, I still haven't been ejected from the family. In fact, other than needling me about missing a great pot roast, no one has ever said anything about it to me at all. Making deep human judgments about people based on what they do, or do not, put into their mouths seems to be pretty much limited to the cities.

Comments (29)

One must have a very highly refined stupid-discriminator in order to tell which of Dowd's columns is the most stupid.

This is pretty stupid, but if you are expecting much more from a Maureen Dowd column, I don't think you're ever going to find it.

"Making deep human judgments about people based on what they do, or do not, put into their mouths seems to be pretty much limited to the cities."

A lesser man might make a joke here. Perhaps even a cheap one.

Once nice thing about Western PA: as long as you don't knock the Steelers most of us don't care what you or any other adult puts in his or her mouth.

Eh . . . live and let live.

Can we needle you about the big hamburger ads that regularly appear on this site? I love the irony.

Well Obama should be thankful. All Carcetti got were tuna subs.

I was on a business trip in rural Texas once. The hosts, with the pride only a Texan could muster, took us to a barbecue joint in the middle of nowhere. My boss, a vegetarian, declined to eat anything. I ate with gusto the meat put in front of me.

The head of the group with whom we were meeting pulled me aside at a later date and told me that, but for the gusto with which I ate the aforementioned meat, they would have walked away from the deal because he didn't "trust fruity vegetarians."

So, the notion that people outside cities don't pass judgment on what you put into your mouth seems suspect.

I think it was one of her best columns yet. I'm obama fan numero uno but am becoming disengaged. He doesn't "appear" to relate to normal people and the "perception" in my mind is that he does eat egg white omelets- no problem there, except most people don't, and most people want someone they can relate to. He is having a tough time relating right now, and I think that is Dowd's point. You gotta get out there and down some donuts with some vigor. If you're lucky you get elected, and then ten, fifteen years later you have triple bypass :)

Maybe this is an accurate depiction of Texas, but I don't think it's an accurate statement about the rural north.

"I still haven't been ejected from the family."

Sure, but would they vote for you?

I guess this will be the theme of this blog for the next few months: attack everyone who says anything even mildly critical of Barak Obama. Smash John McCain for minor hypocrisies, while firgivng Obama's major ones.

Maureen Dowd writes many silly things, as Yancey says, and focusing on a candidates eating habits is rather silly. But it was no more silly than this gem from Megan McArdle's State of the union Commentary:

Let us go forth to do their business? Was that seriously the last line of his final State of the Union speech? Are we toilet training them?

But there is an interesting point implicit in Dowd's column. Barak Obama has a strong appeal for rich white liberals who love their Whole Foods arugula and their Chardonnay and look down on beer and pork rinds. That's just the way it is.

Now, Megan's refined cricle is definitely more of the Chardonnay variety. She hangs with a self-styled litterati that considers itself vastly superior to George W. Bush and his gauche supporters, with their bowling and their Nascar and their desperate clinging to guns and religion.

So Megan has a hard time understanding Dowd's criticism. I guess it's not surprising, since Megan herself and her pals share some of the failings that Dowd is pointing out, and that George Will explained very well here.

She might know a lot about economics (her Cameroon blunder notwithstanding) but Megan's understanding of middle America--and its evident discomfort with the haughty Obama--is open to doubt.

RWE, I agree with you that Barack Obama strikes many people as uncomfortably elitist. I simply disagree that the source of their discomfort is his inability to put away a waffle.

I make no apologies for eating arugula, but I don't care for chardonnay. I don't think either of these have much to do with me as a person.

Meanwhile, outside the New York Times office...

Western Pennsylvania has swung heart and soul behind a smart, well spoken, black, egg-white-eating intellectual. He is the most worshiped, important black man in Western Pennsylvania: Mike Tomlin.

Jeeze. What a golden opportunity to write about the transition Western Pennsylvania is going through: from Cowher Era to Tomlin Era. It's right up MoDowd's alley. But Dowd is stuck in her stereotypes. Those stupid Hunkies in the Steel Valley can't really accept a smart, well spoken, black, egg-white-eating intellectual, right?

And it's Obama who's the cake eater?

Sheesh.

beyond that I think modo is on the right track with her column, I think evaluating what the candidates eat and trying to read insight into it is fascinating. I think dubya stuffed hot dogs down his throat to great effect during the last election.

Megan, I'm not attacking you as a person, nor am I really attacking you as a blogger. If I didn't think you wrote interesting posts, I wouldn't read your blog.

But I do think you share some of the attitudes that George Will was pointing to. I think Barak Obama appeals to you--and many others in places like the Upper West Side, Marin County and Georgetown--because of his general social attitude, rather than because of any set of policies.

Several challenges from readers like Thorley and Ann to explain how your support for Obama is consistent with your professed free market principles have gone unmet. So I conclude that you cannot meet that challenge.

I have been reading this blog for some time and have often found it engaging and insightful. But I have found little evidence on it that you understand people who attend church every Sunday, hold Bible readings, have sons or daughters in the military--people who voted for Ronald Reagan and then for George W. Bush and who care about things like flag lapel pins.

Some of those people are disappointed in President Bush and might now lean toward a Democrat. Hillary Clinton is capable of speaking to them in a way they find appealing. So is John McCain. Obama, for all his celebrated eloquence, has thusfar shown little ability to communicate with them. He seems to them aloof and supercilious--and they are quite skeptical about his dubious associations with the likes of Reverend Wright and William Ayers, and concerned about his wife's admission that she had never, until recently, been proud of her country. These are issues that the middle of the country cares about, issues of character, but that you and your friends have derided as trivial and irrelevant.

So I stand by what I wrote above.

I'm from Texas and I have to admit to a certain amount of suspicion for those who don't eat meat... but we'll treat you nice anyway and you can have a big salad or something. Bacon on it? Shrimp? That's not meat, is it?

Given how much ink is spilled writing about candidates, there's plenty of room for people to write about every aspect of their lives. There's no point in everyone only writing about Very Serious Issues. We have plenty of that, plus some other stuff.

I'm not sure I want a man who turns down french fries as President...

I started that post, but didn't finish it--I did two podcasts yesterday, which kept my blogging short. Will try to get it up today.

"... this is one of those depictions of small town America that always reminds me of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica entries on colonial subject peoples"

I get an image of Dowd watching David Attenborrough talking about the different types of North American Yokels. He could end it, like every show he does, with a lamenting look at the destruction of their habitats.

...oh, I'm making my first smoked pork shoulder barbeque of the year this weekend. Just to give you an idea of what you're missing:

http://weebls-stuff.com/toons/Pork/


mmmm... pork. If I eat it all, can I be president?

I'm from Texas and I have to admit to a certain amount of suspicion for those who don't eat meat... but we'll treat you nice anyway and you can have a big salad or something. Bacon on it? Shrimp? That's not meat, is it?
Well, it's treif, that's for sure. I'll take some cow. Or chicken. Or fish. Leave the bacon and shrimp out.

And yet, if Obama got fat, like Al Gore did, he would no longer be considered eligible to be president.

Now McArdle's calling herself a vegetable.

1) Can I possibly be the first commenter, chiming in a day late, to point out how badly awry the country went the *last* time we elected someone everybody wanted to toss back a cold one with?

3) Having been raised in the "heart" of the rustbelt, Youngstown, Ohio, I can vouch for the fact that you in towns like mine you get a certain amount of grief for daring to do something so "elitist" as take care of your health or get an education. What consistently shocks me, however, is that this characterisitc of lower middle class *white* America has been enshrined by the punits in the last month as a a new Constitutional right to be backwards and self-destructive (come on! It's American!) but no one blinks an eye -- in fact, it is widely praised -- when someone, such as Obama himself,or Pat Buchanan, tells the African-American community to put down the ribs and the remote control (or the guns, for that matter) and pick up the veggies and the textbooks. No one is huffily defending their Constitutional right of self-destruction or accusing the right wing nuts who claim all of the problems of the A-A community are self-created of being "snobs" and "elitists." Hmmmm. . . .

@hilesq: Making the assumption that those who eat meat are not "[taking] care of [their] health" is certainly elitist. That is one failing of the vast majority of vegans and vegetarians...the smug moral and intellectual superiority that they assume. The rest of us see folks like you, who extrapolate an affinity for self-centered, egotistical behavior, as the poseurs that you ultimately expose yourselves to be. Mneh.

Re: resentment. You prove my point. But you were reading your own assumptions not my post: I never claimed superiority to anyone, based upon dietary habits or any other factor. In fact, my own view, having struggled with my weight all of my life, is that one of the most shameful socially-acceptable prejudices in our culture is the, yes, obnoxiously self-righteous (and baffling - I mean, what is it to them?) hatred for the overweight. I also think that the puritanical crusade against the so-called "obesity epidemic" is scientifically questionable, to say the least. It is certainly beyond question that much of what passes as scientific "common knowledge" in this area is neo-puritanical ideology, not fact. My favorite recent example is the quote from supposed expert in response to a peer-reviewed longitudinal study showing that, all other factors being controlled for, people with BMIs in the "overweight" range had longer lives than those in the "healthy weight" range. The "expert" opined, "There is more to being healthy than mortality statistics." Yes, being alive isn't sufficient for health, but last time I checked, it was necessary!

My real point was that it didn't make any sense for people to create some sort of misty-eyed, battle-hymn-the-republic-humming myth about lower class white Americans and their lifestyle while vilifying African-Americans for a substantively similar lifestyle, the way right wingers like Pat Buchanan have been doing recently.

My attitude on eating habits (for folks of all colors) is live and let live (or die, I guess, if your BMI is in that dangerously-low "normal" range!)

I personally am a meat-eater, by the way, for health reasons (I was terribly anemic when I lived on bagels and ice-cream, my preferred bill of fare). I feel a twinge of anxiety, sometimes, that my live-and-and-let-live philosophy ends with my own species.This Kettle is not so self-righteous, dear Pot, that I can simply write off any group, including vegetarians, with a huffy, petty "Mneh" (whatever the heck that is supposed to mean, anyway).

hilesq, the thing is that rural Southerners who eat too much fried food and lack college educations aren't going around shooting each other and doing drugs and having lots of children out of wedlock. Inner city black youths are doing those things. If inner city black youths were eating fatty foods and smoking and otherwise leaving others alone, there would probably be fewer calls for them to shape up.

If somebody just starts eating vegetarian and doesn't make a big deal about it and how much better it is than eating meat, who would even care? If someone does try to make other people feel guilty about their own hard-earned meal, why would it surprise you that they wouldn't like it?

Re: barbecue

I was under the impression that barbecue joints also offered biscuits, coleslaw, cornbread, pie, and other good stuff. Why wouldn't the boss fill his plate with that and grin?

Anyone knows where does coach mike tomlin attend chuch?

Anyone knows where does coach mike tomlin attend chuch?

Anyone knows where does coach mike tomlin attend chuch?


Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.