A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
February 13, 2007A Balanced Look at ObamaOver at Stubborn Facts, they're*** going bananacakes over the evil liberalism of Barack Obama because he's, they claim, a liberal trying to clothe himself in centrism. Or as Simon has variously claimed, a liar and possessed of the least credibility of all current candidates. Beneath the frothing hyperbole is a fair point. Obama's liberal. I'm not persuaded that this qualifies as "stop the presses" news, nor am I convinced that Obama's rhetoric qualifies him as an insincere liar and general snake oil salesman. If you're a centrist, you may well find Obama's approach appealing. If you're a centrist with a bullsh!t detector, you temper your enthusiasm by being careful to grant him only a fair hearing, not a prematurely gushing grant of your undying allegiance. That's how we roll, right? Anyway, I ran across what I found to be a more balanced questioning of who this guy is and what promise he may or may not hold. From the Daily Herald Obama, who objects to ideological labels, wins high marks from progressives on environment, abortion and labor issues, as well as on civil liberties and education, all of which are vital to winning the Democratic Party's presidential nominating process. You gotta read the whole thing. Plenty of starter meat on actual votes, predictable puffy quotes from his campaign, a variety of questions and perspectives. The cited votes show a liberal. At a glance, the vote that troubles me most is the one against allowing people who used guns in their home to claim self-defense. That's a red flag worth looking into...although it was a law geared towards what the regs would be in towns where handguns were banned. Obama's record is thin, speaking comparatively. He's been promising a new kind of politics that transcends what he bemoans as the smallness of our politics. Is he truly committed to and capable of finding and working on common ground, or is that just BS cover for a committed liberal ideologue? Here's the thing. Ultimately, if you are a centrist, and you decide to vote for him, it will be because you are choosing to take something of a leap of faith. I don't think there's necessarily anything wrong with that. Just know that's what you'll be doing. UPDATE: At Simon's behest, I'm adding a link. You decide, would a grown up call him Obambi? Or say "battered centrist syndrome"? Someone's coming a little bit unhinged: ***Update 2: Tully's right. "They" isn't quite right. It's 99.9% Simon banging the "Obama's a liberal" drum. Pat mighta chimed in a hair here or there, but Simon's carrying the weight. Posted by Kranky Kritter at February 13, 2007 07:35 AMComments
The article points to a few, scanty exceptions to an otherwise pervasively liberal rhetoric. President Bush has reached across the aisle and adopted a liberal position on immigration - does that make him a moderate? A centrist? Obama's co-operated with Senator Coburn; if that makes him a moderate, does it make Justice Scalia a moderate because he's frequently joined opinions by Justice Breyer? I realize Brian hasn't said any different above, but I should clarify a point that I think isn't clear: my beef with Obama isn't that he's a liberal, it's the deceit: the mismatch between his rhetoric and his record. Posted by: Simon at February 13, 2007 11:57 AMBy the way, it might be considered polite to actually link to the post(s) your objecting to, so that CF readers who don't read SF can read those posts and make up their own minds... Posted by: Simon at February 13, 2007 12:00 PMIt might be considered polite to stop bogarting, too. But you're right. I neglected to link, and that's bad form. Since I'm busy today, I settled for accurately describing a few things you've said. And to be honest, I felt you'd taken enough stage without me spotlighting you anymore, and I questioned how interested folks would be in our spat. Still, I'll remedy things at your behest. We aim to please. You're not denying that you called Obama a liar or that you believe he has the least credibility of all the known candidates though, right? This description is balls-on accurate, right? Posted by: bk at February 13, 2007 01:04 PMFirst, you won't find me arguing against a domestic agenda America prefers to the last seven years (did I break a mirror or what?). I wonder what Simon considers Liberal. Sometimes Liberal is used to describe a socialized healthcare system (which is very liberal) and sometimes used to describe better gun control which is garden Liberal. I am in favor of the liberal aspects Obama would seek, but believe on some issues like healthcare, he falls back to positions even Hillary has abandoned –very liberal, or more correctly, socialist.. I take it that Simon is referring to Obama's spin that he is a more realist, centrist politician. It must be quiet under the radar image, as he knows Hillary has been under fire for from the anti-war wing, for just such “centrist” thinking. I would say that centrists have a particular regard for sufficient national security, which certainly includes energy policy, healthcare costs and immigration. On these issues, one see numerous politicians move towards the center. McCain, Giuliani, Clinton and even Biden might find this centrist consensus. I think the question Simon is asking is if this "centrist" qualifier is more of Obama's spin or his really being a moderate realist kind of Liberal. That was exactly the point of my earlier critique. Energy policy, Foreign Affair policy, and Healthcare policy. My pointed questions drive directly at the matter. The deeper he swings left (and I don’t mean garden type liberal), the more he damages his centrist claim. Invoking Lincoln is a bit dangerous. Anyway. I believe that if he heralds very liberal domestic solutions but avoids the anti-war crowd by developing an actual record of centrist convictions, he will be on Kos' shit list, but might lose the primary. He might win anyway. Remember, Lieberman didn’t advocate socialized medicine and a few other Obama votes. If he cuts back on his socialist approach and takes the anti-war foreign policy to heart, they will support him and he will lose. Obama can advocate very liberal goals and plunge further to the Left. I believe he would lose and possible make him an unacceptable VP choice. Obama could moderate his Liberality and steer a bit Right on national security, resolving early on in the publics mind his passionate conviction that our security and values CAN prevail in the world. He can explain how such a belief is not our domination or criminal hegemony that Putin decries. He can make the case that we must return to the old Liberal Consensus in order to succeed in the world AND at home. He can call it the neoLiberal Consensus…LOL Obama can co-opt the reasonable assumption that our leaders must have strength and tenacity in a time marked by allied identity-crisis, confusion and historic threats and opportunity. Coming together? Is that when Congressional debates begin with “you can’t unscramble an omelet.” Is that deflecting evidence of a foreign nation supplying weapons that kill our soldiers by selectively excluding military groups in Iran who supply such weapons, as “not part of the Iranian government”? If Obama plays to public passions and says, “Well he lied in 2002, so how can we believe what “they” say now?”, is this centrist, let alone SERIOUS?
And as far as resolve and conviction when it comes to conflict, it was not Bush that said this: "The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from
Obama does deserve my support to learn quickly and rise to rationally defend many of the ideas we share. I am not sure however, what he believes. I wonder what’s under the hood and like Simon, what a centrist he really is. The cheap shots and uncalled for attacks are unfortunately part of present politics. I often pull for the underdog. If he can evolve and survive, he’ll be ready for Ahmedinejad and Hamas….maybe
Without necessarily agreeing with Simon's tone or rhetoric, I have to agree with him on at least thing: Obama is not the moderate that some centrists make him out to be. His views on economic/fiscal policy are without a doubt progressive--not moderate. Yes, he's a very good speaker, but in terms of political philosophy, he's not much different than you're average Democratic politician. Nothing that he has proposed has been particularly novel, nor does it seem likely to point the Democratic in a new direction. But as always, it's style before substance. It's just like Democrats and Republicans to fawn over their presidential front-runners as if they were the best thing since sliced bread. Having said all that, Obama only looks all the much better when you consider his likely competition on the Democratic side: Edwards and Clinton. Edwards has a history of K-mart bashing and playing class warfare politics with his "Two Americas" theme, and while that may play well with his base, it is becoming rathering tiring to the rest of us. Meanwhile, Clinton seems to have little shame about being an enthusiastic cheerleader for the war for its first three years and then--sensing that the tide of puplic opinion has turned against the war--quickly flip-flopped on her position. No apologies admitting that her vote to authorize war was wrong. Instead, she goes on attacking Bush, hoping that the anti-war side will soon forget that only three years ago, she was pandering to the pro-war crowd and condemning her anti-war colleages in the Senate. Posted by: nicrivera at February 13, 2007 06:28 PMOver at Stubborn Facts, they're going bananacakes over the evil liberalism of Barack Obama because he's, they claim, a liberal trying to clothe himself in centrism. I was gonna leave this alone because I think cross-blog feuding is annoying and think the argument itself is silly in most dimensions, but I wish to object to the loose blanket characterization of "they" at SF. Brian's statements do not match the bulk of opinions expressed by the several SF principal posters in that thread, certainly do not remotely represent mine, and I object to the use of "they" as a blog-wide brush. We now return you to your regularly scheduled pandemonium. Posted by: Tully at February 13, 2007 07:29 PMYou're not denying that you called Obama a liar or that you believe he has the least credibility of all the known candidates though, right? This description is balls-on accurate, right?I wouldn't say that he has the least credibility of all the known candidates - John Edwards, after all, is still running, notwithstanding Marcottegate. I've also made it pretty plain that I think that the clear mismatch between rhetoric and record suggests one of two possible explanations: either he believes his rhetoric, and that his boilerplate liberal solutions are commonsense middle-ground solutions (and that the culture wars can be dismissed to the satisfaction of all with the swish of his magic wand) in which case he's deluded, or it's an act, in which case, yes, he's a liar. Posted by: Simon at February 13, 2007 09:01 PM I wonder what Simon considers Liberal.I don't really need to go into any detailed exposition of this, because it's clear that people who very much do consider themselves to be liberals take Obama to be one of their own. Posted by: Simon at February 13, 2007 09:03 PM Tully, that's fair. Duly noted. I'll add an update saying it's 99.9% Simon. (since Pat chimed in a little bit). Copasetic? Obama is not the moderate that some centrists make him out to be. His views on economic/fiscal policy are without a doubt progressive--not moderate. Does anyone have a list of these alleged centrists who think Obama is moderate? I must be missing them. Posted by: bk at February 14, 2007 08:37 AM |
Archives
February 2008
January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Three Quotes
The Choice, Based on Iraq Policy Even More Of A Surprise Castro Bows Out Kosovo Declares Independence Will Obama Take McCain's Funding Dare? Global Poverty Act Preservation Friday Band Taking on Obama Electoral Results Came Out As Expected?!?
|
