I’d be fine if Obama were the nominee; I’d much prefer him to Hillary. He may well indeed be the best we can hope for. But this comment by feralman in repsonse to Joe Conason’s piece "Why conservatives love Barack Obama" captures my reservations about him:
I think some conservatives like Obama because they know they can sucker-punch him. His campaign theme is a variation on can’t-we-all-just-get-along. He proposes to reform health care and accomplish much else by having everyone sit down at the same big table and just work things out. But the simple truth is, no, we can’t all just get along. There are entrenched interests — namely, the drug companies and insurance companies — that will never willingly give up their privileged place in our health-care system. They will fight to the bitter end. They will relinquish their power and privilege only when we take it from them by force of law. Partisanship is the order of the day — too bad, maybe, but undeniably true. Edwards knows it, and Clinton probably does, too. If Obama were to start off by not recognizing this fundamental truth about current American politics, his adversaries would be able to tie him in knots for years. His chance to make a difference will come and go while they have him pinned down by his own good intentions, giving him the Rodney-King but good.
I would feel a lot more supportive of Obama if he were saying something like, "Can’t we all just get along? No? Then let’s get it on." Let him talk that way, and see whether conservatives still play nice with him.
Every decent American hopes that we can find a way to get along. They understandably long for a politician who will transcend the partisan rancor. Moderates think Obama will be acceptable to a majority of decent, reasonable Americans, even many who voted for Bush in the last two elections. I think that’s true, and I don’t question the desirability of a candidate who has that kind of appeal. The moderate fallacy lies in thinking that while Obama’s conciliatory approach will have a wide appeal in the general population, that such an approach will be effective in his dealing with the entrenched interests and power blocs in Washington. Politics for these people is blood sport, and I don’t believe for a minute that a reasonable, reconciliatory approach with these factions will have the slightest effect. I see them sharpening their knives as they await Obama’s arrival. It’s wrong to think that the reasonable, conciliatory way we strive to talk to our neighbors with whom we disagree is a workable approach when confronting these interests.
I hope I’m underestimating Obama’s toughness, but a willingness to compromise with people who have no such willingness leads to the kind of ineffectiveness we’ve seen from the Democrats in the last year. We’ve seen time and again that these factions on the right have no interest in compromise, and they look at compromisers as wimps.
The movement conservatives have conceded this next election to the Democrats, and they want the Democrat who presents the least threat to their agenda so they can buy time and regroup. I suspect that they see Obama as the one they can neutralize most easily precisely because of his conciliatory approach. Edward’s pugnacity has probably disqualified him among moderates. It’s ironic that the man effeminized as the Breck girl would probably be the toughest candidate for the GOP to deal with. It remains a mystery to me why these conservatives can love a guy like Lieberman and hate Hillary so much. She is the most Liebermanesque of all the Dem candidates; you’d think she’d be the Democrat they’d be falling over themselves to get her elected. But that would assume a certain level of sanity and straightforwardness impossible within the funhouse hall of mirrors known as the Beltway.
Leave a Reply