25/03: The Real Problem? Obama is too liberal.
Category: Politics
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
One of my favorite pundits, Dean Barnett, wrote today that the big problem with Barack Obama is that he is a man of inaction—all rhetoric and no ability to perform worthy deeds.
If only...
As a conservative in the most classic American sense, I would rejoice in the assurance that Obama plans to do nothing but talk.
Liberal administrations govern best that govern least.
I could rest much easier if I thought an Obama presidency portended merely lofty flights of empty rhetoric. However, an eloquent but harmlessly passive President Obama strikes me as unlikely.
If not his tendency to prefer oratory over action, what is my biggest concern with Barack Obama?
His willingness to abide deranged purveyors of scary black nationalism?
His inexperience?
His ties to shady Chicago power brokers? His slipperiness? His lack of respect for his "average white lady" grandmother?
No. Those are distractions. What is actually most troubling about Obama?
He is too liberal.
He owns the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. According to the National Journal, he is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, John F. Kerry, Russ Feingold, Dick Durbin, and Barbara Boxer.
Under ordinary circumstances, he is way too liberal to win election as president of the United States. Generally, the “ultra-liberal” label equals certain defeat in a national election. But, unfortunately, these are not ordinary circumstances.
The Democratic candidate in 2008 will run buoyed by intense George W. Bush fatigue, restlessness over an unpopular five-year war with no end in sight, and uncertainty in the face of an economy perceived to be tenuous at best---or, even worse, on the brink of cataclysm.
The Democratic candidate in 2008 will run against a presumptive Republican nominee who is seventy-one-years-old, admittedly inexpert in economic policy, who bravely advocates extending the five-year war indefinitely, if need be.
This is a good year to run as a Democrat.
The base of the Democratic Party understands this moment. And, this time, they will not be easily intimidated into selecting a moderate candidate who will seem more appealing to centrists and independents in the fall. They just don't think they need to play things "safe" this time around. They think they are running down the court for a slam dunk. They can nominate any reasonable candidate and win. Why not pick the guy they really like--the anti-war, post-racial, Kennedyesque liberal orator?
This turn of events devastated Hillary, of course, who spent years preparing to run as a moderate, national security Democrat whom you could trust at 3:00 a.m.
As noted, the dismal unpopularity of Bush, the failing economy, and the troubles that accompany a protracted and unsatisfying military engagement make this particular political season particularly irregular.
However, even with all that, Obama still might have run into trouble, save for the "concept." Americans fell in love with this symbol for an age.
But, if Obama gets by Hillary (which I am not ready to concede), he will arrive virtually unstoppable in the General. And, if elected, I expect him to skillfully translate his electoral triumph into a mandate for liberal action. With a Democratic majority in Congress, and the Fourth Estate abuzz with adoration, we are likely to see the most active and most prolific legislating president since Lyndon Johnson.
Make no mistake, President Barack Obama could be the most transformative American political figure of our lifetimes. My worry is that the transformation is going to prove as disastrous as the last attempt at creating a so-called Great Society.
If only...
As a conservative in the most classic American sense, I would rejoice in the assurance that Obama plans to do nothing but talk.
Liberal administrations govern best that govern least.
I could rest much easier if I thought an Obama presidency portended merely lofty flights of empty rhetoric. However, an eloquent but harmlessly passive President Obama strikes me as unlikely.
If not his tendency to prefer oratory over action, what is my biggest concern with Barack Obama?
His willingness to abide deranged purveyors of scary black nationalism?
His inexperience?
His ties to shady Chicago power brokers? His slipperiness? His lack of respect for his "average white lady" grandmother?
No. Those are distractions. What is actually most troubling about Obama?
He is too liberal.
He owns the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate. According to the National Journal, he is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, John F. Kerry, Russ Feingold, Dick Durbin, and Barbara Boxer.
Under ordinary circumstances, he is way too liberal to win election as president of the United States. Generally, the “ultra-liberal” label equals certain defeat in a national election. But, unfortunately, these are not ordinary circumstances.
The Democratic candidate in 2008 will run buoyed by intense George W. Bush fatigue, restlessness over an unpopular five-year war with no end in sight, and uncertainty in the face of an economy perceived to be tenuous at best---or, even worse, on the brink of cataclysm.
The Democratic candidate in 2008 will run against a presumptive Republican nominee who is seventy-one-years-old, admittedly inexpert in economic policy, who bravely advocates extending the five-year war indefinitely, if need be.
This is a good year to run as a Democrat.
The base of the Democratic Party understands this moment. And, this time, they will not be easily intimidated into selecting a moderate candidate who will seem more appealing to centrists and independents in the fall. They just don't think they need to play things "safe" this time around. They think they are running down the court for a slam dunk. They can nominate any reasonable candidate and win. Why not pick the guy they really like--the anti-war, post-racial, Kennedyesque liberal orator?
This turn of events devastated Hillary, of course, who spent years preparing to run as a moderate, national security Democrat whom you could trust at 3:00 a.m.
As noted, the dismal unpopularity of Bush, the failing economy, and the troubles that accompany a protracted and unsatisfying military engagement make this particular political season particularly irregular.
However, even with all that, Obama still might have run into trouble, save for the "concept." Americans fell in love with this symbol for an age.
But, if Obama gets by Hillary (which I am not ready to concede), he will arrive virtually unstoppable in the General. And, if elected, I expect him to skillfully translate his electoral triumph into a mandate for liberal action. With a Democratic majority in Congress, and the Fourth Estate abuzz with adoration, we are likely to see the most active and most prolific legislating president since Lyndon Johnson.
Make no mistake, President Barack Obama could be the most transformative American political figure of our lifetimes. My worry is that the transformation is going to prove as disastrous as the last attempt at creating a so-called Great Society.
