Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Barack Obama, Lyle Lanley, and that Darn Monorail
Have you ever seen that episode of the Simpsons where Springfield gets a monorail? With a song, a smile, and some smooth talking, traveling salesman Lyle Lanley could sell the town just about anything, and he does. Springfield becomes the proud new owner of a ridiculous monorail system.
By the time Lyle Lanley finishes his musical sales pitch, the whole town is chanting "Monorail...Monorail...Monorail!" The episode, consistently a fan favorite, speaks to the power an inspirational leader has to lead or mislead a crowd.
So what's this have to do with this year's presidential election?
Here's the thing. Every time I see Barack Obama speak, I get the feeling that he's trying to sell me a genuine, bona fide, certified, electrified six-car monorail. No matter what the question is, our very own Lyle Lanley of a presidential candidate has a quick answer: "don't worry about it, just sprinkle it with fairy dust, take a dose of hope, and we'll work this out together."
Worried about the economy? President Obama's going to sit those folks on Wall Street down and give them a good talking to. Surely they'll understand.
Looking for universal healthcare? Barack's already booked Camp David for a weekend of fun in the sun with Big Pharma and Big Insurance. Because, by golly, they're such reasonable folks that by Sunday we'll have single-payer universal coverage!
Wondering where American jobs are headed? How we're going to get out of the Iraq mess? The mortgage crisis? Dangerous products coming in from China? An unstable Middle East?
The answer is all the same. President Obama going to unleash some hope at those problems. He's going to have a cup of tea with industry, commerce, and world leaders. Afterwards, they'll understand the error of their ways and come to a nice compromise.
It's nice, it plays well on TV, and maybe it's even a bit inspirational, but it's a complete and utter fantasy. The bitter partisan fights going on in Washington have been there forever, and will be there forever. The lack of will to compromise is one result of our political party duopoly, and for better or worse, it's here to stay.
Senator Obama's rhetoric, while it may help him win over voters, won't have the same effect on the denizens of Washington, D.C. The cynics and professional politicians are going to keep on keepin' on, with or without "hope" hanging over their heads.
Now, Hillary Clinton is far from perfect, but if there's one thing she knows, it's how to work the wheels of Washington. Despite the cries of the media, of Obama-ites, and of conservatives, Hillary knows how to get things done. She's not the best orator, she's not the most visibly empathetic, but she does know her stuff.
And again, despite how the media tries to portray it, Hillary is the real compromiser in this race. She's worked with some of the most conservative Republicans in the Senate for common purposes - some of the very same people who spent the 1990's attacking her husband's White House. She also knows how to be tough when she needs to be, and she's not afraid of letting that show on the campaign trail.
But even if this race is about hope, about inspiration, about a new direction, then it's important to ground those ideals in reality. And the reality is, Hillary Clinton knows how to get things done. And that's what we want, isn't it?
Comments (8)
What, precisely, does Hillary Clinton know how to get done? She's my Senator, and certainly couldn't be bothered to show up and vote on telecom immunity yesterday.
I think you're choosing Dr. Nick, to keep with your Simsons reference. An incompetent who just wants to the job, so fudges her experience. When you call her on her record, "oops, that's not what I thought it was."
Oh, and Conan O'Brien wrote the Monorail episode, which I think is cool.
February 12, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And the reality is, Hillary Clinton knows how to get things done..."
...in the Senate?
...as First Lady?
...corporate attorney (I'm not demeaning that btw -- i happen to be one too!)?
...during her U.S. mission to Bosnia with Sinbad? (I am making fun of that one...)
I think the difference between being a Senator and a President is leadership ability. It's great that she's supposedly good at working the levers of Congress. She'd be a great ally in the Senate. But your points aren't exclusive to Clinton. Obama has worked with "some of the most conservative Republicans in the Senate for common purposes"...the Obama-Coburn bill for government accountability comes to mind.
Obama's greatest appeal is that he wants the Federal Government and its battles to be open to the public. It's less paternalistic than the Clinton "don't worry -- I'll take care of you." He's more of a "your government exists to help you." It may seem subtle, but it's a very different philosophy and way of governing.
February 12, 2008 1:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
You note:
"Hillary knows how to get things done."
OK then, what are her top 5 accomplishments as a US Senator? And I mean real substantive work, where she helped to draft and push through a piece of legislation. Not just signing on as a co-sponsor to something, engaging in drinking games with John McCain, throwing baby showers for Kay Bailey Hutchison or going to prayer breakfasts with former Senator Santorum.
Then, contrast her record with Obama's, both in the US Senate and the Illinois State Senate.
If you keep an open mind, you might be surprised by what you find.
February 12, 2008 1:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know that she's my Senator, and I'm steaming over the fact she couldn't even accomplish showing up to vote on telecom immunity yesterday. She's a waste of space as our Senator, only using the office to run for President.
February 12, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg:
I'm an Obama supporter who happens to believe Hillary Clinton has the better plan for universal health care. I'm sold on the need for mandates. Clinton's argument that it's good politics to ask for the moon (covering everybody) because otherwise you ain't gonna get nothin' seems quite reasonable.
But it seems quite possible to me that Obama has the better, more ingenious plan. His own health care plan is a wide-ranging, very progressive reform very close in spirit to Clinton's and Edwards's. Even Krugman has said so. But to get any serious reform measure passed will take not only a great fighter, but some genuine bipartisan support (not many moderate Republicans, perhaps, but definitely some). If Clinton is elected by a slim margin and wins very few independents, she will have sold her base but have very little leverage to woo independents and moderate Republicans. But if Obama wins with a strong appeal to independents and moderate Republicans, and his proposal is known as "the Obama healthcare plan" NOT "HillaryCare, Part II", then he will be in a strong position to woo the middle of the aisle. If he's personally popular and mobilizes thousands of grassroots supporters including lots of independents, do you think many Republicans want Obama going into their backyard, visiting their constituents, and campaigning AGAINST them? This is all somewhat speculative, I realize, but there is a good argument to be made that Obama's greater appeal to the middle and his freedom from the battles of the 90s and all the polarizing ill-will from those days will give him more of a mandate for change. He may not have the very best plan in all its details, but he will very likely be able to get something very strong passed. (Then, shhhhh, we can come back in another 4 or 6 years to get the full package.)
February 12, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe: I'm an Edwards Democrat who has decided to support Obama, and your post sums up many of the reasons why I decided to do so. Good post!
February 12, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Statements like this just show you haven't done your homework on the candidate or the issues. You can disagree with his positions or the way he campaigns, but any suggestion that the guy is this naive, is just in my opinion, flat out stupid.
Obama's has extensive detailed policy positions and he's been injecting them more into his speeches of late than in the past.
Read here
February 12, 2008 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
HOPE! HOPE! HOPE!
February 16, 2008 1:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment