Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
we're not all obaMANIACs
this from sullivan's blog:
The Unemotional Case For Obama
08 Feb 2008 04:01 pm
A meme is developing is
that support for Obama is all emotion, fantasy, hysteria, etc. There's
no question that the emotions behind Obama are powerful. And any fool
can see why. His oratory does what oratory should. He is the greatest
public speaker in American life since Reagan. And the shame and
demoralization of the Bush-Cheney years - when we launched a war with
reckless indifference to planning it, when we tortured prisoners and
called it "enhanced interrogation", when we saw a government rendered
so utterly useless that a hurricane made the US look like the third
world, when conservatives added $32 trillion to the debt of the next
generation, when a president made sophomoric jokes about not finding
weapons of mass destruction he leveraged American global credibility on
... if you don't feel emotions in wanting to put this disgrace of an
administration behind us, then you are not being rational.
But the strongest case for Obama is not emotional; it is as coolly rational as he is. I tried to express it in my "Goodbye To All That" essay. On the most critical issues we face - Iraq, the war against Jihadism, healthcare, and the economy - he makes more sense as a president than Clinton. And when you watch the knee-jerk opposition to him, I think it is actually more emotional and less rational than the support for him. Fear is more emotional than hope.
And defending Clinton on the grounds of "experience" and "substance" is a fairy tale on both counts, if you pardon the expression. Her legislative experience is one term longer than Obama's (and that's if you don't count Obama's state legislative record), is notable mainly for its uninspired diligence in constituency work, and on the most important issue of the day, Iraq, simply wrong. Her main executive branch experience was destroying a historic opportunity for healthcare reform through arrogance, secrecy and over-reach. Her "substance" claim is just as phony. There is no detail in her policy apparatus that isn't matched by Obama's. But you've heard a lot from me on this. Here's a video that shows a conservative cynic being slowly and rationally disarmed by the logic of young, shrewd voter.
A vote for Obama is a vote for reason over sentiment. Check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kica8hmSdAM
Comments (7)
Wow Chris,
Great Post and Vid. It will be great to share this with Hillary supporters who think we are all a bunch of crazed cult lunatics. There are solid facts behind the madness. :)
February 9, 2008 2:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
true, obama does get a large share of zany voters which is what troubles me. but im still for him, i just feel like this 'inspirational' thing is going to turn people off b/c it is kinda getting creepy.
but i should note that he's not the only one who has voters who dont know anything on their candidates' positions.
..just like hillary does with the N.O.W. group who only desperately want to get a woman elected even though Obama's pro-life record is substantially equal to hers, as well as his efforts on healthcare in the state legislature of illinois. they just want her in there because she is a woman. i mean did you see those baseless attacks by NY NOW against ted kennedy?
also people want to vote for mccain because he was a POW. which is fine and all.. but being a woman, black, or a POW does not qualify anyone for being president. so just putting it out there that obama's not the only one who has an ignorant following.
February 9, 2008 3:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I must admit that some of the supposed "zany" supporters of Obama are really "trolls." They could be from the repub side or the hillary side. Or wherever. Any interest that can clearly see that Obama is the best hope for pulling our country back from the brink is going to be against Obama. Painting supporters as "nuts" is one tactic. This is a Rovian tactic....
Many intellectuals are for Obama. I have not yet met one who is nuts. But I've seen nutty posts of people claiming to be for Obama. Again... I think these are trolls. (A few mentally ill people may be for Obama... but mostly the mentally ill don't have energy to post.)
Thanks for your post! ♪♪♪
February 9, 2008 8:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's not much unreasonable about Obama's policies or about Clinton's. I think it comes down to credibility and you make a lot of sense here. Hillary still has to employ some tortured logic because she won't just say "I was wrong on Iraq but will correct that mistake as president," which would be an unassailable answer.
I would not insult Obama's supporters by calling them maniacs. But it is Obama who strikes me as full of Messianic self regard. Frankly, I think he's arrogant and that he's unprepared for the pushback he'll face in Washington.
February 9, 2008 11:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not a Hilary supporter, yet.
Obama's central message is the We message; bringing new voters or old Republicans into his movement. His main meme is hope via transcendence. Through Obama's movement we will transcend race, gender, party and class to address, as a community, human issues.
Fine. Any passing look at Obama's policy agenda proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he is one hell of a progressive Democrat. He's practically a Kucinich. destor23 raises a good point, the push back against Obama's policy agenda will be massive, unlike anything we have seen, that is, if he sticks to his agenda. Now, he may be able to keep his Republican and independent voter recruits, once he's president and then all policy all the time, but he won't be able to unite Republican lawmakers behind his policy goals. The only leverage he will have to do so will be his amorphous majority, his Yes We Can movement; he will tell the Republicans that their constituents want them to go along with Obama's goals. That is a truly thin argument, which may play well in the public square but will die on the senate floor.
I want Obama's policy agenda to succeed, and I admit he can bring voters together. I am deeply skeptical about the efficacy and ethics of mandate driven politics.
February 9, 2008 12:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
But I think the point you are missing is the sunshine element.
Obama wants us to be involved in every level of government. Not just passively watching CSPAN but actually interacting with their representatives. Contact via web, all meetings podcast, wont sign a bill for 5 days allowing the public to comment on it, just to name a few.
Repubs will be exposed for their blocking of important votes. The voters will no longer be duped by the republican accusation of a "do nothing" congress, because they will actually know who is creating the stoppage.
It will not be an open government with a Hillary presidency. Especially since they have such a victim complex, they wont want any kind of exposure to criticism. Even in her stump speech she keeps saying what she is going to DO for us. It is almost as if she is saying "Please leave it to me, the expert, I'll take care of you. I've got everything under control. "pay no attention to that woman behind the curtain" kind of thing.
Obama believes only an informed and involved electorate can bring about change and unity. He believes in that if the electorate feels they have a stake in what is going on, they will realize the wisdom of a certain policy. This will also force congress to formulate better bills.
Hillary on the other hand, does not promote this openess. She percieves the outside world as a group ready to pounce. Not exactly the confident leader I would like as president.
Expect even more secrecy from possible Clinton WH.
February 10, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
On the most critical issues we face - Iraq, the war against Jihadism, healthcare, and the economy - he makes more sense as a president than Clinton.
How so? We know that's your opinion but where's your unemotional case for Obama? And see if you can make it without emotional attacks like "phony" and "arrogant" on Clinton.
February 12, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment