A PoMoCo case for Obama
Tuesday March 25, 2008
Categories: Democrats
James Poulos, our wise-ass barkeep here on the starboard side, is not endorsing Obama, but the Post-Modern Conservative is offering a case for Obama that merits attention. It's basically this: given the cultural and demographic trends in the country, and...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
"conquered population" - Oh, please - you're sounding like Donny...
It's a hyperbolic metaphor. Please calm down.
The metaphor, made explicit by Gingrich and others, of ones political opponents being an enemy engaging in war instead of fellow citizens engaging in political process has been one of the factors that has polarized politics in America.
Weren't you just thinking that McCain was going to win? Anyway, I might fear McCain more than Obama.
And thanks John. Let's not forget about Clinton's "War Room" and Carville's colourful metaphors, letting loose the "dogs o' war" and all that. Gingrich is a gentle if passionate man compared to the asshats that make up Team Clinton.
At this point, I would bet money that McCain is going to win. Posting Poulos's case for Obama does not change that fact. I'm depressed either way.
Anybody who thinks the Republicans are wholly responsible for war room politics is willfully self-deceived.
"And if there's one thing Barack Obama doesn't have, it's a vendetta." -- Poulos
I still don't understand why this is the default assumption, but okay, let's take it as given that Obama doesn't have any vendettas. How about the people he would appoint? He has accused the current Justice Department of racism for trying to roll back affirmative action to color-blind standards and for investigating voter fraud in heavily minority communities. (But no, he has no chips on his shoulders; move along, nothing to see here.) He has promised to clean house in the JD and staff the Civil Rights Division with liberal civil rights lawyers who will concentrate on things like "hate crimes." None of these people will be carrying a vendetta? Please.
>>>
Anybody who thinks the Republicans are wholly responsible for war room politics is willfully self-deceived.
Posted by: Rod Dreher | March 25, 2008 8:57 AM
>>>
So why do you continue to use a metaphor that you seem to acknowledge as divisive and harmful to national unity?
I don't worry about Barack Obama's vendettas. What concerns me more is his competence.
Barack Obama is a competent politician. He behaves like a competent politician; he rewards his allies/supporters and punishes his enemies.
Who are his supporters ? Liberals, blacks and radical agitators. He has long been a supporter of abortion rights, "civil rights" and expanded State spending. (Most liberal voting record in the Senate, remember !) Look for more of the same should he become President.
Who are his opponents ? Conservatives and supporters of traditional values. Let's not forget that he declared war on us in his famous "healing speech". What will happen to us should he become President ? The Fairness Doctrine (probably applied to the Internet), higher taxes, more special privileges for designated victim groups, and a return to Kennedy-Johnson-era IRS investigations for advocates for Traditionalism and other "divisive" and "non-inclusive" points of view.
If this man wins, I'll have to seriously consider going underground. I'd almost rather have Hillary.
Your servant,
Lord Karth
In other words, you are hoping that a Democratic Karl Rove does not enter the White House.
Pay back is a .....
Poulos' argument is unpersuasive, to put it mildly. The only real conservative argument for an Obama Presidency is this:
Obama, because he tries to be all things to all people, is bound to fail. If independent voters flock to Obama in November, it will be with the expectation that he is a centrist figure who brings people together, transcending old partisan divisions. As President, of course, he cannot possibly be anything close to that, nor can anyone else. So President Barack Obama governing with a heavily Democratic Congress would do wonders for the Republican brand. And four years from now, perhaps we'll get a GOP nominee who has read the Douthat/Salaam book and understands how to build a durable coalition centered on middle class families.
Unfortunately, Obama increasingly looks like such a deeply flawed candidate that we'll probably get President McCain. That means four years of a moderately-conservative but uninspired administration, energetic only in its support for the War, and a virtually mathematical lock by the Democratic Party on the House and Senate until at least 2014.
I think McCan has an edge right now and he is a master at using the media. While leaning towards McCain (a small lean) I hope for a real debate on issues in the general campaign. I would vote for either Obama or McCain if they presented a better case. If its just too close to call I would vote for Obama at this point. At some point its just better to vote the old bums out to rid the party of built up corruption while in power. I also believe that allowing either party to carry out its policies to excess is harmful to the country.
Steve
The biggest question on McCain is how he'll handle it when the media turns against him in the general election. Sure, they've loved him as the "renegade" Repubican who was always good for a sound byte that would contradict his own party, but they aren't going to support him for President over any Democrat.
I also believe that allowing either party to carry out its policies to excess is harmful to the country. - Steve.
This brings to mind the old adage: the party that governs least, governs best.
What with Rev Wright's strong anti-white, anti-americanism, his wife's antipathy for the US, and his radical mother as primal influences, why don't you believe that Obama has a vendetta.
Then add in his extreme partisan voting record, his record as an Alinsky protege (I know Hillary has history there also but not so recent) and over-the-top extreme abortion support and I'll take the political bargainer Hillary in a heart beat over Mr Hope.
What with Rev Wright's strong anti-white, anti-americanism, his wife's antipathy for the US, and his radical mother as primal influences
All of that seems a little over-stated to me. Rev. Wright doesn't seem any different than black preachers I know in my city, who say the same things but are happy to ally with whites in support of a common goal. And since Saul Alinsky died when Obama was 11 years old, "Alinsky protege" seems a bit much, especially when compared to Clinton, who actually met Alinsky and was offered a place in his training school.
re Alinsky protege:
What do you think "community activist" means?
I was one and I know.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.