On Hillary & Jim Webb

Couple good reflections by Alex Massie on Democratic politics. In the first, he contemplates "the small, quiet tragedy of Hillary Clinton", and how her icy resentment undermines her in all sorts of ways"

Does Obama get something of a pass? Yes. Is that unfair? Probably. But he gets it because he's offering something new and fresh. Even if you accept that some of the grander claims about Obama's candidacy are inextricably wrapped up in the idea that Obama, simply by virtue of being the man and colour he is, can solve America's problems it remains the case that Obama's person - and its symbolism - stands and is perceived to stand for something bigger, ultimately, than what he is himself. No wonder that's an appealing, powerful message.

Hillary's campaign by contrast too often seems to stand for little more than the greater glory of Hillary Clinton herself. This is a problem she shares, incidentally, with Gordon Brown. What are they actually for? The answer is too opaque, too wrapped up in considerations of their own ambition and, yes, unfortunately apparent sense of entitlement. Brown deserved to be Prime Minister because, well, because he'd waited for it for a long time; Hillary deserves to be President because, well, because it's her turn. This too, alas, breeds resentment from a press corps that believes it has the right to referee these matters itself.

When you have a reputation, fair or not, for being a charmless, humourless control freak it's a mistake to run a campaign that exacerbates rather than discourages that impression or reputation. When politics becomes a soap opera character and humanity matters; simply being an efficient, knowledgable technocrat or policy wonk is not enough. Equally, it's never wise to be caught on the wrong side of the Future vs Past divide. David Cameron's devastating taunt to Tony Blair that "You were the future once" could just as easily be used by Obama to Clinton.

Just as Churchill once said nothing concentrates the mind like getting shot, I believe little focuses the political mind in the year of Our Lord 2008 like the idea of having That Woman on the news for four years.

Alex also makes the case for Obama picking Virginia Sen. Jim Webb as his running mate. I've long thought that Webb would be an outstanding pick, despite his limitations as a politician (he's a stiff). But I hadn't thought of this one, which becomes even more compelling in light of Alex's observations on Hillary's missing her moment in the history of our political culture:

An Obama-Webb ticket closes a circle. Much has been said, some of it overblown but enough of it with a kernel of truth to justify the hype and optimism, about how electing Barack Obama would be an act of historic significance, in some way atoning for the original sin of slavery and reconciling the darker elements of American history. As I say, a good deal of this is trite: a President Obama is not going to magically close the divide between white and black America, but there's enough to this to make the hope it inspires understandable.

Putting Jim Webb on the ticket completes this process. like John McCain, Webb can plausibly claim that his ancestors have fought in almost every American war. Unlike McCain, Webb is a creature of the white working class. He believes his people - the Scots-Irish of Appalachia - remain misunderstood, under-appreciated and disparaged by America's elites. If Obama is a "wine track" candidate, Jim Webb is definitely "beer track". He's quite happy - proud in fact - of his "redneck" stock.

I doubt there's another member of the United States Senate who has made a speech at the Confederate War Memorial (correct me, readers, if I'm wrong). Let alone one who gave a speech such as the one Webb delivered in 1990."

Read that entire Webb speech. It's marvelous. If he were the Democratic candidate for president this year, I'd be voting Democratic.