...know who your opposition is.Something's really gone off the rails when the Obama campaign decides to release an oppo document on Paul Krugman. It's not only the actual attacks that are weak (most of them rely on misinterpreting one comment, then misinterpreting the next, then pretending there's a contradiction), but, seriously, it's Paul Krugman. Arguably the most progressive voice in American media.Obama's basically embraced what Krugman has accused him of. His campaign is essentially an attack from the right. I'm inclined to agree with Jason in comments:
But Obama is a sideshow, a candidate whose celebrity is his only rationale. It is very fitting that Oprah is campaigning for him. Obama's supporters represent a disturbing cult of personality that I do not see anywhere else (except Ron Paul). They seem to think that his very existence is somehow miraculous and that his election would be "transformative" in some ineffable, metaphysical way. Andy Sullivan's argument, essentially, which should really tell you something.
2 comments:
I have to say that Obama has something that candidates wish to have, I am using this as an opportunity to write for Obama. He represents real change post Cold War. He is far more likely to include conservatives on his staff and is far more likely to include Wilsonian ideals in his foreign policy, something Hillary and for that matter any democrat would be reluctant to accept and do. He represents a new era in politics. For once the modern Democratic Party has a person who can bring about party unity. Ever since 1968 the party I choose to belong with has been unable to unite as one. Finally there is a chance that Republicans will struggle to stay united. Evangelicals vs. Libertarians. Democrats will reunite the GOP if they don't choose Obama or really if they choose Hillary. I believe the best chance for a Dem victory lies in a Obama-Bloomberg ticket. This would bring in any libertarians in case Huckabee pulls of the "Divine Upset" and it puts pressure on Rudy to keep many moralist on his side. How do I know this? I have seen what the two sides of the GOP believe when it comes to politics and Obama has the best shot at bringing many reds around. Obama-Bloomberg would bring about foreign acceptance and it would keep social liberal standards alive, plus we need less spending in this country. Why? Because Bush has been a "Moralist" Spender during his reign in the oval office and we don't need another one. Meaning Huckabee the Pastor or Rudy the Man Who Fought Terrorism in New York City and Wants Democracy in an Undemocratic Land. Hillary would lose an election to these crazy conservatives, but Obama would make for great political theatre and could change politics like Coppola changed movies, he would bring about refreshing change and new look to politics.
It looks like we will disagree down the line on this one. Especially on your evangelical vs. libertarian equation.
Obama represents business as usual, pre-President Codpiece, for politics in this country. He's correct that we need to move beyond the Clinton agenda, only he doesn't represent change. Take a look at his health care plan.
The Democrats don't need to bring around any reds, thank you very much. We need a candidate who isn't afraid NOT to compromise with the right, not one who's attacking his Democratic opponents using right wing talking points.
Post a Comment