Posted on 10/02/2005 10:42:14 PM PDT by Miklos Szeles
Friday Senator Barack Obama, in an attempt which was at times self-contradictory, tried to rein in the apoplectic rage at the Daily Kos. A few excerpts of his letter are enlightening.
"According to the storyline that drives many advocacy groups and Democratic activists - a storyline often reflected in comments on this blog - we are up against a sharply partisan, radically conservative, take-no-prisoners Republican party. They have beaten us twice by energizing their base with red meat rhetoric and single-minded devotion and discipline to their agenda. In order to beat them, it is necessary for Democrats to get some backbone, give as good as they get, brook no compromise, drive out Democrats who are interested in "appeasing" the right wing, and enforce a more clearly progressive agenda. The country, finally knowing what we stand for and seeing a sharp contrast, will rally to our side and thereby usher in a new progressive era.
I think this perspective misreads the American people. From traveling throughout Illinois and more recently around the country, I can tell you that Americans are suspicious of labels and suspicious of jargon. They don't think George Bush is mean-spirited or prejudiced, but have become aware that his administration is irresponsible and often incompetent. They don't think that corporations are inherently evil (a lot of them work in corporations), but they recognize that big business, unchecked, can fix the game to the detriment of working people and small entrepreneurs. They don't think America is an imperialist brute, but are angry that the case to invade Iraq was exaggerated, are worried that we have unnecessarily alienated existing and potential allies around the world, and are ashamed by events like those at Abu Ghraib which violate our ideals as a country."
Senator Obama sounds sensible enough, but somehow he just can't seem to resist pandering to the Bush-bashing conspiracy theorist left.
"I am not drawing a facile equivalence here between progressive advocacy groups and right-wing advocacy groups. The consequences of their ideas are vastly different. Fighting on behalf of the poor and the vulnerable is not the same as fighting for homophobia and Halliburton."
And the self-contradiction continues. "The bottom line is that our job is harder than the conservatives' job. After all, it's easy to articulate a belligerent foreign policy based solely on unilateral military action, a policy that sounds tough and acts dumb; it's harder to craft a foreign policy that's tough and smart. It's easy to dismantle government safety nets; it's harder to transform those safety nets so that they work for people and can be paid for. It's easy to embrace a theological absolutism; it's harder to find the right balance between the legitimate role of faith in our lives and the demands of our civic religion."
And finally, for a mix of rational thought and rally cry, Senator Obama covers his tracks while he covers all bases. "Finally, I am not arguing that we "unilaterally disarm" in the face of Republican attacks, or bite our tongue when this Administration screws up. Whenever they are wrong, inept, or dishonest, we should say so clearly and repeatedly; and whenever they gear up their attack machine, we should respond quickly and forcefully. I am suggesting that the tone we take matters, and that truth, as best we know it, be the hallmark of our response."
Interesting to see a Senator address the deranged kiddies at daily kos, a website famous for applauding the terrorist murder of American contractors in Iraq ("screw them!").
Daily KOS is not in the realm of rational discourse, nor feasible policy alternatives. It is the land of reflexive Bush-hate and blame-america-firstism.
Perhaps a Democrat senator addressing them is a sign of how very low the party has fallen.
"(a lot of them work in corporations)"
"Them" is very telling, here. Obama clearly assumes that few -if any- in his audience work in the private sector.
The truth would be a good start in the much-needed rehabilitation of this country's opposition party.
Oh Really! I want to see those guys.
Odd turn of a phrase, don't ya think?
If the rumor is true that Obama is being considered as a running mate for Hillary .. I predict it will destroy Obama.
Why ..?? Because it destroyed Lieberman. Joe may still be a senator, but he's not a leader in the senate and he's no longer considered presidential material. The reason is .. when Joe became "candidate-VP" - he had to accept all the garbage of the Gore campaign. Many of the ideas of the Gore campaign were complete oposites for Joe. Joe had to change his positions on social issues and it was a terrible mistake.
Obama will have to do the same for the Hillary campaign. He will be required to change his position on a lot of issues. When Obama loses (badly) to another repub - his career will be over and the golden boy will be out of the game.
Barack Obama is, like Hillary, at heart a stone leftist, but far better than she at fogging up the place to appear moderate. Their ticket would wrap up the nomination quickly and then run hard right. They would both be spinning furiously. I don't think that represents any dramatic change from Obama's own political approach.
But it could tarnish him if Hillary is unmasked as a camouflaged liberal and they both end up looking ridiculous.
"But it could tarnish him if Hillary is unmasked as a camouflaged liberal and they both end up looking ridiculous."
I'm surprised to hear that Obama is so hard left .. I guess he had succeeded in convincing me he was more moderate than left. Thanks for clarifying that, and I do agree with your assessment that if they try to run to the right they are going to look ridiculous.
Odd turn of a phrase, don't ya think?
Perfectly symptomatic of the Left's moral relativism.
I'm surprised to hear this - concerned, actually. I had thought Obama's moderate cloak was pretty transparent, but if he's start to fool even Freepers.....
Obama is covering for the whackjobs at DK. Democrats are, by and large, anti-war, anti-capitalist, pro-infanticide, and pro-U.N. socialists.
That about sums it all up. "Truth as we best know it". That sounds like an admission that truth to them is whatever they decide it is.
So is the Democratic Party at large.
As a wonderfully articulate caller named Eric, a black American, to Rush's show on Friday said, that is why they are so nasty: they are trying to justify immorality.
That just can't be done decently.
I have to admit, you do have a point.
Well, Obama just lost my vote. He should have begged Zell Miller for advice. Demonization of my friends, colleagues, and family is a sure way to ensure that I work to keep you out of power.
The country, finally knowing what we stand for
Your right about that Obama, we know that you stand beside the Devil..
Agree, they can try to mask it but bottom line is they are died in the wool socialists. Amen.
Also,
"The country, finally knowing what we stand for and seeing a sharp contrast, will rally to our side and thereby usher in a new progressive era." His case in point is that we do know what they stand for and thats why they get their A$$ kicked in every recent election. Amen.
FINALLY? He presumes we don't know already what they "stand for".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.