Barak Obama: the heir of Woodrow Reagan?

Man, it’s really tough getting a handle on this President. Is he Woodrow Wilson incarnate, or Ronald Reagan?

The Right wing thinks he is an  anti-American, quasi-Christian (or maybe-Muslim) pseudo-intellectual who is hell-bent on forcing his national socialist agenda upon the United States,  impoverishing it enough so that it will easily comply with the demands of a European-led New World Order.  The deadliest of democracy’s enemies:  a Progressive.

The Left wing believes he is a cowardly, vacillating Quisling, a pawn of the Republicans,  who has arrogantly ignored his Democratic base  by  caving in to conservative congressional demands,  kowtowing to Wall Street and perpetuating  the policies of the Bush era. In short: he is no Progressive.

How can Limbaugh, Savage, Beck  and the Teavangelistas label Obama a  Progressive/Socialist who must be defeated in 2012 while Schultz,  Rhodes,  Miller and the Young Turks are questioning the wisdom of supporting him for another term?

I guess this shouldn’t be very surprising, when our only political choices are between two extremes.  Or at least, that’s the way the politicians and pundits present things, particularly with this last election.  Any moderates need not apply for office.  We will accuse you of lacking ideals and convictions and you will likely lose the primary.

So, is Obama feeling this liberal heat for being a moderate: willing to negotiate terms with Republicans, just so that something might get done, even if it is something  less than what he would have hoped?  Are the Democrats really the liberal extremists the conservatives paint them ?  And are the conservatives  so intoxicated with political righteousness that it is impossible for them to see anyone on the left as something other than a Marxist demon?

Because the conservatives sure are unaware of any presidential diplomacy, any sense that Obama might be more of a centrist than a leftist. They crow about the victory of  Republican ideals over Democratic snake oil, ignoring the fact that this victory would not have been possible without a Presidential willingness to play ball.  The debate over whether or not to extend Bush the tax cuts and restore lapsing unemployment benefits  could have stalled over political principles, presenting us with the worst case scenario – increased taxes on the middle class along with a loss of their jobless benefits.

It’s no wonder that so few politicians  present themselves as thoughtful, reasonable people, willing to listen to both sides of the issue and take both sides seriously.  Moderates raise the ire of both political parties.  Besides that, the subtleties of post partisanship, the idea that both sides have good ideas and that the best practice is one that is not slavishly devoted to any one ideology, is lost on today’s voters. .  Everything is a matter of black or white,  left or right.  And that’s how we like our Presidents.

Advertisements

, , , , , , , , , ,

  1. #1 by logiopsychopath on December 10, 2010 - 7:27 pm

    He is learning the lesson of being pragmatic–he knows where his toast will be buttered in the next two years. If he doesn’t paint himself as a moderate, he will face a stiff challenge (even from other Demos) in 2012.

    Clinton learned this lesson the hard way, but he had an advantage over Obama: he doesn’t have the moral fortitude of Obama. In other words, Obama is truly a principled progressive. Obama is cut from a similar ilk as Wilson, to an extent. For example, both seem to see business (and maybe private property) as being on a permanent loan from the government to the people. When the need arises, eminent domain becomes a norm, not an option. Also, I really believe Obama thinks HE knows better on any number of questions and problems, than any common citizen.

    Clinton went the way the wind blew (no pun intended) and if Hillary had been a conservative, Bill would have followed suit.

    On the other hand, Reagan was just as Big Government as anyone, he just hid behind the flag to conceal this fact. He just saw pushing military service as a better option for the poor than welfare. I believe he really brought deficit spending to a new level of competence.

    Obama is playing his cards right, at least with Congress. Could you imagine if this had been the case with health care? What is funny is that as recently as October, he was saying Republicans would have no voice, but could come along for the ride (as long as they sat in back). Politics makes for strange bedfellows, don’t it Hon.

  2. #2 by logiopsychopath on December 10, 2010 - 7:44 pm

    I was wrong–here is an interview from October 26, 2010.

    Obama is saying the POLAR OPPOSITE on taxes and the Republicans as he was saying this past week. He knows where his toast is buttered–and I withdraw the statement of his principles.

    http://www.youtube.com/user/missBsharp#p/a/u/1/pvo-You-BA4

    Check out about 4:45 into this audio with Al Sharpton, and notice how Obama’s tune has changed 180 degrees in the past 7 weeks.

    In the words of Jim Mora, Principles? Principles?

    • #3 by Christian Beyer on December 10, 2010 - 10:10 pm

      I’ll check out the video later, but I disagree with your guess about a Democratic challenge – they want him to move farther to the left, not the center.

  3. #4 by logiopsychopath on December 11, 2010 - 11:26 am

    Well–maybe you are right about challenges from the usual Tweedle-Dees (Gephart, etc.). You are also right–this tax compromise is nothing but another trillion $$$ stimulus–yeah, some get slight (2%) tax advantages, but the bill will be loaded with roasting swine flesh before it hits the floor of either chamber–from left and right projects alike.

    I believe the vernacular is “We’re Screwed!”

  4. #5 by logiopsychopath on December 12, 2010 - 9:23 pm

    Oh yeah–I heard this from Mark Plotkin on WTOP. He said that if Obama does not pull troops from Afghanistan by July, that he might face opposition in 2012. Plotkin was basing his opinion on comments from John Kerry.

    So, I retract my statement given above, and will assert Obama is in political trouble in his own party.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: