Everybody's Needed (Was Re: [lbo-talk] Obama 'was educated in madrassa')

andie nachgeborenen andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com
Sat Jan 20 22:41:37 PST 2007


Agreed about Hagel. The Repubs and the conservative Dems can take a harder line for obvious reasons, like it took Nixon to go to China.

I'm far from crazy about Obamas's ultra-cautionness, but I do think he has legs and I saw Edwards last time and I don't think he does. I like Edwards' class war message better. I like Kucinich even more. But what Obama has -- I am not sure that people outside Illinois have seen this yet, except in New Hampshire and a few other places -- is not just real charisma, but an ability to win the support of conservative, even racist voters by someone managing to show them that he is paying attention -- without sucking up to them or trying to triangulate a la Clinton.

He's not a principled leftist. He's not a leftist. He's not a "moderate" either. He's an Illinois liberal, which means he's actually pretty liberal. He has a long record in the state legislature to show it. He might get shot. He might flame out early. There might be enough racists who will never vote for a black person -- although the attempt to smear him as an Ayrab terrorist suggests that that group is worried that there aren't. He might have a skeleton in his closet -- that goes with Illinois politics, but I find it hard to believe he's a crook, whatever deals he had to make with Daley.

But what outstaters don't get (yet) is that the hype has a basis. He's not just a pretty face. Not that his pretty face hurts. The enthusiasm's based on real charisma, real politics smarts, and an ability to generate real excitement.

If he's elected, even with a Democratic Congress, he won't be the Second Coming. He won't do a tenth of things we thing he _could_, never mind a hundredth of the things we'd _want._ He will do a decent share of things that range from bad to awful. But isn't an Illinois liberal who might actually win, if you think he can, better than, say, McCain?

As I said, I don't advocate shutting down the movements for the duration. That will assure that whoever gets elected will be a lot less amenable to our policy goals. But it's a mistake to damn a politician for not being a political kamikaze if he can do less harm and more good than the others on the table.

And those of you who can't stand being pragmatic, that's good too. I've been there (15 years!) and agitated and written in favor of principled purism. One of the things I said then from the other side of when I am now is that you (the pragmatists) need us to rouse the rabble and make you seem reasonable. So do it. Everybody's needed. Just don't waste energy on the usual jammer about My Way Or the High Way.

--- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:


>
> On Jan 20, 2007, at 2:00 PM, andie nachgeborenen
> wrote:
>
> > And the
> > candidates who support the positions we like --
> > Edwards to some degree, Kuchinich -- poll in the
> > single digits and have no choice.
>
> Kucinich is hopeless, but Edwards is only a few
> points behind Obama
> in the latest polls
> <http://pollingreport.com/WH08dem.htm>. It's not
> surprising that Obama's had a surge, given all the
> hype about him,
> that's not surprising.
>
> On Iraq, Chuck Hagel sounds tougher than Obama.
>
> Doug
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>

____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't get soaked. Take a quick peak at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list