David Brooks Lays Out, “The Two Obama’s”
June 20th, 2008 at 10:21am KMorrison
David Brook’s excellent article The Two Obama’s does an excellent job laying out how Senator Obama talks reform and inspiration, but plays old school politics as well as anyone out there…
“God, Republicans are saps. They think that they’re running against some academic liberal who wouldn’t wear flag pins on his lapel, whose wife isn’t proud of America and who went to some liberationist church where the pastor damned his own country. They think they’re running against some naïve university-town dreamer, the second coming of Adlai Stevenson…”
“…But as recent weeks have made clear, Barack Obama is the most split-personality politician in the country today. On the one hand, there is Dr. Barack, the high-minded, Niebuhr-quoting speechifier who spent this past winter thrilling the Scarlett Johansson set and feeling the fierce urgency of now. But then on the other side, there’s Fast Eddie Obama, the promise-breaking, tough-minded Chicago pol who’d throw you under the truck for votes…”
Brooks goes on to explain Obama’s history of old school politics. That he is smart and calculating, and has laid out a path for himself that any old-school Chigago politician would be proud of…
“…Back when he was in the Illinois State Senate, Dr. Barack could have taken positions on politically uncomfortable issues. But Fast Eddie Obama voted “present” nearly 130 times. From time to time, he threw his voting power under the truck.
Dr. Barack said he could no more disown the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than disown his own grandmother. Then the political costs of Rev. Wright escalated and Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.
Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don’t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.
Dr. Barack could have changed the way presidential campaigning works. John McCain offered to have a series of extended town-hall meetings around the country. But favored candidates don’t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.
And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue. He aspires to be to political reform what Bono is to fighting disease in Africa. He’s spent much of his career talking about how much he believes in public financing. In January 2007, he told Larry King that the public-financing system works. In February 2007, he challenged Republicans to limit their spending and vowed to do so along with them if he were the nominee. In February 2008, he said he would aggressively pursue spending limits. He answered a Midwest Democracy Network questionnaire by reminding everyone that he has been a longtime advocate of the public-financing system.
Full David Brook’s article The Two Obama’s
Entry Filed under: Barack Obama, Campaign Issues, Media Bias
8 Comments
1. Joe | June 20th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
LOL!!!! You are talking about OBAMA flip-flopping????
But Fast Eddie Obama voted “present” nearly 130 times.
— A little research would show that…
Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.
— Isn’t that what you people were begging him to do? I guess you can call McCain “Fast Johnny” for courting the Hagee endorsement, then renouncing it two months later.
Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don’t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.
— What the hell is he talking about?
But favored candidates don’t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.
— McCain wanted 13 of these debates. How unrealistic is that??? 13 in a 4 month period. People were getting tired of the 20+ that the Democrats had during the primary. Why did McCain turn down Obama’s counter-proposal to 5 debates? That would be the most in the modern-presidential era.
And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue….
— What is more important? Getting over 1.5 million individual donors giving an average of $100 or take public financing? Is it sour grapes that McCain doesn’t have that kind of support? If this was the other way around, what would be your response? McCain got the best deal he could with public funds. He wasn’t going to raise that kind of money on his own.
By the way… didn’t McCain violate his own bill in using the promise of public funds to secure a loan?
See my post in the ’Change’ Defined thread about the two McCains.
Republicans really should try making Obama about “changing” and flip flopping. They really should. The comparison of the two would be excellent.
2. Joe | June 20th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Any reason why my last comment is “awaiting moderation”?
3. Joe | June 20th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Here is my comment without all the I and B tags. Maybe that made a difference?
LOL!!!! You are talking about OBAMA flip-flopping????
But Fast Eddie Obama voted “present” nearly 130 times.
———–
— A little research would show that…
Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.
———–
— Isn’t that what you people were begging him to do? I guess you can call McCain “Fast Johnny” for courting the Hagee endorsement, then renouncing it two months later.
Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don’t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.
———–
— What the hell is he talking about?
But favored candidates don’t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.
———–
— McCain wanted 13 of these debates. How unrealistic is that??? 13 in a 4 month period. People were getting tired of the 20+ that the Democrats had during the primary. Why did McCain turn down Obama’s counter-proposal to 5 debates? That would be the most in the modern-presidential era.
And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue….
———–
— What is more important? Getting over 1.5 million individual donors giving an average of $100 or take public financing? Is it sour grapes that McCain doesn’t have that kind of support? If this was the other way around, what would be your response? McCain got the best deal he could with public funds. He wasn’t going to raise that kind of money on his own.
By the way… didn’t McCain violate his own bill in using the promise of public funds to secure a loan?
See my post in the ’Change’ Defined thread about the two McCains.
Republicans really should try making Obama about “changing” and flip flopping. They really should. The comparison of the two would be excellent.
4. Joe | June 20th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Here is my comment without all the I and B tags. Maybe that made a difference?
LOL!!!! You are talking about OBAMA flip-flopping????
But Fast Eddie Obama voted “present” nearly 130 times.
———–
— A little research would show that…
Fast Eddie Obama threw Wright under the truck.
———–
— Isn’t that what you people were begging him to do? I guess you can call McCain “Fast Johnny” for courting the Hagee endorsement, then renouncing it two months later.
Dr. Barack could have been a workhorse senator. But primary candidates don’t do tough votes, so Fast Eddie Obama threw the workhorse duties under the truck.
———–
— What the hell is he talking about?
But favored candidates don’t go in for unscripted free-range conversations. Fast Eddie Obama threw the new-politics mantra under the truck.
———–
— McCain wanted 13 of these debates. How unrealistic is that??? 13 in a 4 month period. People were getting tired of the 20+ that the Democrats had during the primary. Why did McCain turn down Obama’s counter-proposal to 5 debates? That would be the most in the modern-presidential era.
And then on Thursday, Fast Eddie Obama had his finest hour. Barack Obama has worked on political reform more than any other issue….
———–
— What is more important? Getting over 1.5 million individual donors giving an average of $100 or take public financing? Is it sour grapes that McCain doesn’t have that kind of support? If this was the other way around, what would be your response? McCain got the best deal he could with public funds. He wasn’t going to raise that kind of money on his own.
By the way… didn’t McCain violate his own bill in using the promise of public funds to secure a loan?
See my post in the ’Change’ Defined thread about the two McCains.
Republicans really should try making Obama about “changing” and flip flopping. They really should. The comparison of the two would be excellent.
5. KMorrison | June 20th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
This is from the NYT, not exactly a paper that has been friendly to McCain over the last year. Senator Obama barely has a record, and so if he has a large number of ‘no opinion’ votes that troubles people. Try finding a Senator with a 25 year record as consistent and as bipartisan as Senator McCain. He’s beat up routinely, for not toting the party line, and he’s made numerous politically risky moves in order to do what he feels is right. Senator Obama doesn’t have a bipartisan record anywhere close to that.
My argument with Wright all along has been that Obama has not adequately explained himself. Does he believe what Wright believes? Did he join the church for political purposes? What does it mean if you say you can’t disown Wright, then you do? I’d take the Hagee/Wright comparison any day of the week. The McCain camp should have vetted Hagee better, but no one really thinks McCain believes what Hagee believes; we don’t know about Obama and Wright.
I think the point that the article really shows is that Obama is an extremely talented politician that has marketed himself as new and different, but really isn’t. That people on both side of the isle should open their eyes and do their homework on a candidate and not just become enamored by an excellent speaker.
BTW - I’m hoping Obama supporters think this election is a lock, because its a lot closer than anyone expected; and McCain does great when he’s the underdog.
(Don’t why you had trouble posting the comment.)
6. Joe | June 20th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Thanks KM. If I remember correctly… if you have more than 1 or 2 links, the comment gets put on hold.
Anyway…
Regarding Obama’s “no opinion votes”… I think the link I provided explains what a “present” votes means in Illinois. I think that is what has to be explained to people.
Regarding Wright, you know my opinion is that it was Wright that said these things, not Obama. Do you know if every one of Wright’s sermons were just like the 45 seconds that everyone has seen? Do you really believe all of his sermons were like that? What has Obama done that makes you think he is of the same mindset as Wright’s 45 seconds of GD America?
Obama is someone that people are excited about BECAUSE he has not been in D.C. for a long time. Only the GOP are looking at Obama as too inexperienced. Most people looks at him as not spoiled by D.C. After 8 years of Bush people are looking at the candidate’s ideas.
You have Obama that is coming up with fresh ideas (relative to what we’ve seen in the last 8 years).
Then you have McCain, who I would have liked to be the Pres in 2000 when he truly was a “Maverick”, but now has tried becoming something else.
I would have considered voting for a McCain circa-2000. But McCain circa-2008 is now for the tax cuts, the endless war, torture, etc etc etc. He has turned to become MORE Conservative in order to draw in the GOP base and toe the GOP line… a line of which I personally feel has seriously hurt this country since the early 80s.
By no means to I think this election is a lock. I do feel optimistic when looking at the polling in the individual states. A generic nation-wide poll is useless. Individual state polls (especially when you look at trends) tells a completely different story.
Obama is leading in polls in PA, OH and FL. Obama is leading or virtually tied in states where that are historically “red”. States like NC, VA, IA, CO, NM and NV. Even in Alaska Obama is virtually tied.
So again… this is by no means a lock and it is still a long way to November.
If McCain remained being his “Maverick” self of the 2000 campaign, he would have a lot more independent and crossover Democrat voters behind him.
7. KMorrison | June 20th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I’m from NH and saw 3 Reps and 4 Dems in person, and Biden and McCain were the only two to talk about Iraq in anything more than ‘Leave’ or ‘Don’t Leave’ type sound bites. McCain running on the war was politically very risky, and he was right to push for a change, and call for Rumsfeld’s resignation, and forced through anti-torture legislation. You should have read his blog when he came out in favor of immigration reform. People called him a traitor and threatened his life. I don’t see that backbone from Senator Obama. He’s an incredible speaker, and I understand why people are inspired by that, but Obama 2008 isn’t that different than Bush 2000. Remember ‘I’m a uniter and not a divider’? He was too experienced as well. If there is no substantial record of bipartisanship, what’s really going to change?
…RCP Average has McCain with an edge in FL
8. Unsafe At Any Deed - Obama | June 30th, 2008 at 6:39 am
Have You Vetted Obama?
He was a Senator for 2 years before setting out on his Presidential Campaign. He offers tax & spend policies of the past, which won’t work to encourage investment or job growth. At the same time he promises the monumentally expensive gift of health care for all.
He has chosen to surround himself long term with 1) a radical race baiting minister (Wright), a man up on rackateering charges (Rezko) whom he also has financial dealings with, a couple of 1970’s hippie radical bomber/bank robbers (Ayres) who were convicted but pardoned by Clinton, and a woman who does not exude a comfort level with America or her role in it (Michelle). You have to ask questions about a persons character given that purposeful choice of long term friends, associates and life partners.
If this were any other candidate he would not have made it through the primaries!
Can we really afford to risk The Presidency and our future on this inexperienced individual who has made such odd if not bad choices in his associates in the past? What sort of people will he bring to Washington considering his record on being able to judge people in his own personal life?