--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Marek Reavis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > Obama may (probably will) change and became more politically > pragmatic as he confronts whatever crisises his presidency will > face; that's probably inevitable. But my bet is that it will take > longer; he'll be able to resist longer and more effectively. > That's my impression of how he might play out, at least.
This is the problem I see with him: his pledge to "put the politics of polarization and division behind us." It sounds so appealing. Who wouldn't want an end to polarization and division? But that's just dangerously politically naive. We've had divided government for 40 years now, and it obviously hasn't resulted in any kind of bipartisan cooperation. We need *stronger* partisanship--from the Democrats. We need branded policies. We need to make our differences with Republicans crystal clear. We need people to understand the Republicans are not acting in their best interests. It's not *attitudes* that are causing the polarization; it's economic inequality. Only strong Democratic policies are going to address that, obviously. The notion that the Republicans are suddenly going to become meek and mild and cooperative once Obama gets into office is just nuts. Another problem is that Obama attracts people not because of his policies but because of his charisma and idealism. That means his coalition of support is fundamentally vulnerable to fragmentation once the rubber starts hitting the road and the interests of the various factions begin to conflict. There's more along these lines, but this is the sort of thing I and a lot of others are concerned about. It gets pretty deep into the political weeds, so it's not easy to cover in a post. There was a story in the Times yesterday about Senate legislation Obama introduced requiring nuclear power companies to notify those who live in the vicinity of their plants when there was a radioactive leak of any kind. He wasn't able to stand up to the Republicans, the power companies, and the nuclear regulators. The legislation became more and more watered down; it wound up meekly asking for voluntary cooperation. And even then, it ultimately died on the Senate floor. But he boasted about having passed it to voters in Iowa. That's not very reassuring about his skills at legislative infighting--nor, for that matter, his veracity. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html? scp=2&sq=radioactive&st=nyt http://tinyurl.com/3dha5r And finally, another thing that disturbs me is that Obama's supporters on the various lefty blogs are some of the nastiest I've ever encountered. There's a fanatical quality to their comments that is downright scary. It's pretty surprising, considering their candidate supposedly stands for civility, empathy, and cooperation.
